I For One Welcome Our New Robot Masters
The San Rafael Pacifics are no strangers to promotions, but a computerized umpire being showcased Tuesday could offer a glimpse into the future of baseball.
The Pacifics hosted the first professional game played with a computer calling balls and strikes.
Home plate umpire Dean Poteet didn’t move much during the game. He called fair and foul balls, but not balls or strikes.
“They told me to stick my thumb in my belt loop so that I didn’t call strikes,” Poteet said.
The robotic umpire is designed to determine each player’s strike zone, and make the call.
Former Oakland A’s player Eric Byrnes announced the robotic umpire’s calls.
“This is something down the road that will change the game of baseball forever,” Byrnes said.
Brynes is right. It’s only progressives who think “change” is always good. Computerized umpires were the natural “progression” from instant replay review. The itch to make things perfect can never be scratched. Nothing is ever enough.
Look: we don’t even have to play the games. Why should we? Players make mistakes! Don’t you know how important these games are? Money is involved. Why don’t we quantitatively assess players’ abilities, and then design an algorithm which matches teams and shows us which side would have won? We could play entire seasons in seconds! Think of the tremendous savings! After all, who doesn’t want to get it right?
“American,” “illegal alien,” “foreigners,” “mothering,” and “fathering” are just a handful of words deemed “problematic” by the University of New Hampshire’s Bias-Free Language Guide.
According to the university’s website, the guide “is meant to invite inclusive excellence in [the] campus community.”
Terms also considered problematic include: “elders,” “senior citizen,” “overweight,” “speech impediment,” “dumb,” “sexual preference,” “manpower,” “freshmen,” “mailman,” and “chairman,” in addition to many others.
The guide defines words such as “homosexual” as “problematic,” offering “Same Gender Loving” as a more inclusive substitute. Similarly, a lack of gender-neutral bathrooms is, according to the university, “ciscentrism.”
The university defines “ciscentrism” as “[a] pervasive and institutionalized system that places transgender people in the ‘other’ category and treats their needs and identities as less important than those of cisgender people.”
Words exist to express bias. If we remove the ability of words to do this, we lose the ability to think. It is a bias to call the tart pulpy red-skinned fruit that drops from a tree an apple and not a Buick. It is a bias to call a man without legs disabled; it is nonsense of the first order to call him differently abled because, obviously, he is not “abled.” It would be better to call him handicapped, or even crippled, for that is the best expression of the truth.
That we now see truth as “hurtful” is an symptom of our insanity. To think that some people, like those who created the asinine guide, make a living promulgating such preposterousities (if they can make up words, so can I) to a cowering populace. Maybe we ought to create our own guide and market it to supine college administrators.
Science is one of the causalities. The guide says, “Problematic/Outdated: Biological/Genetic/Natal/ ‘normal’ sex”. Recommendation? “Preferred: Assigned Sex”. How long before some lunatic, say a man pretending to be a woman, sues a gynecologist for refusing to treat him? I’d put my money on the lunatic. He might wind up with Anthony Kennedy as a judge.
Given that our government is staffed by folks who have been thoroughly propagandized, how long is it before these kinds of non-words are made official? Don’t laugh. Some enterprising Democrats have already introduced a bill to eliminate “husband” and “wife” from the language. And it’s already happened in other countries.
All this is the quite natural consequence of supposing the “truth” is what we decide.
Poll Commissioned by Planned Parenthood Says Planned Parenthood Is Popular. (Somebody sent this to me, but I cannot rediscover who. My apologies—and thanks.)
Planned Parenthood hired a Democratic polling firm to find out if taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood is still popular, and found out that 64 percent of voters still want federal funding for the organization. Here’s the question that voters were asked:
Some Republicans in Congress say that because of the undercover videos released by the Center for Medical Progress, there should be an immediate vote to end all government funding for Planned Parenthood, including for services Planned Parenthood provides, such as cancer screenings and family planning. Do you strongly agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, or strongly disagree with the Republicans who say Congress should vote immediately vote to end all government funding for Planned Parenthood, including for services Planned Parenthood provides, such as cancer screenings and family planning?
Say, they forgot to ask about butchering babies and selling the pieces to the highest bidder. Could this be why nobody trusts statistics?
Incidentally, our guess that supporters of killing the lives inside mothers would either disparage the videos because of editing (even though the full unedited versions are also available) or would ignore them hoping they would go away was right on the money. John Nolte discovered that the legacy media covered the hunting of some dumb beast more in one day than in Planned Parenthood in two weeks.
Powers & Principalities
My prediction that the secret location of the unveiling (in my hometown) would be ex-mayor Coleman Young’s residence turned out to be wrong. Win some, lose some.
We All Need A Little Solace