This is another video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World. This video is my quick reaction to the season one finale of HBO’s The Last of Us. Like my other quick reacts, I didn’t script this or structure it like a video essay. As a result, I stutter and stammer a lot. I also make a few errors here and there. But I still try to get my point across.
Also, I do mention some heavy spoilers from both the show and the games. So do keep that in mind. Enjoy!
Filed under Current Events, HBO Max, Jack's World, technology, video games, YouTube
This is another video from my YouTube channel, Jack’s World. This video is a brief video essay, as well as a reflection of sorts, on the Satanic Panic of the 1980s. It’s an issue that has suddenly become more relevant in recent years and for all the wrong reasons. But the circumstances (and absurdities) of what happened in the 1980s were unique. And they’re worth learning from, especially if those with agendas are intent on starting a whole new panic.
Filed under Current Events, Jack's World, politics, psychology, YouTube
I am a man.
I strive to be a good man.
I like to think I’ve done the best I can in that regard. I know I’m not perfect, but I still strive to improve. I also try my best not to judge others who don’t do as well or struggle to be the man they seek to be.
I say all of this as a precursor because I’m about to go on an angry rant, of sorts, on those who take advantage of insecure, vulnerable men. That rant will include profanity, tirades, and insults. So, if that doesn’t appeal to you, this is your warning. I’m just sharing that as a common courtesy.
Having gotten that out of the way, I’d like to make some important statements that hope finds its way to men and women alike.
Fuck every man who calls himself an alpha male.
Fuck every man who promotes the whole alpha male mentality.
Fuck every man who actually buys into the bullshit behind alpha males.
I understand that’s a bit terse, but I promise I mean every word. I only wish the English language had stronger forms of profanity to get my point across.
Because as a man who has written about men’s issues in the past, I have nothing but abject hatred and disdain for those peddling the objectively stupid notion of the alpha male. I would go so far as to argue it’s worse than the idea of “toxic masculinity,” another label I think is built on a foundation of bullshit.
But the notion of the alpha male isn’t just stupid and wrong. It’s dangerous.
It presents men with a rigid dichotomy that supposedly determines whether they’re a “real man” or just some loser weakling who can’t open a pickle jar. Either you’re some muscle-clad, sports-loving, macho douche-bag who builds his day around how many women he sleeps with or you’re some pathetic, scrawny weakling who deserves to get shoved into lockers in high school.
There’s nothing in between. You’re either one or the other. And unless you’re constantly striving for that alpha status, then you’re somehow a failure as a man.
Again, that’s all bullshit. I seriously cannot emphasize that enough. There is no such thing as an alpha male. That is not a thing in science, biology, or objective reality.
In fact, the whole concept behind “alpha males” is based on horribly flawed study about wolves in captivity that was later disproven. If you want to know the details, please see the following from Phys.org.
If you don’t care to read the whole thing, the long and the short of it is simple. The study that first coined the terms, alpha male and alpha female, was based on observations of social structures of wolves in captivity. However, that social structure does not manifest in the wild.
Instead, the structure is largely based on adult wolves looking after their pups. It’s not too different from how most social animals look after they’re young. We don’t call their parents alphas. That’s just a byproduct of having a particular social structure that relies on adults protecting, teaching, and guiding their young.
That’s exactly what happens in humans, too. We don’t call the parents of children alphas. They’re just parents. Their role is the same as the wolves observed in the wild. They raise their children as a family unit, looking after them and teaching them so that they can survive on their own.
At no point is there this alpha male of the pack who gets all the females and makes all the lesser males do his bidding. That’s not a social structure we find in nature. That’s a social structure we find only in cults, namely the dangerous ones.
That’s exactly what keeps the whole alpha male myth going. It feeds into the agenda of selfish, power-hungry narcissists who need some excuse for being the one who gets all the money, sleeps with all the women, and gets others to do his bidding with little to no compensation.
I won’t name names. But if you follow the news about people who throw around the whole “alpha” label, you know who I’m talking about.
Again, fuck those men and every asshole who buys into their bullshit.
Because that’s what this stupid concept propagates at the end of the day. It’s an enabling force for assholes seeking to exploit those who are vulnerable. Every cult leader in history does the same thing. Organized religion and toxic fandoms do it too. But the people who embrace the alpha male label are just uniquely insufferable.
