You can do this in a number of ways. IBM chose to do all of them. Why do you find that funny?
— D. Taylor, Computer Science 350
I did not believe.Christopher Kline
When my robots storm
your front lawn
you will understand.
Meghan [to Alpha Child, who is wearing headphones]: You need to turn your music down, I can hear it from here…
What are you listening to, anyway?
Alpha [looking very innocent]: “Get Off My Back”
Me: Did you just mouth off to your mother with a song title?
For better or worse, its a bit like PHP (or if you prefer, JS): there may be some genius solutions out there built with it, but everyone remembers the kid in the corner with the half-eaten box of crayons.
The Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect is, simply put,
I believe everything the media tells me except for anything for which I have direct personal knowledge, which they always get wrong. source
Formulated by Michael Crichton, is named after Murray Gell-Mann, an astrophysicist. (said Mr. Crichton, “I refer to it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.”)
Mr. Crichton explained it further in a 2002 speech, “Why Speculate?”
Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward – reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.
That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I’d point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn’t. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.
RIP, Mr. Crichton.
Shhhh… Soldiers don’t have bedtimes.
People with doors want this project done.
— My new favorite euphemism for management
First they came for the verbs, and I said nothing because verbing weirds language. Then they arrival for the nouns, and I speech nothing because I no verbs.
Swearing makes talking fun!
— Maureen Paul, EIG