0743: "Infrastructures"

[CZeke]

Wow, I came here to see if one or two people were as miffed with this strip as I was. Not only did I find the balance of opinion leaning toward miffed, but the thread as a whole was a really interesting debate with good points on both sides. I think that may be against the rules of message boards.

To weigh in on a couple of points that have been raised...

• The autism crack didn't offend me, though a question mark briefly appeared over my head. To the offended, I suggest a thought experiment: swap out "autistic" for "gay" (pretending it fits in context). Is that offensive, or just obviously silly on the character's part? And if the latter, is it still offensive for Randall to put it in the strip, or is he doing it to make a point?
• xkcd is often smug. This is not news. I read in spite of that because the smug strips are often funny anyway, or smug about something I agree with; I suspect this is typical. And mileage is bound to vary about which strips are annoying. (For instance, I find xkcd way more insufferable about sex than hacker issues.)
• Of course reliance on .docs has nothing to do with Facebook. Beard-guy isn't saying that. It's about the other guy's attitude. Beard-guy sees him as blindly using what everyone else uses, and in his view, that's what led to the Facebook mess.
• Using Facebook is completely fine and normal. Trusting Facebook is the province of fools. That's where I agree with beard-guy -- you pays your money and you takes your chance. Where we disagree is that I would say the same about anything comparable the open-sourcers set up.

You know, I have a habit of ragging on xkcd, but I have to admit it's one of the few webcomics that make me think this much. Even when it annoys me.

I feel a lot like the bearded guy (is that supposed to be Stallman?)

Let's not kid ourselves. That's Randall.

[Amelas]

Say what you will about OpenOffice, but at least OO can handle MS formats. The converse is not true. I opened a Calc document in Excel, the values copied, but not the formulas (which is what I needed). Calc can retrieve the values -and- formulas from Excel. Calc also has smaller file sizes. I saved a spreadsheet in .ods, then had to save to .xls since Excel sucks at reading formulas as I previously mentioned. File size increases by 25%. I open and save the -same- file in Excel, file size doubles.
And don't even get me started on the interface. This may be a personal preference, but I -hate- the new MS interface. Big huge icons... nothx. This is all disregarding the whole money issue, and some or all of these may have been addressed in the past few pages, but these are my thoughts on the subject.

[BioTube]

swap out "autistic" for "gay" (pretending it fits in context). Is that offensive, or just obviously silly on the character's part?

Considering that autistics don't shut down major throughaffairs to flaunt their autism, I'd say this comparison's completely pointless.

[SirMustapha]

Considering that autistics don't shut down major throughaffairs to flaunt their autism, I'd say this comparison's completely pointless.

Yeah, autists only flaunt their autism and their oh-so-superior intelligence on the Internet, where they can all get together on webcomic forums and enjoy the fact that they're oh so much better than those... normals.

... though actually I'm thinking more of self-diagnosed "Aspies", who may not necessarily have any kind of autism at all, so... never mind.

[BioTube]

Yeah, autists only flaunt their autism and their oh-so-superior intelligence on the Internet, where they can all get together on webcomic forums and enjoy the fact that they're oh so much better than those... normals.

... though actually I'm thinking more of self-diagnosed "Aspies", who may not necessarily have any kind of autism at all, so... never mind.

Still easier on the economy.

[PM 2Ring]

swap out "autistic" for "gay" (pretending it fits in context). Is that offensive, or just obviously silly on the character's part?

Considering that autistics don't shut down major throughaffairs to flaunt their autism, I'd say this comparison's completely pointless.

What the hell are you trying to say?

[BioTube]

What the hell are you trying to say?

It's just ragging on gay pride parades. You got a problem with that?

[PM 2Ring]

What the hell are you trying to say?

It's just ragging on gay pride parades. You got a problem with that?

Yeah, I do. I've lost a few LGBT friends to suicide, including (at least) two guys I went to school with who used to get taunted for being gay. And although the laws relating to homosexual acts have changed in many places, there are still plenty of LGBT people that suffer from depression & poor self-esteem, etc, due to the level of non-acceptance in general society.

Personally, I find gay pride parades a bit overwhelming, but I think they are important, so if people want to march in them, they certainly have my support. It's a way for LGBT people to feel a bit of solidarity & boost their confidence. It's not easy going through life knowing that large numbers of people despise you & feel entitled to treat you like shit.

[poxic]

So sorry that your Sunday drive was inconvenienced by a parade, BioTube. Next time we'll tell those people they have to go somewhere else to throw a party so you won't have to acknowledge that such icky people exist.