So, the next time you hear someone throw that alpha male label around, remind them that it’s based on bullshit science and only exploited by wannabe cult leaders. And if they refuse to accept that, then don’t give them the courtesy of calling them alphas. Just call them insufferable assholes. Because that’s what they are and that’s what they’ve always been.
Filed under Current Events, gender issues, human nature, men's issues, psychology, rants
If you’ve ever worked a full-time job, chances are that job had set hours during certain days of the week. It may vary from job to job, but in most developed countries there’s this concept of a standard work week. And it goes like this.
You work five days a week, often Monday through Friday.
You work eight hours a day, usually around 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
You typically don’t work major holiday or overtime. But if you do, you get paid overtime.
That’s seen as a “normal” work week these days. I put “normal” in quotes because what constitutes a normal workday has changed a great deal over the years. But I prefer not to focus on the history of the work week. I just want to ask a simple question about the work week as we currently accept it.
Is the five eight-hour workday schedule really the most effective approach to work?
It’s an honest question and one I think the COVID-19 pandemic has made more relevant. Beyond revealing how much work we can be done remotely and from the comfort of our homes, it also revealed that our concept of a normal work schedule is somewhat skewed. And it might be a good time to re-evaluate our understanding.
Some are already doing that. A number of companies in various parts of the world are starting to experiment with a four-day work week. It doesn’t always entail less work. In some cases, people opt to work four ten-hour days instead of five eight-hour days. The duration of the shifts don’t change. It’s just the structure.
And according to the conclusions of multiple studies, the results have been a massive success for everyone involved.
Overall productivity remained unchanged or actually improved.
Worker satisfaction increased, as did overall work/life balance.
The same amount of work got done, even when fewer hours overall were worked.
There were practically no real downsides. People got an extra day off, but were just as productive. They were also happier, overall. Even if you’re a ruthless business tycoon with no sympathy for others whatsoever, these results are encouraging. After all, happier and more fulfilled workers means less turnover and less conflicts overall. Unless your company runs on the tears and suffering of others, that’s generally good for business.
Even in the absence of these studies, I can personally attest to the appeal and the merits of a four-day work week. While I wasn’t lucky enough to have that schedule with any of the full-time jobs I worked, I do know it was a popular option in one particular company.
Since I don’t know if my former employer visits my site, I won’t say their name or their industry. I’ll just say that this company utilized a lot of shift-work. There were some typical nine-to-five shifts, but most varied considerably in order to ensure 24/7 coverage of our operations. I typically worked five days a week, usually 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
However, there was an option for those with kids to work four ten-hour days. The day of the week they got off varied. My supervisor actually encouraged those who used this option to coordinate and decide amongst themselves which day of the week they would take off. Some preferred having Monday off. Some preferred having Friday off. One even preferred having Tuesdays off.
It was probably the most popular shift, but one that wasn’t widely adopted. It was always framed as a shift reserved for those with young children who needed an extra day to take care of doctor’s appointments, personal matters, and what not.
Personally, I would’ve definitely preferred working four ten-hour days. Even if it meant those four days were longer, I would’ve gladly worked that time in exchange for a longer weekend. It would’ve made a lot of things easier, especially when I was young and just out of college. Even today, it would make a lot of things easier. An extra day would give me more time to rest, run errands, work out, and work on my personal life.
I suspect many feel the same way. Just think about how excited/relieved you are every time you have a long weekend to look forward to. But honestly, is a three-day weekend really that long? It’s still less than half of the week. And can you honestly say you get less done on a shorter work week?
Now, I understand that not all work is the same. There are certain jobs for which a four-day work week just isn’t practical. By the same token, there are also types of work for which a five-day work week isn’t practical, either. We just still use that schedule because it’s considered standard and “normal.” We’re so used to it that we don’t even question it.
But we should. The results of the studies I mentioned imply that there are better ways to get just as much work done with less time in a manner that is just as productive, if not more so. So why not embrace that?
I suspect a part of it has to do with how the five-day, 40-hour work week is engrained in a lot of labor laws. That is not a trivial detail that we can just overlook. But laws can be changed. And in this case, there’s a better and more efficient option available.
In a world with so many diverse people and so many diverse forms of work, it makes sense to be flexible. If a shorter work week means equal or greater amounts of efficiency, then the only thing stopping us is outdated assumptions about what constitutes “full-time work.”
