@Grant_us_eyes's banner p

Grant_us_eyes


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 12 12:05:58 UTC

				

User ID: 1156

Grant_us_eyes


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 12 12:05:58 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1156

There was some bad casting in the first movie for characters that don't appear in this installment.

Their switch-over of Liet-Kynes to a random black woman for diversity points alone shows how badly the Director's understanding of the Dune universe works; a very wide but shallow puddle that completely misses the mark.

I didn't see the first one, won't see the second one. Don't even get me started on them showing off the Sardaukar homeworld.

Fun aside; None of the movies ever get the Padishah Emperor right. In the books he's described as a youthful, thirty-something redhead. Yet they always have him as an old man past his prime. Pity.

The odd spread of opinion on the motte in either incarnation has been a puzzlement for both posters and mods alike for years, to the point where, imho, the mods give far too much leniency toward left-aligned posters in an attempt to foster a more 'even' debate forum. A laudable goal, I suppose, but not without it's unintended consequences.

Again, imho.

How the motte as a whole has developed hasn't been a surprise to me. At all.

Please allow me to explain my point of view.

Also, please excuse my generalizations, as I'm going for brevity, and relying primarily on my personal experiences.

I've been around a time or two. Long enough to see how forums develop, primarily in the fandom arena. Fandoms as a whole tend to lean left. Often, most fandom forums will also include 'off topic' areas that allow for political discussion.

While you could likely quibble with the ratio, I think it's fair to say that the most vociferous voices in these off-topic forums are going to lean heavily left. This creates a board culture that slowly dominates more and more, accelerating depending on how the spread of moderators and their personal opinions go.

This creates a specific argument culture - the majority of posters are left aligned, posting frequently, and have a plethora of free time to do so. If any right-aligned posters decide to wade into that pool, they're going to be faced with large opposition - gish galloping, low-level harassment in the form of having to deal with multiple posters attacking their view without pause, and so on. This creates stress, which can result in bad behavior(despite their opposition never being called out on it), often resulting in mod action, which creates a feed-back loop of self-satisfaction for the left-aligned posters and mods. This creates a perceived trend - right-aligned posters cannot debate or argue their points, hence their ideas are not good, and so on. A chilling effect occurs, as right-aligned posters realize the juice isn't worth the squeeze, the environment is hostile, and the mods - supposedly neutral arbitrators - will not be on their side.

So. This reinforces a perceived board culture, and what few right-aligned posters that debate such things will typical be extreme outliers, as they've been hardened by experience and can handle operating in a hostile environment.

However, a curious thing can occur. Off-shoot forums can develop, much smaller, taking population from the larger as a whole yet not having the numbers or involvement. Off-topic forums are put in place, including, yes, politics.

And a different environment emerges. When the playing ground is made even, suddenly it's the left-aligned posters acting badly because they're no longer operating in an environment they're familiar with. One on one, they can no longer rely on gish-galloping or numbers, and their opponents are well-experienced handling rapid-paced one-on-one debates(they have to be, to survive this long). Suddenly, the shoe is on the other foot - and the resultant behavior is so explicitly bad, even if the mods would normally be left-aligned, the size of the forum can't hide the behavior. It's clear, explicit, gains attention, and the mods have to play by the stated rules whether they want to or not.

Such off-topic areas are often shut down in quick order, likely due to all the mod-actions that result from it. I suspect this is due to all the left-aligned posters constantly abusing reports in the background, resulting in an over-sized headache the mods don't want to have to deal with, but this is pure suspicion on my part, lacking in any explicit evidence.

The motte exists in it's current forum because it's a level playing field, rigorously enforced. When their is conflict with the mod's decisions as a whole, it's often in the form of special treatment toward the left-aligned posters as a whole, but the mods have limited choices. The wider internet as a whole has inculcated a specific attitude in most left-aligned posters that does not lend itself toward even debate. They exist in an environment that encourages gish-galloping, low-level harassment, and confidence that the mods will take their side in most matters. They're used to low-level chilling effects and love-bombing in the form of most posters taking their side.

You say the motte is more 'right-aligned'. It is, likely. From the perspective of most left-aligned posters that wander in, because they're used to a radically different debate environment, populated by posters with similar opinions, where their perspective is rarely challenged, and where ideas in opposition to their own are rarely presented in a cogent fashion(and when they are, there's no guarantee it will remain).

