FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
No bio...
User ID: 675
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
47m ago
If you think my history and sequences of statements is that of a troll/shit-stirrer then I recommend for your own sanity and mine that you block or just ignore me.
Naw. I occasionally find your comments annoying, but my impression is that you are pretty clearly the good kind of annoying. That is, I may disagree with what you say, but my expectation is that what you say now will be at least roughly congruent with what you've said previously and will say in the future.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
2hr ago
I can civility express an opinion to matter how distasteful you feel it is, and that constitutes normal behavior here.
True.
"Following around" on a forum means dragging the content of one thread into another.
This forum runs on a reputation economy. People can remember the things you say, and use sequences of statements to build a working model of your behavior and goals, and steer their interactions with you thereby.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
2hr ago
Capacity to accept extreme sacrifices helps whether you are fighting or not fighting. I agree with you, I think, that such a capacity does not in and of itself guarantee victory, peace or prosperity, but the good life runs on sacrifice, and if individuals or collectives are not willing to make those sacrifices personally, they will sooner or later run out of other peoples' sacrifices, in a similar way to how socialists inevitably run out of other peoples' money.
Horatius accepts dying well with a spear in hand, facing the foe. Christian martyrs die well, refusing to fight on principle. Either of these are, I think, valid expressions of accepting sacrifice, of the sort durable peace and prosperity are built on. But what you seem to be pointing to in this thread is that there is a sort of illusory sacrifice, where mere indolence masquerades as principle: "not organizing and not compromising is my principle. How about a fruitless gesture instead?" I would point out that there's also a similar illusory sacrifice pursuing violence-for-its-own-sake; CatgirlKulak and the Israel-Palestine conflicts seem like good examples of this failure mode.
Sacrifice is necessary, but waste is not sacrifice, and an inability to distinguish the two leads to disaster. Are we not fighting because it is not time to fight, or are we not fighting because fighting would be scary? Are we not fighting because fighting is wrong, or are we not fighting because we are too comfortable?
I have a chronic argument running with @CapitalRoom and @The_Nybbler on this subject for some years now. They argue that the time to fight has passed us by, and seem to want either fighting now, or an admission that fighting will never happen. My position is that while the current position is miserable and undignified, we are in fact moving in the correct direction, and endurance continues to be the correct choice.
In your opinion, what does organizing look like? What does compromising principle look like?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
3hr ago
And I think that's very beautifully polished bullshit. "Free to die" is a very different kind of freedom from "Free to live a happy and prosperous life doing all the stuff you (plural) think I shouldn't do".
The latter is built on the former. Without the former, the latter disintigrates.
Jerking off to softcore videos of photorealistic AI-gen women seems extremely lame to me, lamer than watching live-action porn featuring real women (which is already pretty lame). On the other hand, is watching photorealistic AI-gen porn lamer than watching hentai, animated furry porn, or similar?
Gabe: Wait. What are you doing?
Tycho: Putting my Lancer up here, with Frostmourne. I assumed this was where we were putting our epic weapons.
Gabe: No, no, na-no no. This is where we put rad things. Not bullshit, like your pretend gun.
Tycho: Frostmourne is a pretend sword.
Gabe: No, it's a real sword, based on a pretend sword.
Gabe: That is a fake gun, based on a pretend gun. It's fake twice.
Tycho: You teach me so much, Gabriel. You teach us all.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1d ago
To be fair, this claim is significantly more plausible if you've seen UK fences.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1d ago
Drejka cannot be the aggressor, because McGlockton initiated their altercation with a brutal physical assault that caught Drejka completely unawares and laid him prone on the ground. This does not mean that Drejka was subsequently justified in shooting him in response; it was a very iffy shoot, and as I argued at considerable length at the time, Drejka's conviction was an acceptable outcome. It's actually a fairly interesting case, and I reference it often to provide illumination on the subject of personal defense with firearms.
Drejka's subsequent conviction and its justification are irrelevant to the point at hand, though, which is that Drejka was not the aggressor, which is one of the criteria you were looking for when selecting this example.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1d ago
Why it fits your request partially: It’s a self-defense claim used by a white aggressor against a Black victim, showing how police initially accepted the shooter’s framing of events.