I sincerely hope that changes in the coming years, especially as people continue to realize the value of a good work/life balance. Just because we’ve been structuring our jobs a certain way for decades doesn’t mean we should keep doing it that way. If a four-day work week is better by every measure, then we’re only making our jobs more miserable by clinging to outdated practices.
Filed under Current Events, health, politics, psychology
In general, I don’t care for commercials. Unless they’re for an upcoming movie I’m excited about or some local pizza shop I haven’t tried, I tend to ignore or skip them. I’ll even mute them during a live broadcast. I just find them that unremarkable.
But every now and then, a commercial will come along that really annoys me. It’s not just the aesthetics of the commercial, the cheesy nature of the scenario, or the annoying jingles that some devious marketing team conjured. It’s the overall substance of the commercial and what it’s ultimately selling. Because it’s one thing to advertise in hope of selling a product. It’s quite another to advertise in hope pushing a questionable agenda.
This is how I feel about the recent flood of the “He Gets Us” commercials that have been popping up lately. If you’ve been awake and coherent for any commercial break lately, you’ve probably seen them. They’re part of a PR campaign by Christian organizations like The Signatry and billionaire activists like David Green, the co-founder of Hobby Lobby.
And it’s not a cheap, low-level campaign either. According to NPR, it’s part of a multimillion-dollar effort intended to change or influence the public perception of Jesus Christ and Christianity, in general. There’s even plans to air a special commercial during the Super Bowl, which is not a cheap endeavor.
That alone should hint at the ambition behind this effort, as well as the deep pockets of those funding it. As for the commercials themselves, they all have a very distinct tone.
You’ve got these dark backgrounds depicting people who appear real and genuine.
They’re often include messages about how Jesus was a refugee, hated hypocrisy, and was unfairly persecuted for his beliefs.
They often end with the tagline message that Jesus gets us and with references to the organization.
Anyone who has a passing familiarity with Christianity and the bible probably knows these details about Jesus Christ, already. Even if you’re not a Christian, it’s nearly impossible to live in the United States and not be aware of basic Christian ideas. That alone makes the idea of a campaign to inform and educate people about Jesus’ life seem somewhat redundant.
However, it’s the bigger picture behind the message and the larger trends in organized religion that genuinely concern me. Because even though the message seems uplifting and benign, it’s important to understand who it’s coming from and why.
In case anyone has forgotten, the family behind Hobby Lobby has also been behind a number of court cases and legal efforts to promote “religious freedom.” I put that term in quotes because it’s a very politically charged term. In America, when most people talk about religious freedom, they’re usually referring to the rights of mainstream Christians to oppress, denigrate, or discriminate against minorities, usually individuals of the LGBTQ+ community.
To them, religious freedom means the ability to refuse service to people based on their sexuality, race, or gender identity.
To them, religious freedom means the ability of their particular religion to get special treatment and protections by the state. They’ll rarely say anything about Jewish or Islamic communities getting similar treatment.
To them, religious freedom means being exempt from laws or policies about women’s health care, adoption, or science.
To them, religious freedom means the ability to indoctrinate their children on their terms through things like homeschooling or private schooling.
In essence, their struggle for religious freedom usually boils down to an effort for their brand of religion to have power, influence, and some measure of preferential treatment over the competition, be it other faiths or no faith at all.
Now, as always, I need to make clear that organizations and efforts like this do not reflect on the character of most Christians. As I’ve said before, most of the people in my family identify as Christian. Some are very active in their church. They are good, decent, loving people. And most of them couldn’t care less about the politics or private lives of others.
They’re goals are actually perfectly in line with the teachings of Jesus. They seek to help and comfort others through meaningful community-centered efforts. They don’t need multi-million dollar campaigns to do it. Their faith is enough for them. And if others join them in that effort, then everyone benefits. That’s a legitimately beautiful thing.
But efforts like “He Gets Us” attempt to go beyond those simple, smaller acts of piety. It’s attempting to reshape perceptions of the notion that being a Christian means being an intolerant, anti-science, anti-fun, anti-LGBTQ+, anti-woman, anti-abortion, pro-gun, pro-capitalism, anti-environmentalist bigot. Considering the damage the religious right has done to perceptions of Christianity, I totally understand that.
