We are still struggling to heal Minnie’s ulcerated eye. She won’t eat with the Elizabethan collar (aka “cone of shame”) on. She has done so in the past, but she has forgotten and has now decided it’s impossible and she stands next to her food looking confused.
Until today, we took the cone off her to let her eat, but that meant she was un-coned for 60-90 minutes per day and free to scratch at her eye and rub it on the ground. No wonder it isn’t healing. It should have been obvious this was a bad idea.
I tried putting the food on a flat plate and elevating it on a footstool, about a foot of the ground. Nope.
So I took the cone off her to let her eat while I supervised her from a distance of less than three feet, to be sure she didn’t scratch at the eye.
Because she is a senior dog with kidney disease, we feed her three times a day. Also, I’m giving her eyedrops four times a day. I have gotten very good at giving the dog eyedrops. I feel pleased with myself when I do it quickly and efficiently, less so when I dribble the eyedrops on her face. Notwithstanding those feelings of pride at a job well done this is not a skill I ever wanted to acquire. This is going to be how we do things for another week, then hopefully she’ll be healed up.
This afternoon at the vet, when it was time to bring Minnie home, I just lowered the cone to face-level on the dog and she stuck her head right in it. The vet-tech was impressed. I acted nonchalant as if this was not a surprise to me.
My motto for the week: “In retrospect, it should have been obvious that was a terrible idea.”
The Interview: Chris Rock Has Been Thinking About Forgiveness [David Marchese / The New York Times]
“Rodeo Drive and Skid Row are in the same city, probably eight, 10 miles apart. In a lot of ways, America’s like that: very rich, very poor. We live in a world where either you order shit or you deliver shit], and you really don’t want to deliver [expletive], you know?”
Also:
You don’t really realize if you love somebody until you have to forgive them. I can enjoy myself with just about anybody. It’s when somebody tests you, when somebody betrays you, when somebody lets you down and you still want to be around them – that’s love. I have a friend that’s going to be nameless that might have gotten canceled. Another friend of mine was like, “How can you be friends with that person?” I was like, “If you’re only friends with your friends when they’re good, they’re not your friends.” If you’ve got a bunch of people that are only going to be there when you’re good, you have no friends. That doesn’t mean condoning abusive behavior; you can reprimand your friends. That’s also part of friendship.
Despite the headline, Rock genially but firmly cuts off questions about the Will Smith slap. He says he has said everything he is going to say about the subject, and wishes everyone well.
🦍 Mitchellaneous #179: Memes and other found media
Jamelle Bouie: I cannot emphasize enough that the president has pudding for brains. youtube.com/watch
🦍 Mitchellaneous #178: Memes and other found media
Appellate court rules that AI-generated video of a manslaughter victim forgiving his killer went too far
A man convicted of manslaughter in Arizona will be resentenced because an AI-generated video of his victim speaking from beyond the grave was ruled to have carried “undue emotional weight” as an impact statement. An appellate court in Arizona ruled that the manslaughter charge will remain, but the judge must reconsider the length of the man’s prison term because of AI.
To be clear, the victim’s sister, Stacey Wales, who generated the video, was in no way deceitful. She wrote her own perceptions of what victim Gabriel Horcasitas would have said as a way of expressing her impact statement, put the words in the AI-generated video of her brother, and she disclosed all of this to the court.
She compared it to the way courts thought of photography in the late 19th century.
“It took about 15 years […] and about five landmark cases in the United States that went all the way up to the Supreme Court before photography was an accepted standard to be used in the courtroom for evidence, identification, and testimony, et cetera,” she said. “I believe that’s what we’re seeing now with AI. It is a brand new medium.”
He Was The Times’s Moscow Chief. My Grandmother Was His Censor.
When I was a kid in Moscow, my grandmother told me that New York was the greatest city in the world, The New York Times was the greatest newspaper in the world, and Harrison Salisbury was its greatest journalist. She had made these determinations decades before she ever saw New York City or held a copy of The Times in her hands. As for Salisbury, she never met him. For several years, though, she read almost every article he wrote. She was also his government censor, the person whose job, at the Chief Directorate of Literature and Publishing, was to keep much of his work from ever being published.
M. Gessen, writing at the NY Times, remembers his grandmother, her career as a censor and Salisbury’s career as a foreign correspondent in Moscow.
Salisbury covered the USSR for the Times during World War II, left, and fought to never go back. But he returned in 1949.
He seemed to grasp the biggest story almost immediately. The Soviet government was waging a campaign to identify and imprison “rootless cosmopolitans” — a code word for “Jews.”
He wrote a story about the campaign, which Gessen’s grandmother censored.
My grandmother remembered this article as revelatory. But it contained nothing she didn’t already know. For more than a year, she and her circle of friends – young Jewish intellectuals in Moscow – had been living with a growing sense of fear. Many of them had had their university studies interrupted by the war and were just now, in their late 20s, graduating to find out that Jews had become all but unemployable. They read all the reports of high-profile Jewish writers, actors and critics being denounced, demoted and jailed, and they were sure this was just the beginning. Salisbury’s article reflected these facts and fears back to my grandmother.