Here is a video recording of the McGlockton shooting. It clearly shows that McGlockton is the aggressor. If you disagree, I would be quite interested in hearing your argument as to why.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
3d ago
People who are upset by this appear to want the old sociopolitical system, wherein there was a strict division of labor between the people who cranked out images of shit being dumped on the hated outgroup by laughing cartoons of tribal champions, and the actual tribal champions who directly benefited from those images while standing solemnly before a podium in a very expensive suit extruding the blandest possible word-product into an array of very official microphones. If one is going to argue for this previous system, one should argue for it as it actually was, not as it might be imagined to be, particularly in the imagination of the side employing a large majority of the old shit-pouring cartoon experts.
Also, Hideous Hermaphroditical Character, same as it ever was.
I remember Trace running his prank on Libs, what'd he do with DataRepublican or Barnaby?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
3d ago
what about kids making content on social media, ie youtube?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
4d ago
a week and a half to two weeks for me. It ate up pretty much all my free time over that span, though.
damn opsec....
I'm currently using Midjourney, and I'm only just dipping my toes in the shallow end. Here's what I've learned so far:
Midjourney does not seem capable of generating a clean sprite sheet, nor tiling textures. If there's a way to do it, I haven't found it yet. What I have been able to do is to generate good-looking pixel-art images of terrain, then chop chunks out of that terrain and compile them into a sheet of raw chunks. My plan is to process these chunks using photoshop magic (desaturate to greyscale, clamp number of colors to a small value, gradient map to recolor with a consistent pallete) and possibly some cleanup by hand to eliminate rendering artifacts and inconsistencies in the chunks, and then use the chunks like lego pieces to assemble production-quality sprites. Creating tiling textures is fairly trivial in photoshop using filter > other > offset and fill > content-aware or minor editing.
I've started experimenting with re-rendering of images I've painted myself, but so far the results have been unusable. I think this is probably just lack of knowledge on my part, so I'm gonna keep digging on it.
I've also started testing generation of monster sprites. So far the results for that have also been unusable, but did have some interesting bits. I'm hoping the re-rendering might help a lot here if I can get it working properly.
You got some examples of the kind of pixel art you're going for? any details on the sorts of sprites you're trying to make?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
9d ago
On my tank game, I got a simple grenade-throwing enemy working using unity's Behavior system, my collaborator got his messaging system working, and we got a bunch of old systems cleaned up and working properly again. He's working on engine and transmission mechanics, while I've had to hop over to another project where I'm trying to build a pixel-art environment tile set for another collaborator's RPG. After much experimentation for painting techniques for high-detail pixel art, I caved and got myself a midjourney subscription. The plan is currently to use midjourney to generate chunks of terrain detail, which I will then cut out into raw sprites. I will then clean up and normalize these to remove generation artifacts and inconsistencies, then use them to assemble the final terrain sprites. So far, it's working pretty well, and is the first time I've used AI for serious art production.
@Southkraut, @ArjinFerman, how go the projects?
It depends on your understanding of the problem, I think.
If the problem is "blacks are statistically distinguishable from whites at a population level due to worse outcomes", probably.
On the other hand, the Mississippi Miracle and similar data points indicate that we do know how to secure significantly better outcomes for black people in a variety of ways, and my tribe at least is actively being prevented from fixing the problem.
Bukele in El Salvador is another example of the difference between the three. El Salvador's murder rate was absolutely intractable, right up until the moment it was promptly tracted. One of my strongest objections to the general thread of HBD discourse is the pretense that nothing can be done, when in fact it is highly probable that we could significantly reduce many of these gaps and then reassess. Maybe if we can't completely erase the gap, all the problems will persist... alternatively, maybe they won't be as bad, and maybe significant improvements in one area will lead to better outcomes being possible in other areas.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
9d ago
"we can't fix this at all"
vs
"everything we've tried to fix this has failed"
vs
"actually, we have a way to fix this, but solutions are being blocked by specific actors for specific reasons".
The difference between these three positions really matters.
That being said, I do not consider mastectomies to be that irreversibly life-altering. If you change your mind, you can still get implants, and we have the tech to prevent any kids you might have from starving to death (and arguably had the tech for 10k years or so).
Are mastectomies more or less irreversibly life-altering than anorexia or bulimia? If schools were actively encouraging their students to pick up these habits, and hiding this fact from the students' parents, would that be more or less acceptable than the current status quo?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
14d ago
For my money, ACAB is/was a major social justice meme, and Blue-aligned politicians can be relied upon to endorse all ascendant social justice memes for the cameras.
