Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
Pretty much. Sometimes it's easy to recognise when you have been crazy, but most of the time yeah it is 'oh I overreacted but I was basically right.' The confounder in all of this is the intelligence of the person being discussed of course.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
To build on @Muninn's great explanation: Schizophrenia is in a way pattern matching in overdrive. What anti-psychotics do is dial the frequency in closer to the station that we call reality, but there is always still some fuzz. So a lot of people go on anti-psychotics for a while and because the fuzz is still there they don't really feel very different - or worse, they feel like they have traded the frankly fucking magical world they lived in for the grey lifeless slog all the zombies live in, because it has no effect on the symptoms like anhedonia.
And on top of that they also get to enjoy fun side effects like feeling dog tired all the time, constant headaches, weight gain despite constant vomiting, and the always delightful sensation of your muscles seizing of their own accord so you look like you have cerebral palsy because your jaw desperately wants to rest on your shoulder and your hands are doing their level best to retract into your elbows. On top of that, there is the widespread belief in the community that if you find yourself gurning you have been on anti-psychotics for too long and you are rolling the dice on involuntarily gurning for life.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
This was an excellent post, and I agree, this is textbook paranoid schizophrenia. Call the police man. Anonymously if possible, he is better off with you in his life imo. I would have and I am a paranoid schizophrenic. My reaction to reading he wants to get a gun to "be a man" and "take care of business" was "ohhhh shiiiiiiiit." Paranoid schizophrenics aren't dumb, we are good at connecting dots (too good), and if after a police visit he can't connect the dots that determine why him saying that to anyone is a bad idea, then he is too crazy to have a gun anyway.
I really appreciate the fact that you are thinking deeply about this, but the fact of the matter is that society just isn't equipped to individually assess every mentally ill person for the intricacies of their lunacy, and we know that schizophrenics have an elevated risk of substance abuse problems and as a result criminal behaviour. That doesn't mean we should be locked up, but it does mean society should limit our freedoms in some ways unfortunately. We can not be cops, we can not be judges, and we shouldn't have guns. I don't want to be treated like a toddler with a bomb, but I also don't expect society to commit suicide just to appease me. I might be fucking crazy, but I'm not a narcissist.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
Psychosis does not equal schizophrenia. Men with schizophrenia are indeed more likely than the sane to commit violence - 4 to 7 times more likely depending on your source - but the absolute risk is actually very low - 1 in 4 schizophrenic men are likely to be involved in violent crime and schizophrenics make up about 0.3 percent of the population.
On top of that you have the fact that the vast majority of that 4 to 7 increase is by schizophrenics with substance abuse problems. Which makes sense when you understand the critical factors that separate schizophrenia from garden variety drug induced psychosis - the negative symptoms. It's actually really hard to summon the interest to violently assault someone when you spend most of your time in a state where you can barely summon the energy to give a shit about eating. When getting angry at a guy who cut you off in traffic feels like a lot of effort. When watching TV or doomscrolling feels like a chore.
That said, I agree with your overall argument, crazy people shouldn't have guns. But also, saying you don't buy into slippery slope arguments is like saying you don't go for this 'multiplication' the kids are doing, the world is shaped by patterns whether you buy into them or not.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
On my first post I complained that there's not enough exploration in Silksong. I'm glad to say the situation improves a lot once you read the Citadel at the top of the map. It acts as a massive hub area disconnected from the main fast travel network, with many hidden areas you can discover and tackle in different orders, lots of unlockable shortcuts, etc.
Lol yeah I got to the final boss of act 2 and I didn't have double jump so I knew I was missing an area, so I went hunting and I found six more biomes.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
Oh I am loving the absolute shit out of it so far. I have two complaints - the inventory management system is stupid, just needlessly convoluted, although that might be compounded by the second issue - I want a combat difficulty between story and hard, because the refilling of all your health and sanity with each save makes most of your inventory useless, but my heart can't handle the tension of fighting disturbingly sexy scarecrows while three hits from death at all times.
