We did a thing about this on the show a few months back the most puzzling thing about it is that the music is really good and would easily have garnered attention without the fraud.
The fraud is more fun though.
We did a thing about this on the show a few months back the most puzzling thing about it is that the music is really good and would easily have garnered attention without the fraud.
reads alot like barthes mythologies to me.From that book on Mengele's skull @catalog recommended;
View attachment 16787
Mengele's Skull: The Advent of a Forensic Aesthetics
In 1985, the body of Josef Mengele, one of the last Naz…www.goodreads.com
I've looked into it and I believe his COI paid editing & Wikipedia manipulation was done for the Lannan Foundation, with key articles being Cobell v. Salazar, Dawes Act, Elouise P. Cobell (see its creation), and Leanne Hinton. Several of his accounts have already been banned by Checkuser, but given his use of many IPs and single-purpose and throwaway accounts, obviously, a lot of them would still be dormant and he could reactivate them at any time. (Inasmuch as he was paid to push his own ideology, he still has reason to do so even though the Lannan Foundation is winding itself down and he has a 'Distinguished Professor' job at Brooklyn College.) --Gwern (contribs) 23:07 23 November 2023 (GMT)
thats what i was saying about conspiracy theory. it's a collective fictional enterprise.
But the government will keep him on as an employee."A Canadian man who claimed forest fires were the result of a government conspiracy has pleaded guilty to lighting more than a dozen blazes during the country’s record-breaking wildfire season, as nearly 100 fires persist in drought-stricken regions."
I've ragged on Lerner before and the story/essay itself isn't that great, but it's thrown up a couple of interesting things.
Firstly, the use of ChatGPT for the coda. Secondly, that there's now mention on Wikipedia of his actual edits campaign fictionalised in the piece.
Talk:Ben Lerner - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
@sus
oh yes it's lusciousI assume at least someone on this board has seen the Ackman/Oxman drama.
this was a particularly sardonic writeupassumed no one would know what gus is talking about as usual but turns out i was wrong.
It's really something—an academic celebrity revealed to be nothing but a Wikipedia collage and slick branding—plus Ito/Epstein intrigues (Ackman having tacitly blackmailed Ito into keeping mum re: Neri...)
It's true, and the same has been true of painters since the Renaissance. One-man bands are few & far between & usually the mark of the unsuccessful (i.e. those lacking the reputational and literal capital to assemble a fuckin squad, RIP)On a different tip, it's not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things, but I remember being a little disappointed to learn Ellroy hires researchers. It makes sense, but evidently I'd gotten invested in the idea of him singlehandedly pulling off these impressive literary feats and skulking round the archives. The mythology of the great artist.