The motte as it stands is the result of evolutionary pressure focused on political debate exerted on the wider internet as a whole and this forum in specific. Factors elsewhere do not exist here. This is a strange country, with different rules and pressures.

If you want a more neutral forum, find better left-aligned posters that can operate with those rules and pressures. Otherwise, don't be surprised when they decide to instead debate and argue in places where they can flourish.

That still boils down to diversity, hence my critique and criticism of the movie as a whole.

And yes, the Fremen should have been Arabic.

popular actress

Doubt. While my experience with most modern movies is fairly limited, everything I've seen of her is the metaphorical equivalent of a cudgel - an ambiguously brown women/girl they can shoe-horn and pretend everyone finds attractive, and if you point out the obvious race-switching, they make the typical noises about racism.

She's not even that good an actress, from everything I've seen.

I'll be the one to ask the stupid question; For those of us whom haven't been exhaustively following software development, what does 'LLaMa{-7B,-13B,-30B,-65B}' actually mean?

I have to confess, a general philosophy of 'If the world is not fair and just, we can at least make it beautiful' is one that has a good amount of appeal.

No possible war between the US and China could ever be beneficial for either country.

"The Chinese people are not to be cowed by U.S. atomic blackmail. Our country has a population of 600 million and an area of 9,600,000 square kilometers. The United States cannot annihilate the Chinese nation with its small stack of atom bombs. Even if the U.S. atom bombs were so powerful that, when dropped on China, they would make a hole right through the earth, or even blow it up, that would hardly mean anything to the universe as a whole, though it might be a major event for the solar system."

"If the worst came to the worst and half of mankind died, the other half would remain while imperialism would be razed to the ground and the whole world would become socialist; in a number of years there would be 2,700 million people again and definitely more."

Both of those quotes are attributed to Mao Zedong. Yes, I firmly believe nuclear war was a tactic Mao would have implemented; this was a man whom had experienced WW2 through China's eyes, with all it's horrific casualties on the Chinese people.

There's a reason Nixon and Mao coming together to hash stuff out face to face was a huge deal. Don't fall into the historian trap of thinking that 'Great Men of History don't matter, greater factors come into play that determine how history plays out.'

storming the capitol building

Why should storming the capital building be any different than when rioters stormed the White House?

People constantly try to paint the Jan 6 protest as something extraordinary, when it was just the right wing seeing what the left had been doing for the past four years and deciding to use a tool that apparently works.

Don't blame the protestors for assuming good faith and not realizing that left-wing protests were being sponsored and applauded by the various institutions kicking around.

Counterpoint: Political groups have had no issue taking the supposed insults from their opposition and turning it into a badge of pride, regardless of the format.

'Yankee Doodle' was supposed to be an insult. For a more recent occurrence, 'Keep your Rifle By Your Side' was supposed to be atleast slightly satire, until people listened to it, went 'Holy shit, this song slaps' and started using it unironically.

It's a phenomena that's not really new by any stretch.

and it will revert as soon as the person goes back to eating naturally.

Amazing. If you go back to the diet that was making you fat, you will get fat again. Will wonders never cease.

Sorry. I should probably hold back on the sarcasm, given that this is the motte, but this is the one 'secret' about dieting that I rarely see people point out - you can't stop.

Dieting isn't an on-off switch - it needs to be a conscious decision to moderate your diet aimed at long-term goals and body improvement. Once you reach a certain age, you can't just shovel crap into your face and expect to walk it off.

Dieting is a permanent change to your life, and the sooner people acknowledge that, the better.

Conversely, if someone wants to enjoy themselves sucking down baconators and Dr Pepper by the bucket, well, I can't stop them. Maybe they'll get more enjoyment out of life doing that then I will, I dunno.

Chickens are raging assholes that go everywhere they're not supposed to and refuse to die when their time is up.

Ducks are much easier to manage. The eggs are tastier, too.

You have an interesting circle of friends.

The question of where to find single, available women IRL is something I see repeated alot on men-focused forums, reddit included. The conversation tends to devolve down in the same way;

  1. 'Where do I find women to interact with and touch grass?'

  2. insert list of women-focused activities and hobbies

  3. 'I'm not interested in any of those; should I pretend to be invested in them just to find a girlfriend?'

  4. Cue a mixed response of 'Just give it a shot, you might like it!' and the inevitable chorus from online women of 'Ew, you shouldn't join a hobby just to meet women, that's disgusting and women can always tell!'