I don't know what the story is about yet and I don't want to speculate, but the characters are great so far. I am both terrified of my friends and desperate to save them, especially after the beginning and Hanako is such a melancholy protagonist, which just makes the game feel more claustrophobic.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
It'd be nice if they also said "and also cheering for murder is bad, you ghouls" but I don't particularly expect it of them any more than I'd expect Rush Limbaugh to tell his listeners to stop saying the people who died in ICE custody deserved it.
You just take it for granted that mainstream broadcasters are arms of the left, like that's somehow acceptable. And yet in an environment where the people who are supposed to speak to the whole nation are only willing to tell one side to stop being ghouls, you want to blame the twitter algorithm for the lack of left wing sympathy in anyone's feeds?
British police are trained how to do it, and American police could be.
You know, I nodded in agreement when I first read this, my mind going back to old episodes of Taggart, Inspector Morse and Prime Suspect. And a great example immediately came to mind - DCI Schenk in Luther, in this scene, which is excellent. But all of those shows are from a different time. Luther is the newest, and even then Schenk's character arc through the series is he's a good cop who plays by the rules but along with Luther his style of policing is considered outdated by the establishment and discarded in favour of small black women who should be presenting children's shows. The British police don't know how to do it anymore either.
Edit: in fact I would guess there was some correlation between the decline of the British police force and relative lack of non-comedy British cop shows. Because there certainly wasn't a lack in the past.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9d ago
Come on, you can't dish up all those details and then not explain what you mean. It's like you crafted this post to make me both want to learn more about the book and never learn anything else about it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9d ago
In the bible it says: "But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only."
So every morning I get up and say "The world is going to end today, today is the beginning of the end times." And every hour on the hour I say "Now, it's going to happen now."
Am I saving the world? Maybe. Probably. Of course if the world ever does end, then my experiment still has value, because it will prove God doesn't exist (because if he did I wouldn't have been able to predict the end).
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
10d ago
True, but it does fly against ALL of the messaging of the Harris campaign, which was that the only reason anyone wouldn't want to vote for Harris is because they are a bigot who should listen to their betters. If it's unacceptable to vote for Trump or not vote because you aren't feeling a woman president then it is similarly unacceptable to not vote for the gay vp. That kind of petard self-hoisting is very entertaining imo.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
14d ago
Yeah I'm bouncing off I think the final boss now, good God what a fight. Previously when I was starting to tilt I'd whip out my threadolin and go play it for someone new (everyone reacts to it, singing along, including enemies. Trying to play it for bosses is a good way to learn their moves, because you have to play it for a few bars, you can't just hold Y and trigger it.) But I've already played it for everyone now and I just keep dying to this damn boss. At least in Elden Ring you spawn outside the arena instead of having to get back to it each time. I know it's a pretty minor inconvenience, but it gets frustrating after a while.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
14d ago
No chum, we've been there for a while. Remember Jerry Seinfeld and Dave Chappelle and Roseanne Barr and Norm Macdonald and Daniel Tosh and... You get my point. We're at the point in the culture wars where there is now symmetry in the parsing.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
15d ago
Yeah the issue with police stand downs isn't the physical damage, it is the psychological damage. This might sound hyperbolic but it is unfortunately accurate - it works the same way terrorism works, utilising the spectacle of violence to achieve a political or ideological aim by manipulating the emotional state of a much larger audience. It creates deep insecurity and distrust in the general public on top of a general sense of unease and danger.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
16d ago
Probably not? Not no? Like maybe you could see an argument justifying their murders over cartoons? That's disgusting mate.
I'm hoping you were just caught up in couching because it's the motte, because 'they deserve to get their faces punched in' is a more respectable position than that by several orders of magnitude, and I assume anyone who disagrees has never had their face punched in.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
17d ago
It is not schizophrenia, it is bipolar disorder. Psychotic episodes happen in bipolar sufferers during intense manic or depressive episodes, they aren't a constant companion for Freddie, his primary issues are mood related. Also anti-psychotics aren't a floodgate keeping the crazy at bay based on the dose. They block dopamine receptors, a better way to think of it is as telling the under siege town guards there is a ceasefire so they stop shooting at shadows.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
17d ago
Are you joking? You honestly can't see the difference between 'woke is a mind virus!' or 'the left is destroying America!' or 'fuck I hate all these fentanyl zombies!' (I actually don't get how that one is supposed to be used to incite violence at all so I'm sorry if I'm misrepresenting it) or 'anyone involved in election fraud is a traitor!' and 'punch nazis!' or 'bash the fash!' which, when you say 'but not actually right? Like this is just rhetoric, you're not literally inciting violence right?' they say 'no I mean it. Fuck nazis, it's cool to punch them. Bash the fash. If you want to get laid beat up a fascist. Your grandfather fought in world war 2 to kill these evil fucks, now you better not let him down.'