The problem is that those behind “He Gets Us” actively contributed to that perception. They’re the ones who funded organizations that opposed same-sex marriage, anti-discrimination bills, and political candidates who claim global warming is a hoax. They’re the ones who seek favorable treatment by the courts when it comes to refusing services to certain minorities or getting special exceptions from general business practices.
On top of that, organizations like Hobby Lobby and The Signatry have close ties to organizations like the Alliance Defending Freedom, a recognized hate group that often leads the charge in pursuing anti-LGBTQ+ and anti-abortion policies. You can definitely make the case that they actively contributed to the current situation regarding abortion in the United States.
It’s this disconnect that I find so troubling about these commercials. They send a message that the message of Jesus and Christianity is for everyone. It’s somehow a necessary message in the current cultural landscape. But it ignores the fact that religious right has effectively co-opted Christianity to create this current situation. And at no point in these commercials or in their promotional material does “He Gets Us” or the organization behind it apologize for that, let alone acknowledge it.
This initiative claims to want inclusivity, but ignores where that lack of inclusivity came from. It also ignores that Christianity, as an organization, has become a political force that advocates egregious injustices, outright inequality, and a distinctly fascist form of governance that a large segment of the population has embraced. Like it or not, Christianity is closely tied with a brand of politics that is completely antithetical to nearly every core teaching Jesus Christ ever espoused. To not acknowledge or confront that is like trying to change a tire on a car that’s actively on fire.
In that sense, the agenda “He Gets Us” feels less like an effort to redress actual missteps of modern Christianity and more like damage control. It comes off as oil companies trying to shirk responsibility for climate change by claiming they care about the environment too, but refuse to stop polluting.
Again, I’m not trying to say every Christian is responsible for the misdeeds of a select few, nor am I saying someone is a bad person for identifying as a Christian or even contributing to organizations like this. It’s critical to distinguish the individual people from the nefarious agendas that organizations push. If there’s one message I’d like to convey about “He Gets Us” and the message they’re trying to sell, it’s this.
Be very skeptical of their agenda.
Be very skeptical of any religious organization that chooses to spend millions of dollars on TV ads to address a PR problem that they’re responsible for.
If you truly do believe in the values and teachings of Jesus Christ, then you don’t need commercials or politically connected organizations to practice them. You just need faith and a desire to be decent to other people, even if they don’t agree with you.
Filed under Current Events, politics, rants, religion, television
Today is Martin Luther King Jr. Day. It’s a day some take for granted, seeing it just another day off. For others, it’s a solemn reminder of a Civil Rights icon who dared to dream of a more equal and just society. There’s a lot I could say about Dr. King, what he did, what he achieved, and what he stood for. There’s even more I could say about the regressive forces that opposed him, some of which are still very prominent and very dangerous today.
However, I’ll save those words for another time. For this special day commemorating a very special man, I’ll just encourage everyone to listen to his words once more and keep his dream alive.
Filed under Current Events
With every new year comes new challenges and opportunities. And once the New Year holiday celebrations are over, a lot of people like to be extra ambitions. They’ll make bold resolutions like getting into shape, quitting smoking, saving more money, or working on their relationships.
These are all good, admirable goals to seek. If these are among your resolutions, then more power to you. I certainly encourage anyone making a sincere effort to improve their lives.
However, it’s also common to let your bolder resolutions obscure the smaller goals that are also worth pursuing. I can attest that I am guilty of this, as well. For much of my life, I’ve let bigger goals get in the way of smaller, more achievable endeavors. And even if I make progress on those bigger goals, it still feels like I miss some opportunities along the way.
In that spirit, I’d like to share a few little things that you can do to help make 2023 a good year for you. I’ve talked before about bold resolutions and I still encourage everyone to make them. But rather than repeat myself or share random anecdotes, I want to offer something small, but tangible that you can do to improve yourself and your life. I won’t charge for them. I won’t even ask for tips or donations. This is all freely given from me to you.
Tip #1: Go to sleep an hour earlier for one week and see how an extra hour of sleep improves your mood, health, and overall well-being.
Tip #2: Just go for a walk around your neighborhood, but make sure you walk down paths and streets you’ve never gone down before. Get out of your comfort zone to see what’s out there.
