Skip to main content

that time i outed myself as a serial killer

if you're on facebook, chances are you've encountered at least one person who's used a related app called "what would i say". i know a lot of people don't like to use apps because they collect your information and sell it to identity thieves and deposed dictators trying to smuggle money out of the country, but this one is good enough that i consider it worth the risk. also, anyone who takes on my identity is probably in for some unpleasant surprises.

the app takes your status updates and posts and scrambles them to create new things that are supposed to sound like things you might have said. often the results are nonsensical, but sometimes they are brilliant [including the nonsensical ones] in a dada way. and in my experience, they sometimes get a little too honest.

for instance, katebot is somewhat prone to over-sharing:






bad katebot. no one needs to know those things. also, it's not true. i have never worn pants.

then there are the times katebot admits to doing things that could get real kate in trouble:







those all seem like good reasons to avoid being anywhere in my vicinity.  so does this:





thanks for spoiling the surprise, katebot.

of course, she does give excellent advice:



that time she accidentally shared my to do list:



and then decided to try vague-booking in the worst possible way:



[actually, i'm not sure that isn't something i really did say. it sounds like me. but they all sound like me, which is the point. that just sounds a lot like me.]

of course, that does make one think about the "serial killer" admission from earlier. not that i'm saying i'm a serial killer. or that katebot is saying i'm a serial killer. it just makes me wonder why stuff like this would turn up from an application that tries to pick out the most common terms you use on facebook.

 

 it's like she just realised i was in the room and figured she should stop talking.



that first bit is part of a quote from hemingway. and i guess i've just chosen to specify that hemingway didn't eat people. for all those of you who've heard ernest hemingway cannibalism rumours. i know those are big on the internet now.



that can't be good for them...



with good reason if they live anywhere around me. 

so what dark secrets is katebot really trying to share about me?



probably for the best.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

don't speak

you might think that it sounds dramatic, but linguistic genocide is something that happens. people in power will go to great lengths to eradicate certain languages, not just for the sheer joy of making the world a lesser place, but as a way of beating down the culture that's associated with it. language has a unique reciprocal bond with culture, and every group that has attempted to break down another has recognised that forbidding a cultural group from communicating in their own language is an extremely effective way to tear apart their culture.

there are lots [and lots and lots and lots] of examples of this sort of thing, some successful, some not, but far too many to cover in one blog post. however, i thought it was worth looking at some languages that have been the subjects of active repression, and what the political consequences of that have been.

devastation :: the native north american languages :: it should come as no surprise that the largest genocide in history [by a ma…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …