Author Archive: Glenn Reynolds

#FREEJOEL: WHY DOES INSTAGRAM HATE DOGS? Well, at least one dog. A friend of ours has — well, had — an Instagram account for her French Bulldog, Joel, pictured below as a puppy and as a full-grown dog with Helen.

Screenshot

The account is an entirely harmless one involving pictures of Joel walking at the park, running along the beach, snoozing in front of a fireplace, etc. But somehow InstaGram decided that something in the account — they never tell you want — violates their rules and permanently banned it.

Her appeal was refused. No details were forthcoming.

There have been worse injustices on Meta’s platform, God knows, but this seems especially stupid. I’m thinking of petitioning the FTC to require social media to provide specific details on why they banned an account, what rules were broken, and whether they treat all accounts the same. Any FTC lawyers (which I am not) are encouraged to chime in.

#FREEJOEL!

ANALYSIS: TRUE.

Nice pic for Nancy Mace, though.

YEAH, THIS IS THEIR REWARD FOR LOYALTY OVER THE LAST 8 YEARS. ENJOY IT.

Related:

LIKEWISE THE ARGUMENT THAT THE CONSTITUTION IS “FLAWED” OR “OUTDATED” BECAUSE IT WON’T LET YOU DO WHAT YOU WANT. Often it’s designed to stop you from doing that. It’s not flawed, it’s working properly. But leftists don’t believe there are legitimate constraints on their power.

STOCHASTIC TERRORISM IS REAL, IT COMES FROM LEFTIST RHETORIC:

INEPT OR CORRUPT? THE QUESTION KEEPS COMING UP ABOUT ONCE-RESPECTED INSTITUTIONS.

THE WEST POINT PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE APPEARS TO BE EITHER INEPT OR DISHONEST. EITHER WAY, IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED NOW.

ROBIN HANSON: Conquest and Liberation of Academia.

During my graduate studies (’93-97), I looked at the history of prizes in science. I learned that from ~1600-1800, prizes funded science lots, and much more than did grants. But ~1830, science elites controlling top scientific societies, in both Britain and France, defrauded donors to switch funding to grants, which were then selected by society insiders to be given mostly to insiders. Thereafter such societies insisted that donors must fund grants, not prizes, if they wanted their donations to gain their prestigious scientific society association.

Later, ~1900, tenure became common in academia. Then mid-20th century, peer review became common in grants and publications. Also about then, journalism switched from its usual mode of questioning and investigating claims made to it, to accepting whatever academics said and trying to “communicate” that to the public. In the 1980s, college rating systems became widely available to the US public, ratings which depended mainly how how elite academics rated those colleges.

All of these changes were ways in which academic elites wrested control of academia from outsiders who previously could impose some degree of incentives and accountability. The elites of most any profession would love to fully control it, grabbing resources to spend at their discretion, with little need to accommodate demands of customers or investors or regulators or anyone else. But academic managed to achieve this ideal far more than have most, due to their peak prestige. Via elite schools, academic control prestige in many other areas of life.

I review this history to make clear just what academic reformers are up against. It is far from sufficient to enumerate academic failures; you’ll have to develop concrete alternatives that can win prestige fights against the usual academics. History has been moving against you; you’ll have to somehow reverse that strong tide.

To be fair, academics themselves are doing most of the heavy lifting when it comes to undermining their position in prestige fights.

THAT WAS THE GOAL: Marc Andreessen: AI Plus Woke Equals Dystopia.

Andreessen’s experience is that “most of the people” building these AI systems are already products of the current university culture. They have already been infected with the aspects of woke culture which would be dangerous if given power. And we all know how woke works. Argument is dependent on identity above reason. Everyone is expected to pledge their fealty to the woke cause or be at risk of losing their livelihoods. Those with wrong opinions are attacked and, if possible, silenced, shamed and deplatformed. The bad people have no right to speak only to listen and learn from their woke betters. This is the ideology that already runs large portions of our universities. We’ve all seen it in action.

Andreessen offered an example, saying he had a discussion with a professor at one of the AI companies and he mentioned that it bothered him that AI chat bots would give people “patronizing moral lectures” in response to questions. The professor replied, “Well, my undergrads actually really like that. That’s how they expect technology to work.”

Related: Higher Education: A Toxic Industry?

HOW LEFTIST NARRATIVES WORK:

MICHAEL CAPUTO ON MATT TAIBBI’S SUBSTACK: It would be a crime to abandon investigations into Russiagate, both because it’s ongoing and because of the cost to those of us who were victims of it. “Kash Patel, President Trump’s pick to lead the Federal Bureau of Investigation, is the man we need. Like the President elect, he has seen this abuse up close. They are uniquely qualified. Make no mistake, when we all chose politics as a profession, we knew it was bloodsport. But none of us expected the personal toll that impacted not just careers, but health and families — especially our children.”

Identify the perpetrators and lock them up.