  5. Cue frustrated response from several men about how they've been told they shouldn't talk to women in a variety of social spaces, so what exactly are they supposed to do?

  6. No response.

itsallsotiresome.jpg

So, yeah. This is something that's I feel has been happening alot as of late, and has been exacerbated by covid. Whether this is all antecedent data or indications of a larger social trendline with ominous implications for the future has yet to be determined.

appease their loud contingents of leftist female employees

You would think so, but apparently not. It has little to do with female appeasement, and has far more to do with trans appeasement.

Female Dating Strategy.

The only thing I take away from that essay is the overwhelming desire to do bodily harm on the person whom wrote it.

Why I would take anything in good faith from someone whom hates me and mine and gleefully spends hours of his time writing about how much he hates me and mine is baffling to consider. This doesn't belong in the friday fun thread - this is pure rage bait and culture warring.

There is... I don't have the number, but I keep seeing them pop up in forums all over the place(and for several years), so there's at least an amount of left-aligned individuals whom are absolutely convinced that America is only One Bad Day away from getting turned into a Christian Theocracy.

AOC is presumably one of those people.

To quote 'A man for all seasons', 'Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!'

I feel like doing a minor victory lap, gruesome as it is, as I was one of those whom viewed euthanasia permissible, but the last thing I want is to have state-sponsored euthanasia in place. (And, yes, before you ask, I've yet to square that hole as to allow for such a thing. The world isn't perfect, sadly.)

Every time I see this advocated or hearing for Op's scenario, I can't help but envision myself at 75 going in for a minor medical procedure only to have the working professional suggest I commit state-sponsored self-die. I'd rather just skip that entire possibly, thanks.

Fact checking

Have we gotten to the point where we're pretending now that TW wasn't having to produce active forgeries about the matter when Libs of TikTok expressed the exact criticism you're saying she didn't have?

I'd link to TW's post describing everything he did during that entire event, but for some odd reason, it was deleted. Funny, that.

What confuses me though is his unashamed hamas-freedom fighter sentiment and Jews-are-the-villains narrative

I don't see any of that. I see satire pointing out how America has a tendency to fall all over itself in supporting Israel without question, and that some people are just a little bit tired of that.

Your take on the matter kind of proves his point; Israel seems above criticism, and any negative word in their direction is taken as support for their enemies.

Which is a third-party prosumer item that not everyone has.

That's the point. You shouldn't need a third-party item to understand where the fuck-up is. Even if it's a hidden option in the background, cars come natively with enough computers that you should be able to pull up an error-code read-out without spending additional money.

Instead, we get new cars and trucks with 18 different cameras built in so the software can construct a to-down view when backing up and then wonder why everything is so expensive nowadays.

Cause men tend to be more insane than women.

I can't really find a better word to describe it. It's something I've seen in people whom are really focused on sports, from running to martial arts. The ones whom been invested in such things - for years upon years - tend to be just a little bit, uh, off.

After all, you're basically torturing yourself regularly, week after week, for seemingly no purpose whatsoever other than to, well, keep doing it?

So it seems from the outside. Mind, there's a plethora of benefits that come with said exercise and whatnot, but that doesn't get much focus, as said benefits typically come after those years of practice.

And, yes, your observations tend to run similar to mine. In martial arts, men typically outnumber the women to a vast degree.

Ah, yes. I've seen that advice, as well.

I don't think I've ever seen anyone remarking on it actually working, though. Most of the time people comment how nothing ever comes of it, and I've never actually seen it occur in real life.

If I had to venture a guess, this idea stems as an artifact of european style dating, where I've heard a more slow, organic, 'start as friends and become more' is seen as a standard thing, whereas in American it's often considered openly verboten.

That's mostly a wild supposition on my part, though.

My experience with the DKE can basically be translated as 'I am knowledgeable and skilled at one thing, therefor, I am knowledgeable and skilled at everything.'

Often with lawyers.

My search and reference skills are clearly lacking at the moment, so I have to be the one to ask; 'The Hock'?

I forgot the statistics precisely, but in generally any country you go you're likely to see far more volunteers from people with parents/grandparents who were in the military than a random first-generation enlistment.

Seventy percent of military recruits have a family member in the United States armed forces.

Seventy fucking percent. I admittedly wasn't expecting that high a number. I still marvel at it, at times.