@Ioper's banner p

Ioper


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 4 users  
joined 2022 September 05 05:03:30 UTC

				

User ID: 448

Ioper


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 4 users   joined 2022 September 05 05:03:30 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 448

Have you actually interacted with these men at all? They are not dependable. At some point people become a negative value proposition for anyone that isn't desperate and it isn't the welfare state thats making women not desperate, its being able to work.

People are exposed to that elsewhere too but arent turning progressive. It seems more likely that "conservatives" have shat the bed spectacularly in both the US and UK, allowing for this memetic takeover. There is dominance but the reason it is allowed and works is because of the clownshow on the right.

The issue here is that the low status men aren't dependable, they are losers in every sense of the word, otherwise they wouldn't be low income. Getting a decent income (and keeping it) is piss easy and if you don't then there is something seriously wrong with you, and why would women want to date that? And even in this case you can easily get a mail-order bride, I know people who have. It's not hard and you don't need even a median income.

Moderately successful men on the spectrum with poor social skills that fail in the dating market is an entirely different issue.

The repair stuff could make sense if they are liable for something like catastrophic failures, you really wouldn't want a someone else cheaping our on a repair in that case.

Then they either genuinely forget about this when the maintainance contract goes to someone else or they "forget" about it.

The shutdown after X hours could also make sense as a security measure. IE. It should be impossible to drive the train for that long without mandatory maintenance.

As far as I understand it this is fairly common practice with heavy machinery these days and it isn't secret.

These kinds of things could explain why polish authorities have been so anemic in their response.

It could very well be that all this is nefarious and illegal but it could also be at least partially a mistake or ineptitude on the part of Newag. One shouldn't underestimate the extreme incompetence in IT of the management team in these kinds of companies. There was a major it security scandal in 2019 in Sweden where ~200k recorded calls to the state Health advicory service had been publicly available and the CEO of the company providing the product clearly had no idea how computers worked, never mind his own product. He made some famous statements claiming that someone had connected an "internet cable to the harddrive" (not possible, and it's not called an internet cable), he also said you needed a special "command movement to slip in the back door" (I can not emphasize enough how ridiculous this sounds in Swedish), which you of course didn't.

Some coder at some point might have done this due to some vague instructions from techicnally incompetent managers, it got documented poorly or the management forgot this even existed even if documentation did.

I don't believe "anything" will happen, nothing ever does.

These are not new elements in Italian politics and she is euro-ambivalent, pro-nato and pro-ukraine. Who gives a shit about the culture war stuff given the circumstances here?

There is a major war in Europe, massive inflation, energy crisis and a looming depression. Who gives a shit if she is stricter on immigration or doesn't like trannies or wharever?

I realise all that. I'm saying that the reasoning for why this exists might not be nefarious or even intended to sabotage competition.

Newag continues to lie and try to blame others.

That might be possible but it's not stated anywhere in the article. The only mention of communication with Newag is when they stated that the breakdowns was due to a "safety system" which could very well be correct.

The issue isn't that they lied, it's that they failed to communicate what this security system was or how to disable it. This is just glossed over but seems very important.

It could be due to incompetence or malice, or some combination. I'm saying that the existence of these kinds of systems doesn't necessarily imply intentional industrial sabotage. Regardless, they clearly failed to live up to their contractual obligations.

What I'd be interested in is a more detailed explanation of these systems, and the systems in other trains they aren't servicing themselves. Is this a generalised system or tailor-made for each train/competitor? The article isn't clear on this but it seems like a fairly important detail. If it's the latter then intentional industrial sabotage seems like a given, if it's the former it is plausible that it could be due to incompetence and/or poor routines.

I'd also like to know more about what Newag has said and what happened in the communication between the two companies.

The lack of this information and the limited response from Polish authorities makes me suspicious.

Yes, half my family is working class or lower middle class. Some have fallen down to be underclass adjacent. I have also lived in underclass areas and worked jobs with the underclass.

You think that kid has a lower or higher 'status' than the football star who'll end up beating her and who's been a serial cheater from day 1?

Compared to what? The intermittent pizza delivery or Uber driver? The guy that has issues holding down a job as a hospice care giver? The guy occasionally cleaning subway cars at night? The part time gas station attendant? Almost all of them drug users and video game addicts? This is the underclass, not the construction workers or guys employed in the manufacturing industry. Those guys don't end up single or criminal either by the way, they're doing fine.

The football star that beats her might very well be the better option. And what's to say the other guys dont beat their spouses as well?

Neither of the groups have any value at present but one at least did something at some point in his life. There is some capacity there that might transfer to a kid.

Fucking with condoms is like eating candy with the wrapper on, only worth it if you're starving.

Perhaps it's different if you're circumcised and have somewhat limited sensitivity in the first place.

Which doesn't compensate? Wage increases were some 6% 2022 compared to about 9.5% inflation, in 2023 were looking at 5% wage increases and 4% inflation.

Maybe people are so used to increasing wages and stagnant prices that even mild decreases or wages and prices keeping track feels like a decline?

Only, outside of a few techies, intelligence seems to broadly correlate with every other positive trait, including brawns.

Good foreplay only makes it worse.

Also, regardless of whether the sex ends in orgasm or not, the sex is so much better without a condom. The goal is as intimate and pleasurable sex as possible, condoms are a major impediment to both, with or without orgasm.

What you describe are also actionable ways for someone to improve themselves.

No, being high value is being high value. You're high value to yourself, to other men and to women. Why? Because you provide value and this is broadly useful.