That's the difference. One side uses rhetoric 'which, taken over-literally, seem just as likely to encourage murder as the "fascist" talk' while the other side promotes actual violence. The right used to use language like that too - helicopter rides and the like. But 'due to the alarming rise in online hate caused by right wing extremism' (read asymmetric application of censorship) it was largely stamped out, while the left's direct expressions of violent purpose were excused and justified with claims about the language of the oppressed and regurgitated world war 2 propaganda.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
19d ago
The vast majority of signatories on the famous Harper's Letter are liberals or leftists. Few are conservative, and virtually none are associated with the populist Right that dominates the Republican establishment.
No conservatives signing a letter that includes a denouncement of the current leader of the conservatives doesn't tell you conservatives don't care about free speech. It tells you conservatives have kicked at that football one too many times, Lucy.
And now FIRE is progressive! I'm sure Greg Lukianoff will be surprised, considering the many attacks they have suffered from the left, being branded a front for conservative ideology because the only people they could source funding from were conservative.
And while I'm at it, the original FIRE database you link lists deplatforming attempts, which you call cancelling, but that is like calling attempted murder murder. Attempted cancellations are bad, yes, but of the successful attempts the left clearly dominates.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
19d ago
I have been playing Hollow Knight Silksong. God damn, I agree with pretty much all of the criticism - it's brutally difficult and more of an expansion for hollow knight (gameplay wise) than a sequel. But I love the shit out of it. The visuals are great, Hornet makes a great protagonist, the story is intriguing and it is packed with cute and interesting npcs. And the music is just phenomenal, absolutely gorgeous. But yeah it's hard to recommend to anyone who doesn't already froth Hollow Knight. There are enemies in the second biome who do two masks of damage a hit, meaning you are three hits from death and there is a buttload of pogoing necessary for progress, and since hornet's pogoing is different to the vessel's (diagonal instead of straight down) you have to learn a new system - and forget the muscle memory of the old system. But if you liked hollow knight you should definitely play it (although you probably already are) and if you haven't played hollow knight but like metroidvanias or souls likes, get on it!
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
19d ago
But it was recently pointed out to me that the beginnings of what might be termed cancel culture (less individualized but still targeted pressure campaigns) were way earlier. Remember Christian groups trying to cancel different movies because of inappropriate content? Certain songs, company actions too. Actually plenty of moral crusades going back even farther. And the left of course had the apartheid boycott, Vietnam era protest against officials and companies supporting the war, or certain college speakers, stuff like that.
Those fit with what we call cancel culture, yes. They are the examples I, and many others like me, used in apoplectic exasperation when we were begging progressives (donglegate, elevatorgate, gamergate, etcetera ad infinitum) not to enable a culture of getting people fired for saying dumb shit in their private lives, because by the noughts we were finally establishing a moderately stable and coherent application of free speech to the home/work divide, and the only thing that was required to keep it, the only thing that people had to do to maintain it, was not be petty vindictive assholes who stew for days over words on the internet. But apparently that was a bridge too far.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
19d ago
I think rights are more than just tools we use to protect higher values. They're the values we aspire to themselves because we're happier living in societies that carve out spaces for different human activities. I think depending on where you are in society you're going to have a different view on what kind of society you live in. In my own case I can agree with what people like Jaron Lanier says and I think many people in country's across the world would say the same thing for themselves, even without an explicit commitment to free speech. If you're a black teenager that inherits the circumstances and conditions of having to grow up in inner city Detroit, you still may not say you live in a tyranny, but you live in a dog-eat-dog world in a 1st world shithole society that doesn't care about you, from some of their perspectives. And it's hard to disagree with that when it's baked into your life experiences. Those communities would greatly enjoy a little more security and a little less freedom if you offered it to them on a plate. There are compromises to reach on civil liberties which include free speech. I used to get criticized all the time for "not understanding" how important freedom of speech is. I can assure people I absolutely understand it's importance. But it's important to understand there are different sociopolitical planes and axes that people live under. And freedom of speech isn't a one-size fits all solution. Countries do what they believe makes sense in their circumstance and history.
