Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
How would you feel if we could achieve a 1 to 1 The Prestige style copy where the copy believes they're the real one? I know hand waving getting there has real 'draw the rest of the owl' energy but I'm interested in your answer anyway.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
So it's a warning? I'm happy to take it for what it is, I wanted clarity. I don't think that's out of line. Do you not wear the hat for warnings any longer?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
I mean TBH I did submit my post and then go back and instantly edit it because I felt the specific question (as opposed to the context) was worth addressing. I'll come back to that.
I didn't mean to imply that you were being somehow duplicitous by using the fake edit, if that was the impression I gave - even if you just decided you didn't want to mess with the flow of your post, it's just a part of forum culture imo, it happens, and I don't see much difference between seconds before/seconds after - but it also feels
But yes, I am upset and I obviously have a bit of a hair trigger for this issue, however I would have been less frustrated with your response if you had said you could diagnose psychosis in one post - that's undeniably possible. But I guess the real sticking point for me is that the op is clearly not schizophrenic. Call it insane (in every sense) stolen valour. (Obviously it's more like the opposite, I don't want others to suffer the same stigma I and others I know have and I know people's brains don't delineate between shitposting and advice so neatly.)
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Is this a warning or a ban? Because I don't see your hat. If your response here is as a user, and simply using the language of modding for some reason thanks for your concern, but I have always been aware I have to fight my own battles here and I am perfectly content to.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
That's weird, I thought you answered the question perfectly well before your fake edit - it was unprofessional and not the way you would have gone about it, and you need other symptoms to diagnose schizophrenia. You just caveated it with the fact that you are sometimes unprofessional. My assumption is that if this was a beauty forum and someone pointed out that it's fucking disgusting of you to casually label someone 'guaranteed a landwhale in my medical opinion' for having a bp of 190/120 you'd realise you made a mistake and cut it out. Then your explanation of what schizophrenia is further made my point.
Also I'm fully aware of where my feelings come from, they come from the knowledge that I joined a community based around the writing of a psychiatrist I respect, a psychiatrist I know would never treat schizophrenia so flippantly despite using it quite a bit as an example in broader discussions of mental illness and the culture war. They come from my expectation that other doctors had a similar level of self awareness and, if they acted unprofessionally and were called out, wouldn't spin a bunch of childish bullshit excuses up like 'waahhh other professions aren't held to the same standard! I'm not on the clock at the moment! You didn't bitch at the laymen! Prove he isn't schizophrenic, go on then!' They come from learning that you too claim you diagnosed schizophrenia in one post despite just explaining earlier in your post that no, you fucking didn't. You at best spotted symptoms much more obvious than anything in the op, because the writer of the op isn't fucking schizophrenic.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
You might not find it insulting to have someone casually dismiss a post that is sloppily written stream of consciousness, but expressing coherent thoughts with philosophical precedent with two fucking sentences: "Not enough em-dashes to be standard LLM psychosis. Perhaps standard homegrown schizophrenia?" but I assume you aren't fucking schizophrenic. I have said before that I have learned to tolerate that kind of casual prejudice, and you will note I didn't object to anyone else saying anything like that. It doesn't particularly bother me when members of the public talk like that. But a fucking doctor casually lobbing a term that instantly makes people lose respect for you (and any psychiatrist who doesn't know that needs to prove to me they still have a license) out like that IS insulting. It is insulting to schizophrenics, it is insulting to doctors and it is insulting to the concept of the motte as a place where fucking smart people who think things through go to talk about shit they can't talk about elsewhere.
I only objected after the pivot from that to 'well hold on I know I flippantly dismissed you with the barest thought moments ago, but I am a doctor so you should listen to me'. Like I said, you can shitpost, or claim the mantle of medical professional. One or the other. Pivoting like that, assuming the freedom of shitposting and then pivoting to demand the respect of your profession is point blank unprofessional behaviour for a doctor and just outright fucking stupid for a fucking psychiatrist.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
Holy fucking shit this is fucking retarded. @Throwaway05 how many posts does it take to diagnose schizophrenia?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
Do I look like I'm on the clock here?
Off the clock doesn't mean ethics are optional does it? Are you allowed to fuck your patients after work?
An "insult" implies, at least slightly, that there's no merit to my claims.
As they used to teach journalists, the primary metrics of an insult are delivery, intent and impact. Even a merited comment can be insulting if it's used to demean someone publicly. And legally we're talking ethics, not lawsuits. Your delivery started with labeling it as 'LLM psychosis' or 'homegrown schizophrenia,' then backpedaled to psychedelics and 'high risk'. That's not constructive critique, it's pathologizing a philosophical post.
I am intimately familiar with crankery, and I know the symptoms of someone at very high risk of psychosis.
You should try focusing on ethics for a bit. Or diagnostics. I don't care how 'intimate' you are with crankery, you can't fucking diagnose it off an internet post. That's what is supposed to set psychiatrists apart from armchair psychiatrists, part of what you are supposed to learn at medical school isn't how to spot crankery it's how to distinguish between spotting crankery and being a dick and why diagnosing over one internet post is always the second one.
Someone offering legal, programming or engineering advice would not be held to the same acuritny.
IANAL is an age old internet acronym because lawyers are held up to a similar level of scrutiny. You are correct that it is not the same however. NAD didn't take off the same way, because most of your profession know not to give medical advice over the internet. Most of them understand that they have traded shitposting for a higher level of respect, for the opportunity to be listened to when they do leverage their medical credentials. I can see a scenario where you notice a regular poster change over time, or fixate and spiral, and warily offering them advice. You called this guy a schizophrenic who fried his brains on drugs after ONE OP.
In this case, I invite you to examine his arguments and see if your claims that I'm being irresponsible stand.
My claims stand. I didn't read the op again, it wouldn't change anything. My claims would stand even if he'd smeared shit and blood on a picture of the Pope, scanned it and attached it as an op. My claims are not about his behaviour, they are about yours.
If you are really determined to maintain your right to shitpost with your credentials, show me what in the op you decided met the diagnostic criteria for either schizophrenia or drug-induced psychosis.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
That's not slightly rude of you, it's unprofessional as fuck. You are leveraging your medical credentials to insult a guy on the internet. What is fucking remiss of you is to diagnose someone based on a collection of posts, and then to broadcast that pseudo-diagnosis in a public forum.
You get to shitpost or enjoy the prestige and respect of a doctor. Pick one.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
9d ago
The ranks of the dark side grow every day. One day we will end the tyranny of light!
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
12d ago
I don't consider that strawmanning, I consider it a misunderstanding of my position. It does illustrate my point though. I would not light matches to see for myself, no, because a fire-fighter telling me there is a gas leak in my building is an immediate authority dealing with an ongoing situation. A police department's press office is a completely different animal, they are engaged in narrative control after the fact. Conflating the two and suggesting they require the same level of compliance... I don't have a brand, I have a label maker and OCD.
Anyway my point is that Pyongyang or London, lumping official statements in with facts and logic is downright insidious. As for 'nudging your priors at least a little' if that is indeed all you meant and it wasn't an ironic 'OBVIOUSLY this is the correct take' line, then you should think about how you write everything else in your post, especially the faux wistful "Of course, if you prefer your axes in the hands of twelve-year-olds fighting imaginary Bulgarian sex pests, I suppose nothing I write will convince you otherwise." that follows it. That is not the language of the thoughtful truth seeker, it is the language of the partisan drawing battle lines.
You began with your preferred narrative - "little ned girls harassed a dude who didn't deserve it" - and then assembled your evidence to support it, deploying the official statement as a key soldier in your army. That is the same thing the telegram denizens do. The exact same thing. You are outsourcing your critical thinking to people who don't deserve it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
12d ago
Man I don't even like reporting people on the motte. The amount of self loathing I would need to swallow to 1. Get in the altercation and end up in such a tizzy I decide I have to film it. 2. Watch the video back so I can be sure I didn't shoot four minutes of my thumb. 3. Drive down to the police station rehearsing how I'm going to ask people - people probably smaller and more female than me - to protect me from little girls. No, the little girls can call me a pedo and waggle their weapons at me, I'm capable of moving past it alone thanks.
As for statism, @Hoffmeister25 implies it isn't statist, if it was those little kids wouldn't be bothering productive adults like this guy.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
13d ago
I can't even imagine how I would explain having a video of little girls on my phone, let alone recording it, not even to the police, not even if they mugged me, so maybe I'm typical minding my misogyny.
I should have gone with my real objection, which was something like "how do you define statism if modern Britain doesn't count? Do they have to go full on nineteen eighty-four?"
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
13d ago
It seems fair to me.