Tip #3: Do one act of random, unprovoked kindness every week for a random stranger. It doesn’t matter what it is. It can be as simple as anonymously donating to charity. A simple act of altruism is good for you.
Tip #4: Schedule a small chunk of time out of every day for a week for yourself. It can be as brief as an hour. Just use that time to stop, catch your breath, and decompress from all your daily stresses.
Tip #5: Make one minor change to your routine for a few days and see how much or how little that improves things.
Tip #6: Don’t follow any major news for a full 24 hours.
Tip #7: Learn to cook something new that you’ve never cooked before and share it with others.
These are just a few tips I felt are worth sharing. I tried to make them specific, but generalized enough that most people can incorporate it into their lives. You can try one or all of them. I simply encourage you to use the new year to try something different in your life.
We all have things we can improve upon and we should never stop trying to improve. There’s always a place for large improvements, but don’t negate the little things. You’ll find that, over time and beyond any new year, they accumulate. And when they do, you’ll appreciate just how much they’ve helped you.
I hope everyone has a safe, happy, and productive 2023.
Filed under Current Events, Jack Fisher's Insights
Firstly, and most importantly, fuck everyone who would exploit a situation like what happened on Monday Night Football between the Buffalo Bills and the Cincinnati Bengals.
Seriously, fuck you to the ends of the multiverse.
I apologize for my crude choice of words, but that’s just something I just had to get out. I knew as soon as it happened on live TV that there were going to be assholes who used this grim situation to push a bullshit agenda. I could even surmise the main details of that agenda and accurately predict how they probably voted in the last Presidential Election. I won’t name names, but it doesn’t take much to surmise who I’m talking about.
Here’s a clue. Most of these same assholes still won’t admit who won that last Presidential Election I just mentioned.
Since this situation is still ongoing, I’ll just relay what is known at the moment I’m writing this. In the first quarter of the Bills/Bengals game, Bills safety Damar Hamlin suffered a major blow to the chest. After getting up initially, he fell back to the ground and suffered what appeared to be a serious cardiac episode. It was so bad and so serious that the medical staff had to perform CPR and AED before sending him off to a nearby hospital for further treatment.
As a result, the NFL opted to suspend the game. As someone who has been watching football all his life, I cannot overstate just how serious a situation has to be for the league to stop a game in the first quarter. Absent a serious weather event, this is quite unprecedented. There have been serious injuries during games in the past. In fact, one Lions player famously died on the field in the middle of a game due to an undiagnosed heart condition.
For now, we don’t know how serious Hamlin’s injury is or what his prognosis is. At the very least, please keep the man and his family in your thoughts. Also, consider donating to Hamlin’s charity. That’s the most anyone can do right now. It’s entirely up to Hamlin and the doctors treating him now.
But not surprisingly, it didn’t take long for those assholes I mentioned earlier to derail this terrible situation for their own benefit. They basically used Hamlin as an excuse to push their insane, bullshit anti-vaccine conspiracies. Their terrible logic is that Hamlin was likely vaccinated. As a result, it is the likely culprit of is condition and the “mainstream media,” also known as media that says things they don’t like, is hiding the truth.
Again, that’s total bullshit.
And again, fuck every person pushing that agenda.
Damar Hamlin is a human being in a life-threatening situation. He’s not a prop for your political agenda or your bullshit anti-vaccine agenda. And if you in any way use what happened to him to propagate your own bullshit, then you are beyond despicable. Just calling you an asshole is the nicest label I can use. There are plenty of other words I would love to use, but I’d rather not draw the ire of the FCC.
Right now, the most likely cause of Hamlin’s condition is something called Commotio Cordis. It’s not common, but it’s not unknown either. It’s basically a perfect storm of events that happens when someone, such as an athlete playing a contact sport, suffers just the right kind of trauma to the chest area while the heart is in a certain part of its rhythm. It’s akin to two bullets hitting one another in mid-air. It’s extremely rare, but it does happen.
That diagnosis could change as more information emerges over the course of the next few days. Hopefully, Hamlin makes a full recovery. At that point, I don’t doubt the same assholes who used his experience for their own end will move onto their next bullshit grift regarding vaccines, elections, or anything the media says that they don’t like.
To those same people, I have one final message.
Fuck you.
Fuck you and fuck all the way off.