[Dave_Wise]

It's just ragging on gay pride parades. You got a problem with that?

Yeah, autists only flaunt their autism and their oh-so-superior intelligence on the Internet, where they can all get together on webcomic forums and enjoy the fact that they're oh so much better than those... normals.

Um, excuse fucking me!

I tend to think that gay pride parades are still necessary- it's not so very long ago that homosexuals were routinely persecuted with official sanction, and homophobic attitudes are still very much at large in our societies. Besides which, what's wrong with closing a thoroughfare for a festival/march occasionally? You'd have no problem if it was, say, st.Patrick's day. As for it being a drag on the economy, I kind of doubt that. Local business probably actually get a boost thanks to the pink pound. Besides which, I happen to think that it would be worth sacrificing a little of our precious economy for a bit more social justice.

Also, I am a bit pissed off about the crap being spoken about autism. The actual comic isn't terribly offensive, and I wouldn't want to think I couldn't laugh at myself. I did have a bit of a "OK, Randall uses autistic as an insult, he obviously doesn't want readers like me, everybody does secretly hate us after all" moment, but that's probably just an overreaction and quite possibly a bit paranoid.

But no, it's the rhetoric about "flaunting their oh-so-superior intelligence" I find offensive. And no, fuck off, I'm not self-diagnosed. It's a diagnosis obtained after a detailed assesment by the local LEA and the CLASS clinic at cambridge. It's difficult enough living with a cognitive deficit without some pillock on the internet shooting his mouth off. If anything, it's harder to deal with that kind of bigotry on the internet- in real life you can tell people in private and most people who it's worth being friends with won't leap to conclusions about you. Yes, there are misconceptions ("Oh, you must be so good at maths, etc.), but they're easy enough to deal with. On the internet, for some reason, every tom dick and Harry feel entitled to shoot their mouths off about a relatively obscure medical condition. I don't buy into the whole 'us vs. them' of aspergers and neurotypicals, and I know what I have is a disability, but can you blame people for having that kind of mindset when we face this kind of ignorance? And since when is it OK to be prejudiced against disabled people anyway?

[lsdigit]

oh, for a little less than a week now, you didnt get the memo?

I'm new to all of this, but is this what they call 'feeding the trolls' ?

[poxic]

BioTube has been around for a while now. If we're not liking his shit, we're calling him on it.

[CZeke]

Sheesh, if I'd known this would happen, I'd have used a different example. Pride parades are certainly debate-worthy, but that debate is totally off-topic here.

I did have a bit of a "OK, Randall uses autistic as an insult, he obviously doesn't want readers like me, everybody does secretly hate us after all" moment, but that's probably just an overreaction and quite possibly a bit paranoid.

I'd go with "definitely". Come on, xkcd is a geek comic. You really think Randall would unironically use a big chunk of his audience as an insult? S'just some stuffing for the straw man.

[SirMustapha]

Um, excuse fucking me!

Sorry, I'm committed.

But no, it's the rhetoric about "flaunting their oh-so-superior intelligence" I find offensive. And no, fuck off, I'm not self-diagnosed. It's a diagnosis obtained after a detailed assesment by the local LEA and the CLASS clinic at cambridge.

So you don't fall into the "definition" I was making. I do know people who are actually diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome, and I know that those people do suffer prejudice, even in the Internet. And you know what makes the situation even worse? It's those assholes who come up with such an obnoxiously self-congratulatory and arrogant as that "self-diagnosed Aspie" garbage to explain their social ineptitude and inferiority complex; "nobody likes me and nobody hangs out with me just because I'm so much smarter than them and I'm constantly mentioning it! Is there something wrong with my attitude? Oh, wait, no! I must be an... Aspie! Cool, now I don't need to rethink my attitude."

[BioTube]

So sorry that your Sunday drive was inconvenienced by a parade, BioTube. Next time we'll tell those people they have to go somewhere else to throw a party so you won't have to acknowledge that such icky people exist.

Actually, I've never lived anywhere anybody'd ever hold a parade(for anything); I just object to comparing mental wiring to choice of partners.

Besides which, I happen to think that it would be worth sacrificing a little of our precious economy for a bit more social justice.

And before you know it you've sacrificed your way to the dark age(yes, there's a real possibility that the Roman Empire's fall was ultimately due to giving away free bread).

[TaintedDeity]

It's funny you say "mental wiring" actually because that's kind of what being gay is.
It's not a choice.

[Mostley]

http://blog.makerbot.com/2010/05/27/tiny-open-violin/

[BioTube]

It's funny you say "mental wiring" actually because that's kind of what being gay is.
It's not a choice.

They've been claiming that for quite some time and still haven't brought forth any proof that wasn't discredited.

[RebeccaRGB]

It's funny you say "mental wiring" actually because that's kind of what being gay is.
It's not a choice.

They've been claiming that for quite some time and still haven't brought forth any proof that wasn't discredited.

Actually, it's all the "proof" that it's a choice that has been discredited. You've got it backwards.

[cjmcjmcjmcjm]

Say what you will about OpenOffice, but at least OO can handle MS formats. The converse is not true. I opened a Calc document in Excel, the values copied, but not the formulas (which is what I needed). Calc can retrieve the values -and- formulas from Excel. Calc also has smaller file sizes. I saved a spreadsheet in .ods, then had to save to .xls since Excel sucks at reading formulas as I previously mentioned. File size increases by 25%. I open and save the -same- file in Excel, file size doubles.
And don't even get me started on the interface. This may be a personal preference, but I -hate- the new MS interface. Big huge icons... nothx. This is all disregarding the whole money issue, and some or all of these may have been addressed in the past few pages, but these are my thoughts on the subject.

Same with GIMP and Photoshop. I've got plug-ins for GIMP that let it read and use PS plug-ins and files, but no one has bothered to make a Photoshop plug-in that reads GIMP files

[Aaeriele]

They've been claiming that for quite some time and still haven't brought forth any proof that wasn't discredited.

Please prove to me that it is a choice. Why should your opinion be the default truth?

[BioTube]

Actually, it's all the "proof" that it's a choice that has been discredited. You've got it backwards.

Last piece of the issue I read was that the latest gay gene finding was bupkis.

[Dave_Wise]

They've been claiming that for quite some time and still haven't brought forth any proof that wasn't discredited.

I.... fail to see how that matters. Even if it is simply a choice of partners (and it isn't), why should that make gay people inferior, and why should it be any of your business? Besides which, they're not pretending to be attracted towards people of the same sex, you know

And before you know it you've sacrificed your way to the dark age(yes, there's a real possibility that the Roman Empire's fall was ultimately due to giving away free bread).

Oh yeah? According to who?

My only qualm about pride parades is that I'd actually like to join in the fun, but I'm not sure if I'm allowed, not being gay. I actually saw a picture of somebody driving a pink tank down a main street as part of one of these things, and if that's not awesome, I don't know what is. Taking a day off just to irritate rightwingers and puncture some of the long faced self-importance that plagues our society sounds like a great idea.

And you know what makes the situation even worse? It's those assholes who come up with such an obnoxiously self-congratulatory and arrogant as that "self-diagnosed Aspie" garbage to explain their social ineptitude and inferiority complex; "nobody likes me and nobody hangs out with me just because I'm so much smarter than them and I'm constantly mentioning it! Is there something wrong with my attitude? Oh, wait, no! I must be an... Aspie! Cool, now I don't need to rethink my attitude."

Possibly. Certainly, I've always wondered why if such people think they might genuinely be autistic, they don't go and see a doctor and ask for an assessment. It's extremely confusing. I don't even use the word 'aspie'. No offence intended to anybody who does, but I've always felt it's a bit of a cutsey word for a six foot, well built man who makes a living digging ditches and lifting heavy things.

I'd go with "definitely". Come on, xkcd is a geek comic. You really think Randall would unironically use a big chunk of his audience as an insult? S'just some stuffing for the straw man.

yeah, I was going to say 'definetly' but, well, I am inclined to overreact to these things, as well as definite paranoid tendencies. I do recognise that I have a bit of a chip on my shoulder about this whole issue.

[Aaeriele]

Actually, it's all the "proof" that it's a choice that has been discredited. You've got it backwards.

Last piece of the issue I read was that the latest gay gene finding was bupkis.

Not a gene != a choice.

[Pfhorrest]

They've been claiming that for quite some time and still haven't brought forth any proof that wasn't discredited.

I.... fail to see how that matters.

And I think that should be the end of the debate on the homosexuality nature-or-nurture debate. I like to state this via an analogy:

I like blue cheese. But some, nay probably most people in my culture think that blue cheese is disgusting. They would never in their lives want to have blue cheese, and they often don't like the idea of even being around other people who are having it; the look and smell is of it absolutely nauseating to many of them. Some people wonder how it is that someone like me could come to actually enjoy something like blue cheese. So that's an interesting question: was I born liking blue cheese? Is it in my genes? Neither of my parents like blue cheese, but maybe the gene for liking it is recessive? Or maybe it's cultural: maybe the way I was raised, the friends I made, the experiences I had, led to me developing a taste for it. I do certainly remember the first time I had it; a good friend offered some to me at a party, and I tried it, and I liked it, and I've liked it ever since, and sought it out where I could find it. But plenty of other people are offered blue cheese in similar circumstances, give it a try that one time, experiment with something new, but decide it's not for them. So what was it that made me inclined to like it when it was first offered, and subsequently led to me having blue cheese with some regularity down to this very day?

Who fucking cares? I'm not hurting anybody else by having blue cheese. I'm not forcing it on anybody else. I try to be polite about not having it in front of people who are disgusted by it but honestly that's their problem. So what's the big deal? If someone is so interested in what it is that leads me to like blue cheese, I can only infer that they must think there's something wrong with it. You don't ask "why would you do that?" when someone does something you find innocuous. So I find the very question an affront to my freedom: I think the best answer to it is "why do you care?"

s/blue\s*cheese/gay\s*sex/g

QED

[BioTube]

I.... fail to see how that matters. Even if it is simply a choice of partners (and it isn't), why should that make gay people inferior, and why should it be any of your business? Besides which, they're not pretending to be attracted towards people of the same sex, you know

The whole point of this is that comparing aspies to gays is inapt at best. I consider it a lifestyle, alongside polygamy and such.

Oh yeah? According to who?

Ludwig von Mises, although it was more the snowball effect that came from refusing to address the core issue of bread giveaways.

[Aaeriele]

The whole point of this is that comparing aspies to gays is inapt at best. I consider it a lifestyle, alongside polygamy and such.

That point got thwarted when you decided to rag on pride displays for no relevant reason.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

The whole point of this is that comparing aspies to gays is inapt at best. I consider it a lifestyle, alongside polygamy and such.

That point got thwarted when you decided to rag on pride displays for no relevant reason.

Fucking ponies, man. <3

[BioTube]

That point got thwarted when you decided to rag on pride displays for no relevant reason.

I went after the most visible aspect - I guess my mistake was subtlety.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

I don't think there's a particular circumstance where people here wouldn't find heterosexism objectionable.

[Natty]

Yeah, autists only flaunt their autism and their oh-so-superior intelligence on the Internet, where they can all get together on webcomic forums and enjoy the fact that they're oh so much better than those... normals.

Oh come on now! Most of us make fun of our neurotypical friends in real life too.

... though actually I'm thinking more of self-diagnosed "Aspies", who may not necessarily have any kind of autism at all, so... never mind.

Agree. Those of us with a real diagnosis tend to go out and get help to learn how you crazy "normal" people think or read up on the subject so that we can act our way through the majority of life. I seriously think it is the self-diagnosed Aspies that give us a bad name on the internet by just always being anti-social jerks...

...whereas the real Aspies get off their butts and learn to be mostly sociable people and only occasionally an anti-social jerk.

[SirMustapha]

Those of us with a real diagnosis tend to go out and get help to learn how you crazy "normal" people think or read up on the subject so that we can act our way through the majority of life. I seriously think it is the self-diagnosed Aspies that give us a bad name on the internet by just always being anti-social jerks...

Exactly. That kind of discredit is very dangerous; just with the small experience I had with acquaintances that do have actually diagnosed Asperger's, it's a condition that we, neurotypicals, need to learn to deal with just as much as the autistic people need to learn how to integrate society healthily. It's bad enough to deal with prejudice against any kind of mental handicap, and it's even worse to also deal with people who abuse a "self-diagnosis" as an easy way to ignore personal inconveniences. It annoys me that much.

[Bassoon]

That point got thwarted when you decided to rag on pride displays for no relevant reason.

I went after the most visible aspect - I guess my mistake was subtlety.

Yeah, damn those homos for displaying pride in who they are! It's not like straight people are flaunting their rights everywhere. How dare they demand equality for that which they cannot change!

[BioTube]

Yeah, damn those homos for displaying pride in who they are! It's not like straight people are flaunting their rights everywhere. How dare they demand equality for that which they cannot change!

A) There are no straight pride parades; B) I personally believe everybody's got the same rights; C) If you're talking about marriage, know that the whole idea of state involvement was to stop miscegenation; I'd rather argue for abolishing marriage licenses entirely than extending them(that would mean the churches could no longer be forced to recognize marriages they disagreed with, which is a good thing); D) Let's just agree to drop the nature-nurture thing.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

A) Oktoberfest? Spring break? Westboro Baptist Church? Sitcoms?
B) DOMA? DADT? Prop 8? Blood donor restrictions? Did you believe this in 2002?
C) Whatever the reason behind the government's initial involvement (which seems suspect, since adultery was punished judicially for hundreds of years before racial issues were prominent), its current involvement extends well beyond that (and in many cases for good reason, such as in defining next-of-kin status). And the "churches will be forced to marry people" argument is a specter that I have never seen substantiated.

[Bassoon]

Yeah, damn those homos for displaying pride in who they are! It's not like straight people are flaunting their rights everywhere. How dare they demand equality for that which they cannot change!

A) There are no straight pride parades; B) I personally believe everybody's got the same rights; C) If you're talking about marriage, know that the whole idea of state involvement was to stop miscegenation; I'd rather argue for abolishing marriage licenses entirely than extending them(that would mean the churches could no longer be forced to recognize marriages they disagreed with, which is a good thing); D) Let's just agree to drop the nature-nurture thing.

A) There are plenty of examples of straight pride everywhere, from PDAs on the street to commercials and television shows. In comparison to the number of straight couples represented in media, there are vanishing few gay couples of either gender being represented.

B) Gays don't have the right to marry in many places, visit their sick partner in the hospital, make decisions for said partner when partner is unable to do so, unable to file jointly for taxes in some places, and are unable to adopt children in some places, all of which heterosexuals can do.

C) Gay rights isn't only about marriage, just as the Civil Rights Movement wasn't only about ending segregation, or women's rights isn't all about suffrage. There are more issues to be dealt with than just marriage rights.

D) I don't see why it matters if it's nature vs. nurture, as the individual doesn't get much say in what their sexuality is anyway. Granted, sexuality can change over time, but it doesn't change for everyone, nor does it matter that it can change; what matters is equality.

[styrofoam]

D) I don't see why it matters if it's nature vs. nurture, as the individual doesn't get much say in what their sexuality is anyway. Granted, sexuality can change over time, but it doesn't change for everyone, nor does it matter that it can change; what matters is equality.

Didn't he just say he planned to not discuss nature-nurture?

[BioTube]

A) Oktoberfest? Spring break? Westboro Baptist Church? Sitcoms?

None of which are parades. But this is getting seriously out of hand; the idea was to call the homosexual-Asperger's comparison silly via the most visible part of gay culture(if you choose to recognize it as such).

B) DOMA? DADT? Prop 8? Blood donor restrictions? Did you believe this in 2002?

I was eleven at the time. I still believed there was a real difference between Republicans and Democrats and that nukes were the coolest things EVAH.

C) Whatever the reason behind the government's initial involvement (which seems suspect, since adultery was punished judicially for hundreds of years before racial issues were prominent), its current involvement extends well beyond that (and in many cases for good reason, such as in defining next-of-kin status).

Which is a problem that should be addressed, not embraced.

And the "churches will be forced to marry people" argument is a specter that I have never seen substantiated.

Meh, last I was interested, I read something about a church being forced to allow a lesbian couple to be married on their wedding pavilion. It was a while back, so I don't remember the details(like who prevailed).

B) Gays don't have the right to marry in many places, visit their sick partner in the hospital, make decisions for said partner when partner is unable to do so, unable to file jointly for taxes in some places, and are unable to adopt children in some places, all of which heterosexuals can do.

Again, I believe the state should get out of marriage business(and the existing business, while we're at it) and the rest is a matter of private decisions.

[TheGrammarBolshevik]

None of which are parades. But this is getting seriously out of hand; the idea was to call the homosexual-Asperger's comparison silly via the most visible part of gay culture(if you choose to recognize it as such).

The nature of a comparison is that the compared groups will not share all of the same characteristics.

I was eleven at the time. I still believed there was a real difference between Republicans and Democrats and that nukes were the coolest things EVAH.

What about the rest of that question?

[RebeccaRGB]

Meh, last I was interested, I read something about a church being forced to allow a lesbian couple to be married on their wedding pavilion. It was a while back, so I don't remember the details(like who prevailed).

The wedding pavilion was not part of the church itself, it was property owned by the church that was used for public functions. That's what the actual lawsuit was about: if you provide something to the public, you can't deny someone the use of it just because they're gay. The church's only involvement was in allowing or disallowing the use of the wedding pavilion; they were not conducting the marriage itself, nor were they forced to. Details are important.