@ArjinFerman's banner p

ArjinFerman

Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 4 users  
joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 626

ArjinFerman

Tinfoil Gigachad

2 followers   follows 4 users   joined 2022 September 05 16:31:45 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 626

Verified Email

I made some progress with the background generation, but we're not quite there yet. What's happening now is that if the player moves off the current grid cell, more cells are generated, the old cells get copied from the shader memory, and normal textures are initialized from them, and assigned to the background sprites (this is when you see them turn pink). The new cells get assigned to the texture array that sits on the shader.

I've hit some issues on the way, as expected copying the textures from the GPU to the CPU slows things down, so I spread it out over a few seconds. This probably won't be enough though, because still have to shuffle the shader texture array around (if you move off-grid to the right, each cell in the array has to be moved left, and blank ones need to be created on to the right). Doing this on the CPU won't be feasible it would require 6 more GPU-CPU copies to read them and 9 more CPU-GPU copies to set them in their new positions, so I'll try to do the whole thing on the GPU. It's a lot of pixels to copy, but it should be a lot simpler code than the bug simulation, so I'm hoping I can do it in a single frame without affecting performance.

How have you been doing @Southkraut?

Agreed. However if the dissenting members (or some other subgroup) are accused of hypocrisy based on the stated views of some other subgroup, that's the sort of group responsibility I am talking about.

But has he done that here? I thought the accusation was that he isn't being specific, which would preclude from attributing views to people who dissent from them.

In this case, the Jew hater identified (1) "Jewish thinkers" who are allegedly responsible for pushing various norms of conduct on the world; and (2) "Zionists" who allegedly carve out an exception to violate these norms.

Sorry, the last comment I saw was about "Ethnostate for me, infinity zogs for thee". It's a reductive and snarky way to phrase it, but I think this view is actually shared by a majority of Jewish people.

This seems to assume that the Charlottesville rally would not have occured had they not been in touch with a single member of the larger group chat behind the rally.

No, it doesn't. I don't have to assume that a particular supporter was critical to an even to call him a supporter.

Consider in just the five years from 2012 to to this hearing in 2017 the ATF and DEA alone paid informants almost 260 million.

Yeah, glowies are also known for creating situations that would later allow themselves to swoop in, and call themselves heroes.

If his characterization of a specific case is correct, none of what you said is relevant. It's perfectly possible that on average things are more or less lime you describe, but people make an exception for Trump.

Keeping Israel as a necessarily majority-Jewish state, while promoting diversity in any state they're a minority in, for one.

By majority-supporting progressive policies for other nations, while opposing them for their own communities.

Note also how for the anti-Semite, each and every Jew is responsible for whatever is said by every other Jew.

A general statement about a group does not imply even it's dissenting members are held accountable for the majority opinion.

Come up with a better name for it, if you want, the dynamic seems the same, and the point was to show that saying a reaction was caused by something, does not actually justify the reaction, unlike what you were claiming.

Doesn't this strongly suggest that Group A's antipathy towards Group B really has nothing to do with Activity X, and it's just a convenient pretext to ostracise a group they wanted to harass for unrelated reasons?

You could say that activity X has nothing to do with it, but not in the way you wish to imply. The actual issue was the dynamic where an activity is seen as corrosive to society by both groups, so one of them bans it universally, and the other bans it only within the ingroup. I don't know how you can claim it's a "convenient pretext", one group is clearly defecting, and has no right to whine about their defection being recognized as such.

The activity being no longer recognized as harmful due to changing socio-economic circumstances does not change the fact that one of the groups was defecting. And even though that particular activity is no longer controversial, the defection dynamic causing the conflict is still observable today.

It’s wild to me how quickly this must’ve changed

We literally discussed it in one of the CW threads back on Reddit.

The Baltics hopped on the mass immigration bandwagon as well, and I'm a bit skeptical on how much it's "doing it to themselves", a lot of it is pressured from the EU level. I'm also not sure I buy that Israel's issue with open borders is about the immigrants' love for Hamas, and that they'd be perfectly happy to import a couple million Indians, and give them full rights as citizens.