Filed under Current Events, NFL
Whenever someone makes an argument, a claim, or a prediction of some kind, it’s important to question just how sincere they are in making it. By that, I don’t mean always doubting them. People can say plenty of dumb things that that they’re convinced are true, even after most reasonable people point out how objectively dumb it is. The internet and social media has made this distressingly easy for any number of issues, be they political, cultural, or mundane.
But I don’t want to bemoan the method or the medium this time. There’s certainly a conversation to be had about the nature of social media and it has affected our collective approach to discourse.
Instead, I want to narrow my focus on one particular vocal group of people who keep making one particular argument again and again about a particular issue. The issue in this case has to do with pop culture and genre entertainment, which are subjects that have always inspired plenty of debate, productive and unproductive alike. Specifically, it has to do with the concept of “Get Woke, Go Broke,” a constant refrain that certain pop culture critics, YouTubers, and social media personalities love to state whenever an entertainment company dares to be diverse.
Now, let me make something clear. I think that refrain is a complete crock of shit.
Let me also make another thing clear. There was a time when I got somewhat sucked into this whole rabbit hole of anti-woke, anti-social justice warrior subculture that emerged in the mid-2010s. I even wrote about it on this site. And I genuinely regret that. I’m even embarrassed that I ever bought into that crap, thinking that there was some nefarious agenda by left-wing activists to ruin pop culture and beloved franchises.
These are multi-billion-dollar corporations, last I checked. Their only agenda has been profits and market share. That’s what it was before the word “woke” ever got coined. That’s what it’ll be whenever the next internet hate mob decides to whine about something.
As for the membership of that hate mob, I genuinely hesitate to identify them by name. I seriously don’t want to give these people any more undeserved attention than they already get. I’ll just say they’re the YouTubers, social media personalities, and online personas that whined constantly about “Star Wars: The Last Jedi,” complained endlessly about comments Brie Larson made about a lack of diversity in film criticism, and never hesitate to bemoan any piece of media that dares to be more diverse than a 1980s action movie.
These are not legitimate critics who have something meaningful to say about the state of popular culture. Their professional whiners and grifters, plain and simple.
Now, I understand that’s a strong statement from someone who regularly reviews and criticizes pop culture. I’m an aspiring YouTuber, as well. And for the most part, my audience and subscriber base is a fraction of what some of these other personalities have. It’s very likely I’ll never achieve their numbers.
However, having followed some of these critics/grifters/whiners over the years, I’ve watched them become more and more dishonest with their criticism. It’s at a point now where I can easily predict their reaction to any new movie trailer, video game announcement, or entertainment news without ever even clicking on their videos or social media feeds. It goes like this.
If the news celebrates or announces something about diversity, inclusion, or anything that’s ideologically left of Archie Bunker, they complain that this is left wing, SJW attack on pop culture.
If the news celebrates or announces something that aligns with or reaffirms their personal politics, which tend to be right-leaning and often glorifies people or characters who are white males, they celebrate it as a triumph.
It’s why they’ll make a big deal about “Top Gun: Maverick” being a huge box office success, but constantly forget that Brie Larson’s “Captain Marvel” made over $1 billion at the box office. They may make endless excuses for why that is, but they’ll never concede that their arguments, rhetoric, and entire perspective are full of shit.
I have no respect for these grifters, in case that isn’t abundantly clear. And with each passing year, their whining and excuses get more pathetic.
But recently, a unique opportunity has emerged for these whiners/grifters to prove that they aren’t just saying what they think will get them subs, clicks, or attention. In fact, it’s an opportunity that could potentially make them and their families very rich.
It has to do with Disney and how it was recently announced that Bob Iger was returning as CEO. Now, there are a lot of uncertain details about this story and why it’s happening. Many have their theories, but it’s very unlikely that any of these wannabe critics know even a fraction of the story. Since Disney owns both Marvel and Star Wars, it certainly has the anti-woke, anti-SJW crowd talking.
To be fair, not all of them are whining about the same thing. But they’re all still whining about something. That’s just how grifters work.
That being said, I do feel this might be the best possible moment for those who genuinely believe what they say to set themself apart from those dishonest grifters. Because in the same news that announced Bob Iger returning to Disney, it made clear that he was going to be in charge for two years. That’s an important detail for what I’m about to propose.
So, with that in mind, I have a challenge for those who believe Disney has become too woke and will ultimately fail in accord with the whole “Get Woke, Go Broke” mantra. And it’s a simple challenge that any one of these individuals can do.
