ChickenOverlord
No bio...
User ID: 218
I mean there is that boss fight in Elden Ring with the crippled girls in graduation gowns trying to bite your ankles. Made my wife and I instantly say "the writer's thinly veiled fetish" when we got to it.
No, I just see preventing prison rape for mtf trannies as no higher of a priority than preventing it for non-trans male prisoners. It's something we should work to reduce, but frankly I don't see many practical ways to accomplish it, especially not without using resources that could be better spent elsewhere. I place a much higher priority on preventing the rape of biological women in prisons, and keeping mtf tranny criminals far the fuck away from them seems like one of the most practical and inexpensive ways to reduce that.
He is, however, arguably thrown under the bus if you insist on locking him in a facility with a population whose notorious Napoleon fetish causes them to brutally rape any transnapoleonics they can get their hands on
If he doesn't want to get thrown in the Napoleon-rape cage then all he has to do is not commit crime and/or invade Russia.
"It's not a compromise with sin; we're just reducing expenses at the cost of throwing a rather small percentage of the population under the bus."
"If I claim it's throwing the trans population under the bus then that means it's actually throwing them under the bus." You're assuming a shared moral framework here that very much does not exist. A trans woman is a man pretending to be a woman, or a man who has a mental illness causing him to think he is a woman. Someone who has a mental illness causing them to think they are Napoleon isn't thrown under the bus when I refuse to use taxpayer money to help them invade Russia.
A separate facility for trans-women was an offer of a compromise
That sounds like a massive expense for a rather small percentage of the population. Prisons generally try to operate on economies of scale, it's a lot cheaper to manage prisoners if you can cram as many as possible into the smallest area you can (without getting complaints from the human rights crowd). It's akin to making a separate third restroom for trannies when you could just have them use the one that matches their sex (bathrooms are, after all, sex separated, and I've been repeatedly told that conflating sex and gender is transphobic).
Famously a major plot point of the film Cape Fear:
Well, apart from the pro-life protestors being portrayed as screaming bigots
And literally worse than demons if the blurb you quoted is accurate.
For what it's worth, as one of our resident Indian dislikers, I like you. You're "one of the good ones" if that matters to you. I disagree with you on plenty of your opinions, but I'd say you seem like a smart guy generally. And you have respect for your host culture in the UK, that says a lot more to me about your character than your intelligence and other capabilities ever would.
In the ending of The Camp of the Saints, I'd like to imagine you'd be like the character Hamadura, a westernized Indian taking a last stand against the destruction of western civilization together with the Frenchies (or in your case, the Brits).
All I can say is that you (and people who share your views) represent a very fucking weird, and frankly anti-human, point of view. I suppose it all fits under materialism? It's similar to how pure ultilitarians or people who believe that free will doesn't exist come across. It's plainly contradicted by my own experiences, and the reported experiences of pretty much all humans. Basically, it comes across as "Who are you going to believe? My heckin' sciencerino and philosophy, or your own lying brain?"
But I don't really care. Like am I supposed to be existentially aghast at the notion that I might be a mere token predictor?
Nah, you (and everyone else on this forum) might be a p-zombie for all I know. But I know that I have qualia, and that precludes the idea that consciousness is some weird emergent property in LLMs or similar systems. Feel free to believe (or Chinese-room style repeat the words that you believe without actually believing them) that you do or don't worry about being a mere token predictor or not, it matters to me and I know I'm not.
I'm not arguing that humans are rational actors, but arguing that our cognition itself is largely based on something comparable to "next token prediction" is very much not established. Yes, humans recognize speech patterns and react to them, but those are only a small part of the working models our minds build of the world, our place in it, etc. and it is by no means clear that this works the same way as an LLM predicting tokens.
I don't know man. If you just dismiss that as a next token prediction, I'm not sure the term is really what separates us from the robots.
The problem is that that is literally, objectively, what LLMs are doing. So unless you're arguing that next token prediction is all (or at least a massive portion) of what makes of human cognition too, then I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. And if that is your argument, then I'd have to say objection, assumes facts not in evidence.