I have had trouble answering this, because I think we're essentially in agreement about rights, you're just focused on the immediate future while I'm focused on the distant future. Because yeah it does come down to trade offs, and it's hard to support the idea that the first (or the second) amendment is what some poor kid in Detroit or Chiraq needs more of. So it's a bit selfish of me to insist on them just because my own community is in the position where the greatest assaults are on our freedom by pencil pushing bureaucrats making up rules to justify their pay cheques. But that is the position I believe I am in.
But having said that, that Detroit kid also isn't benefiting from getting fired from his job at Wendy's for posting a video laughing at the death of some white guy whom the media claims says black people were happier as slaves. And I do worry that part of the problem is that modern society sees rights too much as values and not enough as tools. Like we've sacralised the idea of the human right, and now everything from the internet to hormone treatment is a human right that people are willing to burn down society over. And maybe I'm pattern matching too aggressively, but I can't help but see a through line from the increasing abrogation of the first amendment under Obama and subsequent administrations and the rise in chaos online and off. It's obviously not the incitement, but I think it definitely plays a part.
Sorry this isn't more coherent, it's a challenging subject to deal with. You nailed it with your second paragraph though.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
21d ago
Do you really fight for that out of some inherent admiration for a higher value or because tolerating those views is a price you pay for advancing good ideas in hopes that they flourish? I'll take the heat for my own stance on this but I don't regard free speech as an absolute value even though it's virtually impossible to overstate it's importance. It doesn't give you the right to harass people. It doesn't mean freedom from the consequences of your actions or statements. And I don't regard free speech as a value so high that it means we should burn the whole house down so one person can have his right to say something he's highly attached to.
I don't think there's a difference really. Rights aren't prayers, they are tools we use to protect society. I do think free speech and expression is the most important right, but that's because it is the last line of defence against the tyrannical - even if they lock you up, if you can talk you have the opportunity to convince your captor to let you go. Sure in practice that is very rare, but the potential is better than nothing. In abstract I can agree we shouldn't burn the whole thing down just because one guy can't shout obscenities at passers-by, but in practice that historically means I'm next. Unlike many on the right these days I will still defend the right to speak of people I find abhorrent, which is why that congressman annoys me. But fighting for it, that is fighting for your own demise.
The sad part, in my view, is that many of those who will suffer the consequences of 'belittling' speech will have been indoctrinated into it and raised in an environment where their speech didn't have consequences. They are victims of a zeitgeist shift, but to them, unaware of history, it will look like right wing authoritarianism run rampant. The cycle will begin anew. I'd be worried about that if I didn't think it inevitable.
Then you're fighting for a near non-existent number of people who feel the same way that you do. Unfortunately that isn't what most people want. More people will fight for privilege than principle. Inside of everyone (and especially where it concerns ideological lines) you're never going to coax the majority of people out of their friend/enemy distinction; whether they'll admit it to you or not.
Oh man, I know. And looking back, my life would have been much easier - and better - if I'd embraced the friend/enemy distinction. I used to feel like a poster child for 'here's why you shouldn't live by your principles.' But I think I'm just meant to stick to a smaller community, once I started focusing more on improving my community on the local level my life improved immeasurably. Liberal democracy is not entirely stable in a polarised society I think, it tilts back and forth. People like me will never be in power, but we remind those in power that their righteousness is false, and they can and should do better, which - up to a point - is useful imo. It is also probably cope, but it works for me.
God damn man! What do you use it for if not llms?
More options
Context Copy link