But that's all beside the point. I grant that the nature of the threat these nations face is different than that faced by the Jews, the question was whether Europeans should be allowed to advocate for their nation's continued existence the same way that Jewish people are. The precise nature of the threat seems completely orthogonal to that question. From what I recall about the opinions you expressed here, you wouldn't have anything against that, so as far as I can tell, we're good. Ftttg, on the other hand, seems to be saying that only Jews should be allowed to do that, because their situation is so special, and that's where I'm going to have an issue. Even if I misunderstood him, there's no shortage of people, even otherwise extremely anti-woke ones like James Lindsay or the Babylon Bee brigade, who will make that argument explicitly.

Look I'm happy to concede my ignorance on the subject, so feel free to set me straight, but how exactly are they so black without African ancestry? Why are they so indistinguishable from Palestinians, if they are not ethnically Arabs?

Then you round them off to their respective overarching populations. Africans and Arabs aren't in particular danger of extinction either, so we should shrug at the vulnerability of each of the Jewish subgroups, no?

Not really. We should still care about Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, Swedes, Finns, Norwegians, Danes, the Irish, Icelanders... etc., etc., etc., far before we care about the Jews. If we shouldn't care about these nations because they are all "white" and "whiteness" will live on without them, we also shouldn't care about the Jews. Unless you want to tell me that Jews aren't white.

I think you'll need to elaborate on that.

Just within the last generation you could see a massive cultural and demographic shift in Europe, even in it's most populated countries, and any pushback against the trend will only get harder with each passing day. Is the fact that technically it will take more for us to die off, than it would for a smaller population, supposed to console me somehow?

Er, I thought "race war" was just a shorthand on controversial topics related to race. If it was supposed to be about tone, than yeah I have to take back my agreement from the other comment.

The Schism has a different political slant, new user funnel, expected level of effort, etc. Which of those really deserves credit for the volume difference?

Well, their new user funnel is actually better than ours since we moved offsite (we even have people claiming we should come back there, because we don't have a funnel at all right now), and do people actually get banned for not meeting the higher level of effort? If not, this only leaves the political slant by elimination.

I would say that the cost of flouncing back to mainstream social media is generally lower for a left-winger than a right-winger.

You're treating this as some immutable law of nature, when Reddit itself was remarkably chud by today's standards, well into the second half of the 2010's. It isn't anymore because Reddit started banning right wing subs, or handing them over to left-wing moderators, which in turn started banning right-wing users. This in itself shows the core thesis about left wingers not wanting to debate is correct.

It doesn't matter how much more there is of one group than the other, when their core mechanism of cohesion has been, and is still being eroded.

You never seen someone sperg out, and do something unjustified in retaliation to a transgression?

I can't help but notice that he didn't say "the Holocaust was necessary or justified".

For many centuries, Christians were forbidden to lend money, so if a Christian wanted to borrow money, he had to borrow from a Jewish moneylender

What you're leaving out of the story is that Jews were also forbidden from lending money at interest (all Abrahamic faiths were, though the only ones trying to stick to it nowadays are the Muslims) they just weren't forbidden from lending money at interest to the goyim. This dynamic is at the root of a lot of the antipathy between the groups.

Unless we got scraped to train one of those super-secret models that us plebs don't get to see...

I remember it being race war stuff, but I could be completely off base.

That's what I recall as well. I think there was even a post here from one of the mods justifying that decision.

Culture War Thread weekly roundup posts from the /r/TheMotte era, when it was still on Reddit, are more likely to have been indexed than anything after the move to themotte.org.

Lies! Those "Bad Gateway" errors didn't start popping up because we got more popular all of a sudden.

I’d say that all such spaces are subject to evaporative cooling

The schism literally started off with banning no-no opinions, no matter how civil the poster was, and I bet they'd do it again if they had an influx of right-wing posters.

You’re probably going to get several responses about how (insert outgroup here) is unwilling or unable to have polite dialogues, which I think is patently untrue.

Just the sheer difference in poasting volume between our two fora, despite us being offsite, and them being on reddit, should be an indication that there's more to the idea than you might think.