Mainstream 3d printing sites like thingiverse banned sharing files for gun parts of their own volition years ago. Sites like defcad and fosscad are the ones that the blue states have gone after, and they're still hosting the files, but they might need to IP block users from certain states? Not 100% sure on that, I haven't followed the news on their legal cases.
I'd have more sympathy for the blue states' legal arguments here if they hadn't done effectively the same thing to companies distributing 3d printed gun files (and similar attempts at out of state gun law enforcement) for several years now.
Or as the Brits used to say, "The wogs begin at Calais": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wog
But you would still need to view your policies as good
I've never met any politician who sincerely believed that their proposed policies has to be "good" in and of themselves. Not trying to be insulting to you personally, but believing that anything more than 1% of politicians (especially at the national level) care about doing good with their power is a quokka belief.
Not necessarily, but it weighs a bit in favor of the alleged quote being real. Or rather it's points against people eho think the use of the word makes the quote more likely to be fake.
I mean, blacks shifted to overwhelmingly supporting the Democratic Party well before the Civil Rights movement and the supposed "party switch". 75% of blacks voted for FDR in 1936, for example. The charitable view is that blacks migrating to cities etc. supported the dems because they had greater support for unions and worker's rights etc. A less charitable view is that blacks supported dems because they saw it as a way to get handouts from the government.
Or, as Lyndon B. Johnson (allegedly) said about his welfare initiatives: "I'll have them niggers voting Democratic for the next two hundred years." (Even if Johnson didn't actually say that, he is confirmed to have used "nigger" on several occasions).
I'm 99% sure it's already on your list, but I highly recommend the Anabasis: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anabasis_(Xenophon)
Edit: Also for a sort of modern version of the Anabasis, you should read up on the Revolt of the Czechoslovak Legion in WWI/the Russian Revolution. Also if you're a gamer there's a fun squad based strategy/tactics game based on it called Last Train Home.
This is more recent though. It wasn't called "the fertile crescent" for no reason.
The fertile crescent very much doesn't include the Arabian peninsula. It's more Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, and Israel.
Also I don't really think of nomadic Bedouins as a peak of civilization.
I don't either, but in comparison to Australian aboriginals and their accomplishments, the Bedouins have them beat by a mile.
I'm more than happy to share the Gospel of Jesus Christ with Somalians and aboriginals etc., and to help them achieve the most they can with their inherent abilities. I don't see how that means I need to spend disproportionate amounts of money and effort trying to give them a standard of living and civilization beyond their ability to maintain.
See the parable of the talents. We don't expect the servant given one talent to produce ten, we just expect him to not squander what he was given.
I mean, sure, but it doesn't make them hucking spears at each other any less primitive. At least Rwandans used machetes to murder each other which requires metal while a spear works fine with a stone or even wooden tip.
It's hard to believe that Australia is thoroughly and uniquely poor in this regard.
It definitely isn't. The Arabian peninsula and Saharan Africa both have much worse soil for farming, but both still managed to spawn civilizations. Arabia in particular spawning one that conquered the entire Middle East and North Africa.
I don't doubt that DEI contributes, but the most egregious thing I noticed (after looking into it after the Butler assassination attempt) is that the Secret Service budget for protection duties is $1.2 billion, which is an obscene amount of money for how little they do. They only provide full-time protection for roughly 40 people (I assume Trump and Vance and their families, Barack and Michelle Obama, George and Laura Bush, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and some small number of others). Not sure how many people they provide temporary protection to outside of presidential election years but I doubt it's many.
Compare that $1.2 billion to the entire military budget of several countries: https://www.globalfirepower.com/defense-spending-budget.php
The Secret Service has a bigger budget than roughly 1/3 of the world's militaries, to provide protection to just 40 people. That they seem only moderately competent in the best cases (like this most recent attempt) and wildly incompetent in the worst (Butler etc.) and that they misused such a massive budget means thet the rot has been in the Secret Service for a very long time.
- Prev
- Next

Eh, I've been using that argument since 2010 or so, it's still as applicable now as it was then.
More options
Context Copy link