Fun fact about A Boy and His Dog: it’s one of the primary influences (actually probably THE primary influence) of the Fallout games and their setting. In that sense, much of it is a criticism of Cold War American culture. All of the horrible stuff done to women in that movie is not an endorsement of it, but more of a direct criticism of the underlying misogyny in American culture. Also, it’s based on a Harlan Ellison novella. Or collection of them, rather.

You don’t have to censor the word “Fuck.” This isn’t, like, a Christian minecraft server.

Passive aggressiveness, nice!

That’s not passive aggressiveness; it’s condescension. Passive aggressiveness would be like hiding a spouse’s favorite condiments after an argument or intentionally being late to a meeting with someone you don’t like. It’s being indirectly mean or hurtful. I’m very direct, by comparison.

I won’t be reading his works, mostly because I prefer authors that use proper English grammar.

A truly fascinating hill to die on. I’m gonna bet you’re a BIG Brandon Sanderson and J. K. Rowling fan. Maybe a little Stephen King if you want to be adventurous.

Eh, you’ll probably like him once you read him. They teach his books a lot in high school English, so you’ll maybe get some exposure in…I’m gonna guess 5 years or so.

No, but he won the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1998 and his writing style emphasizes famously long sentences, some of them stretching for pages.

I take it you’re not a José Saramago fan?

From the snopes article you obviously didn’t read:

This might seem like an innocuous comic scene if Travers’s novels didn’t associate chimney sweeps’ blackened faces with racial caricature. “Don’t touch me, you black heathen,” a housemaid screams in “Mary Poppins Opens the Door” (1943), as a sweep reaches out his darkened hand. When he tries to approach the cook, she threatens to quit: “If that Hottentot goes into the chimney, I shall go out the door,” she says, using an archaic slur for black South Africans that recurs on page and screen.

The 1964 film replays this racial panic in a farcical key. When the dark figures of the chimney sweeps step in time on a roof, a naval buffoon, Admiral Boom, shouts, “We’re being attacked by Hottentots!” and orders his cannon to be fired at the “cheeky devils" [see below]. We’re in on the joke, such as it is: These aren’t really black Africans; they’re grinning white dancers in blackface. It’s a parody of black menace; it’s even posted on a white nationalist website as evidence of the film’s racial hierarchy. And it’s not only fools like the Admiral who invoke this language. In the 1952 novel “Mary Poppins in the Park,” the nanny herself tells an upset young Michael, “I understand that you’re behaving like a Hottentot.”

“You can tell that I’m right because of the way I am.”

The original novel had a racist element to the chimney sweeps. The film departs from that, but its source material is about as racist for what you would expect of a novel from that time period. There was some minor controversy where some English professor accused the film of racism: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mary-poppins-racist/

That said, I refuse to ever say anything that might be construed as defending racism in any form, and suggesting that a work of art exists as a cultural artifact of often contested ideological beliefs of the time and place it was created, possessing creative merits independent of its source material or even particular one-off attributes that may have aged poorly when viewed in the light of contemporary discourse, comes dangerously close to outright apologia in the eyes of your more insufferable pearl clutchers on the internet.

So, yeah, Mary Poppins is definitely racist. Why? Well, it’s not my job to educate you, that’s why.

Julie Andrews did black face in Mary Poppins. That’s the only thing I can think of.

I’ve written poorer documentation than this.

“Here is a work around to fix [weird bug in production]:”

“Edit: Disregard the above. It fixes [weird bug in production] but causes [bad thing] to happen.”

“Edit 2: Apparently the first edit is wrong. It doesn’t cause [bad thing] to happen. Bad thing just happened to occur simultaneously the first time I did the workaround.”

“Edit 3: [weird bug in production] has been fixed. This workaround is no longer needed.”

“Edit 4: Turns out [weird bug in production] we fixed is what allowed our systems to communicate with one another. Had to rollback change. Work around is now considered ‘the fix’ going forward.”

“Edit 5: Turns out it DOES cause [bad thing] to happen, but [bad thing happening] is a core component of our system’s design and also PAYROLL NEEDS IT TO FUNCTION?!”

Wizards/Hasbro hires contractors to produce art for their game. They make virtually none of it in house. It’s most likely they neither know nor care who or what produces art for MTG. Besides, they produce so much content in a year, some of it has to be AI/ML generated, so this is incredibly unsurprising. At this point, MTG is starting to enshittify by dumping out product as quickly as possible. Their quality control and playtesting has gone out the window. Most of their recent sets are pretty poorly received in the limited magic space. I don’t personally care about the use of AI art, but I can say that for money making enterprises, they’ll eventually have more and more art produced via ML over time, and eventually they’ll use ML to design sets in some capacity, as well. Right now, people are upset over it or annoyed by it on some quasi-ethical grounds of “stealing from artists by not compensating them for the work they produced being used to train the models.” But it’s going to eventually become the norm, purely on the basis that they aren’t going to lose any money from using ML to produce art and they’re going to save money by doing it.

The foundational premise of this argument is purely that there’s something “special” about human thought and that the way humans do pattern recognition is somehow “better” than a machine’s.