The rest of your post deals with the specifics of the video itself, and I couldn't give less of a shit about what actually happened if I tried, so I apologise if this seems like I'm picking on you, but my intention is to point out that Sunshine made a phenomenally excellent point. Smuggling in 'official statements' with facts and logic, like they are even in the same universe, is beyond ignorant. The difference between smh and the telegram chuds he scoffs at is that the misinformation printed on those telegram channels is written by someone who actually believes it.
An official source is written by a professional. The writers aren't concerned with the truth of a situation, they are concerned with its management. They will omit details, use careful wording ("no evidence to substantiate claims") and construct a story that serves their interests first and foremost. They aren't necessarily lying, but they are absolutely not telling you the whole truth. They are spin doctors, and to take their word as gospel is profoundly naive. Just like trusting a random dude on social media, trusting official sources is just outsourcing your critical thinking to people that have repeatedly proven themselves unworthy of that trust.
Also lol at the idea distrusting the authorities is the modern equivalent of a witch hunt. Was it Matthew Hopkins Witchfinder Footsoldier? Who ran the Spanish inquisition again?
I know everyone wants to talk about this shit, because it's currently popping off. So I don't expect everyone to adhere to my 'wait at least a week before I even consider judging the facts of the situation' stance. But it would be nice if the people who brag about epistemic humility actually employed it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
13d ago
Adults doing productive things like filming little girls who ask them to go away?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
13d ago
Rex asks frantically as he throws blunt papers and bongs out of his car.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
13d ago
You forgot one (or weren't granular enough for my liking) - the poors.
This thread will not shift any priors.
Could we make this like a signature that gets appended to every op?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
14d ago
You might object, "yes, but the rape of white British girls really is that big of a deal! We need propaganda to get across how bad the problem is." Maybe! but I hope you can see that this is not exactly an asymetric weapon as far as truth is concerned.
No, the way I would object would be to remember the last ten years of mainstream media and laugh at your concerns about propaganda until I hyperventilated.
You are right, it is an asymmetric weapon. And the establishment want to keep it that way. So it doesn't matter that explicitly government backed propaganda was used to protect migrants who raped little British girls, or to cover up said rape of little British girls, or to protect the people who covered up the rape of little British girls. It doesn't matter that slightly less explicitly government backed propaganda has been used in the decade since to paint the 'migrants' as scared women and children fleeing tyranny and to defame and punish anyone who doesn't like them. It doesn't matter that government propaganda hid nigh constant protests in France for years, or was used to defame a presidential candidate, to censor social media, to protect corrupt and incompetent politicians, to launder public support for useless and pointless wars, to hide the intel agency to big tech pipeline, to convince everyone to fear their neighbours and cripple childhood development and wear a stupid fucking mask/not wear a stupid fucking mask and give up their bodily autonomy in the name of self righteousness. What matters is that Tommy fucking Robinson can whip up a meme in ten seconds. That's when propaganda is dangerous.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
16d ago
I have been hermiting it up big time since getting back to Australia, and mowing my neighbour's lawn doesn't really count since I do it all the time, but I had the opportunity to do a good deed for someone the last day I was in Osaka - an old lady at the subway station dropped her umbrella and didn't realise it. She was so cute, like the platonic ideal of a little Japanese grandma, and she almost jumped out of her skin when I tapped her shoulder and she turned to see me looming over her. Then she double checked her bag like I was playing the old 'pretend someone dropped their umbrella and give them a second identical umbrella' prank on her. Then when she she realised I was being sincere she transformed from reserved and slightly suspicious to joyous gushing and appreciation, grabbing my arm and thanking me like I just pulled her off the tracks before a train arrived. The way people in Japan transform from mostly affectless to hyper animated when you break through the social conditioning is so much fun as an outsider.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
1mo ago
Except they do not have different morals, they do not believe in the tenets of Satanism, they are trolling? Petulant trolling no less since I would bet they agree with the morality of most of the ten commandments, usually they're just having a 'fuck you dad' reaction to at least one of the first four?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
1mo ago
I am usually the last one to figure it out, like with Darwin or Impassionata or Julius, so I assumed that's what was happening there too, otherwise I would have said something.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
1mo ago
I found it - it's not so obvious now that I reread it, but after reading @Hoffmeister25's post about his suspicion, this post struck me as such classic hlynka in style and tone and proud sense of humour, plus the overt familiarity with the motte's inner workings, that it felt obvious.
Borders and liberals coexisted for a long time before everyone lost their minds. And conservatives were equally useless at arguing against progressives on this topic, as the US demonstrated.
More options
Context Copy link