The point is to avoid focusing on what women want because that distorts and ruins your ability to evaluate things. If you focus on improving you'll be better off regardless of whether women like you better or not. Impressing women isn't the only reason to do things, it's one reason among many. People are looking for shortcuts to get ahead in life but that usually doesn't work very well, whether that is for impressing women, making friends or getting ahead in your career.

I'm married with kids but it's still as useful to me to be seen as high value by society around me as it was when I was 18 and single, because both the perception of high value and actual high value is useful.

Sex with a condom is kind of shit though. Not really worth it unless you're a horny teenager.

What happened at Pearl harbour?

A bit interesting how he describes the volunteers.

Everyone (western at least) was pretty great, except the people with American military experience, outside the special forces, who were spoiled cowards. The Americans without military experience were great but people who'd served multiple tours were useless.

Also funny how the British guy makes himself popular by brining equipment to make people tea (and other hot drinks).

I believe a lot of issues are tied up with Trump specifically, rather than policy positions.

If trump announces that he is running again (and possibly winning) we're in for more extremism from both sides.

If Trump announces that he isn't running and that he is endorsing someone else then I think tempers can cool down.

The only people I've heard offer apolagia for them (from a non-std prevention pov) are circumcised men, which leads me to believe that there is a connection.

Someone being more intelligent doesn't mean you can't see when they are habitually making errors in some area.

I feel like Musk has "doctor's syndrome" where his success and competence in one area (or a couple) leads him to believe he has superior insight into all areas. Only for Musk and other famous people this gets supercharged both by their success and by their fans.

@orthoxerox quoted a story yesterday about a top journalist being outfoxed by a regular police officer during an interrogation, because they played someone else's game on their home terf. Well, Musk is constantly doing this and occasionally making a fool of himself is inevitable.

He is very competent, driven and successful but he isn't god.

Conversely, people are doing the same thing as Musk, they notice how he fumbles about in their area of expertise (or it gets pointed out by others), making overconfident claims and predictions, and therefore assume that he is a fool, or at least not as smart as his success would imply.

He is a troll and a muslim.

I asked chat-GPT4 and this is what it had to say on firearms:

Late 15th century (1480s-1490s):

The Portuguese began exploring new maritime trade routes under the leadership of Prince Henry the Navigator. At this time, firearms such as hand cannons were in use in some Indian states, while the Portuguese had also started to adopt early firearms like the arquebus. The disparity between the two was minimal during this period.

Early 16th century (1500-1530):

The Portuguese, under the leadership of Vasco da Gama, reached India in 1498, and they established their first trading post in Calicut in 1500. During this period, the Portuguese had a clear advantage in firearms technology, as they were using arquebuses with a range of 100-200 meters, while most Indian states still used hand cannons with a range of 50-100 meters. This disparity in firearms technology persisted throughout this period.

Mid-16th century (1530-1560):

The Portuguese consolidated their power in Asia, establishing more fortified trading posts and securing strategic alliances with local rulers. The Indian states began to adopt matchlock guns (toradar or bandook), which were similar to the Portuguese arquebus in terms of range and accuracy (100-200 meters). The disparity in firearms technology decreased during this period, as Indian states started to adopt European-style firearms.

Late 16th century (1560-1600):

The Portuguese began to use muskets, which had a range of 200-300 meters, providing them with a renewed advantage in firearms technology. At the same time, Indian states continued to adopt and adapt European firearms, with some producing high-quality matchlock guns. The disparity in firearms technology during this period varied, depending on the specific Indian state and its capacity to produce or acquire advanced firearms.

Early 17th century (1600-1650):

The military advantage of the Portuguese began to decline as other European powers, such as the Dutch, English, and French, entered the Asian trade arena and established their own trading posts. Indian states, including the Mughal Empire and the Maratha Empire, continued to adopt and improve upon European military technology, further narrowing the disparity between Indian and Portuguese firearms.

--

In other areas the Europeans had greater advantages. In regards to firearms specifically there was a period of relative parity in the early part of the 17th century before the Europeans pulled ahead again with the introduction of flintlock firearms (and then pulling ever further ahead).

I know (of) two people with fairly severe long COVID that still haven't recovered. I don't know anyone like what you described. Then again, we didn't have a very severe lockdown in Sweden.

I'm not on a PR campaign trying to deceive you to perceive us in a more positive ligbt, I'm trying to explain whats going on and how people are reasoning.

Furthermore, I don't think the conditions are the same. Maybe in the general sense they are, people could organise their lives differently, maybe, but in the moment the choices are made the conditions are different. If you plan your meals (and shopping) more meticulously and you have practically twice the female labour force participation rate, having extra meal guests is a larger imposition and such a consideration is more important.

If this highlights a cultural difference then then that may be so, it doesn't make it a factor people doesn't consider and doesn't consider important.

I don't know what the law says here but usually these things are handled by laws giving fairly wide powers to governmental agencies to fulfill their mission as defined by the executive. They are indirectly accountable through the executive (and legislature through whatever overarching laws there are). If there is no legal basis for this agency exacting fees for this kind of category of inspections then it does seem iffy.

I can of course not speak for US law, I'm not very interested in this particular case, I just commented on the claim that the bureaucracy isn't public service oriented, which I disagreed with.

Just like I find a clever way past not paying for my dinner at the restaurant by going to the bathroom and climbing out the window.

This isn't a uniquely female phenomenon, consider men who'll do, say and believe almost anything to get sex or to advance their careers.

The difference I believe is that women are a bit more malleable, have less genuine deeply held beliefs and their goal (securing, maintaining and developing longterm relationships) is more long term (and focused on a single other person) than the male one so their behaviour has a greater chance to affect their beliefs.

Of course, all these things applies to both genders in varying degrees depending on the individual.