Short Disney’s stock.
That’s right. Put your money where your rhetoric is. Prove to everyone, supporters and critics alike, that you genuinely believe what you believe about entertainment that’s too “woke.” Because if that holds true and it eventually does hurt Disney’s business, then you have a perfect opportunity to profit from it.
In case you don’t know what shorting a stock is, I’ll gladly help. In general, it’s a way for anyone to profit from a company’s stock price going down. Instead of buying low and selling high, you essentially borrow shares of a company at a certain price and sell it off at that price for a profit as the stock declines in value. Almost any bank or brokerage offers these services. Here’s a quick video from the YouTube channel, ClayTrader.
I’ll even offer another tip that will help multiply those returns even more. Since Iger is going to be at Disney for two years, you can use that information to essentially leverage your investment through the use of options trading. That way, your returns are greatly increased. Yes, the risk is considerably greater and there is a chance you could lose much more than your initial investment. But that shouldn’t concern you.
Remember, you’re the ones who keep saying, “Get Woke, Go Broke,” remember? That means if you’re right, there’s no chance of that happening. If Disney’s commitment to diversity and inclusion continues to fail, its stock price will fall. And you’ll be there to profit from it. You just have to utilize a put option with a two-year timeframe.
If you need information on that process, here’s another helpful video by the YouTube channel, TastyTrade.
This isn’t just a chance to vindicate everything you’ve been saying about diversity and inclusion in media. This is a chance to turn a massive profit from a multi-billion-dollar company’s failure. You won’t just be proven right in the eyes of every critic who has ever posted a nasty comment about you. You’ll end up richer, as a result. What could be more satisfying than that?
So, with all this knowledge and insight, what’s stopping you?
What’s preventing you from actually taking advantage of Disney’s actions on this front?
If you truly believe that Star Wars, Marvel, and the whole of Disney’s business is doomed to fail because of their agenda, this is your chance to take advantage of it and do something great for your financial future. You, your family, and your credibility in the sphere of pop culture and entertainment will be better.
Your only possible excuse for not doing this is if you actually don’t believe in the crap you say about getting woke and going broke. And the only reason you repeat that is because it earns you easy clicks and a reliable audience. If that’s the case, then you have no real credibility. You’re just a whiny grifter dancing like a drunk monkey in a digital space for tips. If that’s what you are, then that’s fine. People need to make a living. I get that. Just be honest about what a dishonest piece of shit you are.
I’ll ask again. What’s stopping you from doing this?
Go on. Short Disney’s stock. Throw your entire life savings into it. If Disney truly goes broke by going so woke, then you’ll come out ahead. Don’t you want that?
I dare you.
I double dare you.
I triple dog dare you.
Prove to the world that this anti-woke shit is more than just whiny grifters telling people what they want to hear.
I’ll wait.
As a general rule-of-thumb, you should never take news of a “scientific breakthrough” at face value. It’s not that the science is flawed or that the media reporting it are uninformed or misguided. It’s just incomplete. The rhetoric rarely matches the results, nor does it fully grasp the implications.
To some extent, that’s unavoidable. People who actually do science rarely use terms like “breakthrough” or “revolutionary.” Despite what popular media might depict, science doesn’t make giant leaps like that. It usually makes gradual steps full of small, but meaningful advances. It rarely makes for attention-grabbing headlines, but that’s how most scientific progress is made. It’s like building a house brick-by-brick. One brick alone is not a breakthrough. It’s the totality of the structure that garner’s the most vlaue.
When it comes to any news on nuclear fusion, it helps to be even more restrained. I’ve been following tech news for most of my life. During that time, I’ve seen plenty of articles and news releases from mainstream sources claiming some major breakthrough. Some give the impression that we’re just a few years away from using fusion to power starships to Mars. That’s a very flawed, very uniformed perspective.
In that same mold, I’ve also seen plenty of news articles saying nuclear fusion is an impossible dream that nobody will see in their lifetime. There’s a common refrain among these skeptics. They’ll often say something along the lines of “Nuclear fusion is 30 years away and always will be.” It’s a very cynical, very narrow-minded understanding of the issue. It also paints a flawed perspective of where we actually are in the science.
