Eugine_Nier comments on Rationality Quotes September 2013 - Less Wrong

5 Post author: Vaniver 04 September 2013 05:02AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Article Navigation

Comments (456)
Tags: quotes

Comments (456)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 September 2013 02:42:26PM 2 points [-]

Here’s the bigger point: Americans (and maybe all humans, I’m not sure) are more obsessed with words than with their meanings. I will never understand this as long as I live. Under FCC rules, in broadcast TV you can talk about any kind of depraved sex act you wish, as long as you do not use the word “fuck.” And the word itself is so mysteriously magical that it cannot be used in any way whether the topic is sex or not. “What the fuck?” is a crime that carries a stiff fine –– “I’m going to rape your 8-year-old daughter with a trained monkey,” is completely legal. In my opinion, today’s “gluten-free” cartoon is far more suggestive in an unsavory way than the vampire cartoon, but it doesn’t have a “naughty” word so it’s okay.

Are we a nation permanently locked in preschool? The answer, in the case of language, is yes.

Bizarro Blog

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 29 September 2013 06:31:24PM *  -1 points [-]

The reason is that banning certain words works much better as a Schelling point.

Comment author: Nornagest 29 September 2013 09:29:46PM 6 points [-]

I don't buy it. Even if we accept for the sake of argument that limiting sexual references on broadcast TV is a good plan (a point that I don't consider settled, by the way), using dirty words as a proxy runs straight into Goodhart's law: the broadcast rules are known in advance, and innuendo's bread and butter to TV writers. A good Schelling point has to be hard to work around, even if you can't draw a strict line; this doesn't qualify.

Comment author: Desrtopa 29 September 2013 07:44:23PM *  6 points [-]

Better for what, and better than what alternatives?

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 02 October 2013 04:23:04AM -1 points [-]

You wind up in endless arguments about whether this particular show is beyond the pail.

Comment author: Desrtopa 02 October 2013 02:43:51PM 2 points [-]

That doesn't seem like it answers my question.

What's the goal in this case? This sounds like it's only attempting to address effectiveness at avoiding disputes over standards, but that could more easily be achieved by not having any restrictions at all.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit