We have carbon-free power.....nuclear energy. To not even mention it as an option suggests a lack of seriousness on the climate issue. Screaming to the heavens about conservation does nothing to advance the ball. We have way too many planet dwellers without AC and smartphones still. Split, baby, split.
I'm not used to the guest posts and so I especially enjoyed the first few paragraphs, before I checked the by line, and thought I was reading a drunk post by MY. Fun!
"I don’t think Narendra Modi reads this newsletter (he’s more of a Glenn Greenwald guy)."
Uh oh, better watch out, you might get a 20-comment Twitter thread from Glenn followed by his army showing up in your mentions. Or wait, maybe Glenn would take that as a compliment! Hard to tell these days.
This reminds me of my high school history class, where the teacher constantly tried to use some okayish jokes to make his boring subject material more engaging, but all I got from it was a sense of frustration and half as much learning per class period.
I didn't think this was unfunny, but I didn't think it was very funny, either. I would rather read a more concise article then go watch some of my favorite funny stuff on youtube.
It's exactly because that's hard that I would prefer it not be tried. I would much rather see something that does its best at one, and lets me use the saved time from cutting the other to go get a better source of it somewhere else.
Here, I think the humor was the weaker half, plus this is a blog about informative not about funny, so I say cut the funny, keep the info, give me back my time. And if I want some levity afterwards I'll watch a tiktok with the minutes saved
I would like to see Matt do a piece on what it is to be a journalist. I am increasingly in distrust of journalism. The recent Rittenhouse case realy drive this home. Basic facts along with the general contours of the case were bypassed to jump to political takes. Im struck that I really can’t trust any journalistic institution. Who is following the facts wherever it leads them? The journalist following the Rittenhouse case sounded no different than the attorneys prosecuting (and defending) the case. Rittenhouse’s attorney actually seemed like the most evenhanded person I heard. So Matt, what does it mean to be a journalist in 2021? Is it all politics now?
I enjoyed the humor and pithy summary of the climate summit. Better still, I just discovered and listened to Jeff’s “why the Dem’s political brand sucks” 3-part series. I have yet to see the trans Twix commercial, but will look it up. In today’s media, are Jeff and reporters like Peter Hamby weird outliers? Or are there actually many more normies, but simply keeping their heads down?
I appreciate this style of comedy writing because it rarely leaned into sarcasm, which modern cynics frequently mistake for humor.
And I do agree with the takeaway, that progress can be measured in many ways, and often hides beneath the headlines. Climate change won't be defeated in a single Avengers-style snap, but by countless smaller technological developments and policy changes to make carbon-neutral energy a more economical choice than fossil fuels. Outrage-fueled protests were important in the early days to get this issue onto the front page; but now that it is here, we need technocrats and scientists to work their trade more than we need symbolic social media trends or impassioned speeches by teenagers.
Judging my some of the comments, we not only have a climate crisis, but also a sense of humor crisis. Perhaps they are related?
Anyway, I thought this piece was good. the important takeaway, as with all things political, is that actions matter more than words. What politicians say is much less important that what they actually prioritize.
And it seems to me that climate is a classic tragedy of the commons problem but on a global scale.
It’s clear no country is willing to make economic sacrifices for this problem. Jeff here focuses on the ‘technology will save us’ argument - that tech will somehow allow us to have our cake and eat it too. Others cling to the idea that decarbonizing (or, for developing countries, industrializing using carbon-free energy) will not have any economic trade offs. I’m skeptical.
At about the third sentence, I was thinking, "huh, Matt Y is trying out a new style for this post." By the third paragraph, I was thinking, "huh, this sounds a lot like that 'I might be wrong' guy..."
I do wish the guest writers were more prominently announced - a first paragraph explicitly saying it's a guest post would help more than just the byline (which I don't usually look at until it's clear something is up).
We have carbon-free power.....nuclear energy. To not even mention it as an option suggests a lack of seriousness on the climate issue. Screaming to the heavens about conservation does nothing to advance the ball. We have way too many planet dwellers without AC and smartphones still. Split, baby, split.
I'm not used to the guest posts and so I especially enjoyed the first few paragraphs, before I checked the by line, and thought I was reading a drunk post by MY. Fun!
Great post — excited to have found imightbewrong!
"I don’t think Narendra Modi reads this newsletter (he’s more of a Glenn Greenwald guy)."
Uh oh, better watch out, you might get a 20-comment Twitter thread from Glenn followed by his army showing up in your mentions. Or wait, maybe Glenn would take that as a compliment! Hard to tell these days.
This reminds me of my high school history class, where the teacher constantly tried to use some okayish jokes to make his boring subject material more engaging, but all I got from it was a sense of frustration and half as much learning per class period.
I didn't think this was unfunny, but I didn't think it was very funny, either. I would rather read a more concise article then go watch some of my favorite funny stuff on youtube.
It was funny and informative, which is hard.
It's exactly because that's hard that I would prefer it not be tried. I would much rather see something that does its best at one, and lets me use the saved time from cutting the other to go get a better source of it somewhere else.
Here, I think the humor was the weaker half, plus this is a blog about informative not about funny, so I say cut the funny, keep the info, give me back my time. And if I want some levity afterwards I'll watch a tiktok with the minutes saved
I just wonder why anyone is going to develop and deploy that net CO emitting technology without a tax on net CO2 emissions?
I would like to see Matt do a piece on what it is to be a journalist. I am increasingly in distrust of journalism. The recent Rittenhouse case realy drive this home. Basic facts along with the general contours of the case were bypassed to jump to political takes. Im struck that I really can’t trust any journalistic institution. Who is following the facts wherever it leads them? The journalist following the Rittenhouse case sounded no different than the attorneys prosecuting (and defending) the case. Rittenhouse’s attorney actually seemed like the most evenhanded person I heard. So Matt, what does it mean to be a journalist in 2021? Is it all politics now?
So glad to see Jeff's whit and smarts featured on Slow Boring! Excellent choice, Matt!
I enjoyed the humor and pithy summary of the climate summit. Better still, I just discovered and listened to Jeff’s “why the Dem’s political brand sucks” 3-part series. I have yet to see the trans Twix commercial, but will look it up. In today’s media, are Jeff and reporters like Peter Hamby weird outliers? Or are there actually many more normies, but simply keeping their heads down?
I appreciate this style of comedy writing because it rarely leaned into sarcasm, which modern cynics frequently mistake for humor.
And I do agree with the takeaway, that progress can be measured in many ways, and often hides beneath the headlines. Climate change won't be defeated in a single Avengers-style snap, but by countless smaller technological developments and policy changes to make carbon-neutral energy a more economical choice than fossil fuels. Outrage-fueled protests were important in the early days to get this issue onto the front page; but now that it is here, we need technocrats and scientists to work their trade more than we need symbolic social media trends or impassioned speeches by teenagers.
This made me laugh, and it got funnier the more comments I read about people not liking the humor. I'm a bad person.
Also, the substantive points made all seem correct.
Judging my some of the comments, we not only have a climate crisis, but also a sense of humor crisis. Perhaps they are related?
Anyway, I thought this piece was good. the important takeaway, as with all things political, is that actions matter more than words. What politicians say is much less important that what they actually prioritize.
And it seems to me that climate is a classic tragedy of the commons problem but on a global scale.
It’s clear no country is willing to make economic sacrifices for this problem. Jeff here focuses on the ‘technology will save us’ argument - that tech will somehow allow us to have our cake and eat it too. Others cling to the idea that decarbonizing (or, for developing countries, industrializing using carbon-free energy) will not have any economic trade offs. I’m skeptical.
At about the third sentence, I was thinking, "huh, Matt Y is trying out a new style for this post." By the third paragraph, I was thinking, "huh, this sounds a lot like that 'I might be wrong' guy..."
I do wish the guest writers were more prominently announced - a first paragraph explicitly saying it's a guest post would help more than just the byline (which I don't usually look at until it's clear something is up).
This guy is not as funny as he thinks he is. I thought the article made some very good points, but man I found it a tough read.
At least it was better than the Chad piece so maybe by the 10th guest post he will be funnier than the 18th season of Family Guy.
Why did reading this make me cry, not laugh, even though it is comedy
At a time when everyone else says we should take climate policy seriously, man, is this ever a hot take!