With those two perspectives in mind, how do we make sense of the latest news purporting a fusion breakthrough? In case you haven’t heard, the news came courtesy of Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, which is not some fringe company or organization. This is something they’ve been working on for decades and this was a big moment for them, according to the Financial Times.
FT: Fusion energy breakthrough by US scientists boosts clean power hopes
US government scientists have made a breakthrough in the pursuit of limitless, zero-carbon power by achieving a net energy gain in a fusion reaction for the first time, according to three people with knowledge of preliminary results from a recent experiment.
Physicists have since the 1950s sought to harness the fusion reaction that powers the sun, but no group had been able to produce more energy from the reaction than it consumes — a milestone known as net energy gain or target gain, which would help prove the process could provide a reliable, abundant alternative to fossil fuels and conventional nuclear energy.
The federal Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California, which uses a process called inertial confinement fusion that involves bombarding a tiny pellet of hydrogen plasma with the world’s biggest laser, had achieved net energy gain in a fusion experiment in the past two weeks, the people said.
Although many scientists believe fusion power stations are still decades away, the technology’s potential is hard to ignore. Fusion reactions emit no carbon, produce no long-lived radioactive waste and a small cup of the hydrogen fuel could theoretically power a house for hundreds of years.
The US breakthrough comes as the world wrestles with high energy prices and the need to rapidly move away from burning fossil fuels to stop average global temperatures reaching dangerous levels.
Now, compared to other news about “breakthroughs” from mainstream media, this is fairly balanced in that it doesn’t make too many bold claims. It makes clear that commercial fusion power stations are still decades away. But that was never the point of this experiment, nor is it the purpose of the article.
The most important detail from this news is the results the scientists produced. For the first time, a nuclear fusion reactor achieved a net energy gain. That means the generator put out more energy than was put into it. Specifically, the experiment produced an excess of 1.37 megajoules of energy, which amounted to approximately 70 percent more than the energy that was put into the reactor.
That is major news.
That is an achievement worth celebrating.
Because to date, plenty of laboratories throughout the world had achieved fusion. That’s not some act of scientific magic on par with anti-gravity or perpetual motion. The issue with fusion has never been about the physics. It has always been an engineering and logistic challenge, more so than fission ever was.
Creating fusion only requires a few ingredients. You need lots of heat, some hydrogen, and a way to confine it all in a structure. The big challenge that has been taking so many years has been to do all this in a way that generates more power than what goes into it. That’s something no other reactor has achieved until this experiment.
Now, it has been done.
We now know it’s possible to create a nuclear fusion reaction that generates more energy than what goes into it.
This is akin to the first ever cell phone call, which occurred in 1973. And it wasn’t until 1983, a full decade later, that the first commercial cell phone went on the market. That first phone was not very good and nowhere near as efficient as the cheapest phone you can get today. But it did work and it did get the ball rolling on the market.
That’s not to say that fusion will follow a similar timeline, but that comparison helps give perspective to where we’re at right now. Just getting a new technology to work is one thing. Making it a commercial product on some level takes time because the technology requires greater refinement, investment, and engineering.
But that process can only start after someone proves that it is technically possible. Fusion did not have that until this news. On top of that, investment in nuclear fusion has never been very high, compared to other technologies. In fact, it has only been in the past couple of years that more public and private investment has flowed in to developing nuclear fusion. So, that old joke about fusion always being 30 years away was missing a key detail. Any technology is going to develop slowly if there isn’t sufficient investment.
Now that one lab has succeeded in showing that a net energy gain is possible with fusion, others can follow. Hopefully, it inspires even more investment. With those investments will come more refinements and efficiencies. If those efforts are sustained, fusion doesn’t just become possible. It becomes inevitable.
The past couple decades have seen one too many price spikes in oil and other fossil fuels. Recent geopolitical conflicts have only shown just how vital it is for us to get off fossil fuels as quickly as possible. And our energy demands are only going to keep going up in the coming years. Add on top of that all the environmental concerns surrounding fossil fuels and the urgency for nuclear fusion has never been greater.
We’re still not going to see fusion plants popping up tomorrow, next year, or the year after that. But with this news, we’ve taken a critical first step. And many of those reading this will likely live to see the day when fusion energy powers their homes. That’s something worth looking forward to.
Filed under Current Events, technology
Jack Fisher's Official Publishing Blog 