Archive for 2017

A LAW PROFESSOR ASKS: Should I Retire? “I spoke up about a plan I had proposed to end tenure at age 72, whereupon, like most employees, faculty would become employees at will–though with normal age discrimination protections. I asked the attendees, mostly in their 40s and 50s, whether they would do their part for higher education by endorsing such a plan. Not a single hand went up; unlike most Americans, faculty apparently deserve lifetime appointment.”

OLD AND BUSTED: The use bull’s-eye clip-art in a political campaign can lead to a politician getting shot, and both sides must immediately dial back their rhetoric before it happens again.

The new hotness, from Vice.com:Let’s Blow Up Mount Rushmore.”

Related: Democrat Missouri state senator Maria Chappelle-Nadal posts, deletes Facebook post hoping for Trump’s assassination.

UPDATE: Vice has since toned down the headline and URL to simply “Let’s Get Rid of Mount Rushmore” — as if that’s a less offensive proposition to most Americans — but Twitchy has the screencap of their since-deleted original tweet promoting the piece with that headline.

As Stephen Miller tweets, “Last week: The Statue of Liberty should decide immigration law. This week: Yo time to blow up symbols of our founding.”

STOP OUTING NAZIS. YOUR RIGHTS DEPEND ON THEIRS, Bethany Mandel writes:

You can forgive conservatives especially for worrying about this in today’s political climate. There’s a dangerous slippage that’s entered the mainstream discourse surrounding conservatism and Republicans, one that fails to distinguish between the alt right and more mainstream figures. Joy Reid was only the most recent to make this category error when she took to Twitter to write of the rally: “What did they think they were getting in the White House? What did they say when he hired Bannon and his crew? Or Sessions or Kobach?” But Bannon and Sessions are entirely different animals; by equating them, Reid highlights why conservatives are wary of the thought police going after people’s jobs.

Cole White was the first to lose his job to the Charlottsville rally. Peter Cvjetanovic, 20, currently attending the University of Nevada in Reno, is another person identified from the white supremacist rally who now will be hard-pressed to find employment after he graduates (if he’s allowed to stay enrolled and isn’t hounded off of campus, that is). For White and Czjetanovic, being white nationalists has no impact on their ability to do their jobs. Had they held other jobs in which their white nationalism would directly affect their job performance, perhaps the internet mob would be justified in its quest to take heads (white nationalists shouldn’t be teaching WWII history to impressionable middle school students, for example).

But firing individuals based on their personally held beliefs not only creates a slippery slope, but also as one of my Twitter followers half-joked, “an outcast class of bright, reactionary, but unemployable young men with little to lose. What. Could. Possibly. Go. Wrong?”

Read the whole thing.

HEATHER MAC DONALD: A much-touted study of Oakland police shows researchers’ determination to find racism, not cops’ bias.

In June, a team of nine Stanford psychologists, linguists, and computer scientists released a paper purporting to show that Oakland police treat black drivers less respectfully than white ones. The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, elicited a huzzah from the press. The Washington Post, the New York Times, and Science, among many other outlets, gave it prominent play. “Police officers are significantly less respectful and consistently ruder toward black motorists during routine traffic stops than they are toward white drivers,” gloated the New York Times.

Reading the coverage, one expected reports of cops cursing at black drivers, say, or peremptorily ordering them around, or using the N-word. Instead, the most “disrespectful” officer utterance that the researchers presented was: “Steve, can I see that driver’s license again? It, it’s showing suspended. Is that—that’s you?” The second most “disrespectful” was: “All right, my man. Do me a favor. Just keep your hands on the steering wheel real quick.”

The researchers themselves undoubtedly expected more dramatic results. Undaunted by the lackluster findings, they packaged them in the conventional bias narrative anyway, opening their study by invoking the “onslaught of incidents” involving officers’ use of force with black suspects that have “rocked” the nation. A cofounder of the Black Lives Matter movement helpfully commented in the San Francisco Chronicle that the study goes beyond individual racism to highlight a “systemic set of practices that has impacts on people’s lives.”

The study is worth examining in some detail as an example of the enormous scientific machinery being brought to bear on a problem of ever-diminishing scope, whether in police departments or in American society generally.

It reads a bit like a scholarly version of Beria’s “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime.”

OPENNESS — OR ELSE: Some Apple employees may quit over new ‘open’ office floor plan.

If you’re an Apple employee this is a big change. Up until now you’ve been used to having your own office space. But the new Apple Park will change all that. The programmers, engineers, developers and other employees who work there will be rubbing elbows with each other over long tables that they’ll be sharing in the company’s new open space environment. And some are not thrilled.

Jon Gruber, a podcaster and blogger that follows the company is reported to have received emails from employees who threatened to leave the company if the workplaces aren’t suitable. “Judging from the private feedback I’ve gotten from some Apple employees, I’m 100% certain there’s going to be some degree of attrition based on the open floor plans,” he said in this Macrumors report.

Open office designs have been popular with many companies over the past few years. But they’ve also been controversial. Executives believe that an environment without cubicles fosters collaboration, innovation and creativity. Research has backed up some of these claims. But many workers aren’t so crazy about the lack of privacy–and that guy who noisily eats his lunch just a few feet away. Tuna salad again?

The new campus is gorgeous, but forcing all 12,000 or so employees into an open office seems optimistic at best.