I've been repeatedly and regularly told that Wokeness in general and the BLM/Abolish Police memes in particular are dead, dead, dead since at least the 2024 election. How can they be dead, and also a major political candidate repeating them is too normal to comment on?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
14d ago
This is a topic I've written on at some length, but rather than extrude the usual word-product, would you mind if I asked for a bit of detail in what you would consider a good response?
On the theory end, the short of it is that there's a couple prongs:
- "Don't be ruled by people who hate you" is the first and most important rule in politics, and Reds and Blues really do hate each other.
- "Manipulation of Procedural Outcomes" is incompatible with law or institutions generally, and is how things actually do work now.
- "Tolerance is not a moral precept", and we all, like Ozy, love John Brown.
On the practice end, there's tracking of things like selective prosecution, obvious rule-of-law violations, sequential breakdown of core civil society functions, interlocking hostility between legislation, social norms, and official and pseudo-official process, all backed by evident grassroots social sentiment, which I and others have been discussing here for some time.
So we could approach it from the theory/model-of-the-opposing-tribe end, or we could approach it from the observed outcomes end. The conclusion of both is that it's a very bad idea for Reds to try to live under Blue rule, both in terms of the outcomes of the Reds who might be in such a situation getting ground to extinction, and in terms of everyone, given that Blues do not, in fact, have a biological monopoly on lawless violence as a response to perceived injustice.
So what are you looking for?
Selective rigor is not a marginal problem that you have the luxury of ignoring.
It really sucks to see both sides engaged in an arms race to see who can be worse.
This is a war. How do you expect a war to operate?
[EDIT] - My estimation of your reasonableness and sincerity has been trending upward of late, so let me put a little more effort into this.
If you offer people a choice between "laws are enforced against you, laws will not be enforced against your enemies" and "laws will not be enforced at all", some people will choose the former and some will choose the later. The people who choose the former will die out, and you will be left with only the people who choose the latter. When this happens, the problem is not that people aren't upholding the law, the problem is that there is no law to uphold. A lot of people, myself included, believe this is the situation we find ourselves in. Appealing to the majesty of the law is not going to shift us, because we do not observe majesty of the law, but rather fractal deceit. You can think such an assessment is foolish in the extreme, but at some point you should probably consider explaining why it is foolish. Just for starters, I note that Trump does not appear to have used the FBI to censor conversation of and cover up evidence of his alleged corrupt activities, as we now know the previous administration absolutely did. In your view, does the Trump administration get points for not engaging in this particular "arms race to see who can be worse?"
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
16d ago
Seen this thread, out of curiosity?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
16d ago
It's also that woke failed to censor the Internet.
Woke did fantastic at censoring the internet. They silenced loads of people, they broke up organizations, they debanked people, the works. Elon bought X, and they went out of their way to try and ensure the purchase did as much damage to him as possible. And if Trump had lost the election, I'm quite confident they would be well into the process of destroying his businesses and personal fortune at this very moment, and the censorship would have returned at full strength. Likewise the other tech companies; they hedged when it looked like Trump had momentum, and when he won they bent the knee. Had he lost, the censorship would have simply continued to ratchet up.
None of this is guesswork. Europe is not shy about announcing their intentions for censorship of the internet, nor of providing practical demonstrations of how their system works. Democrats publicly announced their intention to create a similar regime in America, and were well on their way to doing so when Trump won.
City residents noticed the 2020 crime spike.
This is true, and the massive violence spike that killed ~8,000 black Americans slacked off. And yet, the officials they voted for are largely still in place, and still executing as much of the decarceration agenda as they think they can get away with.
Woke also overreached on trans issues.
Woke owns the schools, and a large plurality, possibly an outright majority of those staffing the schools are either true believers in trans ideology or unwilling to impede the true believers in any way. Ditto the medical field, from what I've seen. The activists are somewhat quieter because they don't at this moment have the Federal Government as a megaphone. Nothing I have seen indicates to me that they or their coalition have moderated in any way, nor that Blue Tribe is any closer to cutting them loose. Instead, Blue Tribe will do what it did under Biden: claim woke is over and nothing's happening, while providing their movement limitless resources and the full backing of every major social instutition.
But woke has not overwhelmed the country like many feared, nor is it likely to do so even after Trump is gone.
The problem is not woke overwhelming the country. The problem is whether, in the process of preventing such overwhelm, the country survives in any meaningful way.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
16d ago
It's referring to the Malinowski and Deschler shootings, among others.
How many wealthy and influential Royalists lived in the Colonies before the Boston Massacre? How many lived in the Colonies after the revolution?
More options
Context Copy link