Jesweez
1d ago
The null hypothesis is indeed one of a set of competing hypotheses, but it’s typically the one that assumes no difference between populations.
If I want to show that two distributions are statistically different then I start with the assumption that they are not and then set out to disprove that.
Similarly, if I believe the populations are not actually significantly different, I believe it’d still be common to set up a null hypothesis that they are not different and then either confirm or reject the alternative hypothesis.
Jesweez
1d ago
H0 (null): no difference between populations
H1 (alternative): radiation resistance of the new population > radiation resistance of the reference bird population
This is the typical formulation. Null typically assumes no effect or no difference between the populations being considered.
Jesweez
4d ago
If you seriously think people in your day to day want you dead I think this is more indicative of a medical issue than a political philosophy debate.
This is the most extreme kind of political thinking that I’ve seen
You should not treat your political opponents as a homogenous group made of their most distasteful members
This (quite common) cognitive mistake becomes particularly egregious when the conclusion is: they all want to kill me
Jesweez
6d ago
Do not insult the flag of Cusco
Jesweez
6d ago
I think the problem tends to arise when people use these symbols and then also want to deport undesired races from their homeland.
Excellent post! I’m taking notes. If I’m ever in need, nothing will distract the fash better than a discussion of what fit the boys on the street should be wearing.
Jesweez
8d ago
I meant that it was unbecoming for someone on the right to ask me become preoccupied with online micro aggressions as if those were representative of my day to day reality.
Jesweez
8d ago
I’m not sure about your response, for a much more extreme example everything I’ve read about how people behave in wartime always surprises me about how people go on about their normal lives even while bombs fall around them. I remember reading some stories during the Syrian civil war which were like, yeah, we had to avoid those blocks because the rebels have control and the government forces are also over here, but we could take X street though and so after school we went to the theater. Or I also remember following the account of a pair of teenagers in Gaza who would make videos where they make talk about memes and jokes and then say by the way guys we arrived safe at the refugee camp and today we’re trying to find a little extra bread for our mother.
This obviously isn’t wartime in the US, just a clash that feels rather authoritarian to many. I’d give the guy his pass to talk about the museums and think the feds are getting a bit authoritarian at the same time, though.
Jesweez
9d ago
Their friends likely are. I know my immigrant friends are freaked the hell out with the news and would be afraid to leave the house if there was a surge of these masked federal agents grabbing people off the street here in our town. Maybe if you’re an obvious white citizen, like the two who got shot were, you do your friends a favor and make noise when those guys pull up.
Jesweez
10d ago
This is true.
It creates lots of conflict when the sides are polarized and each perceives different threats, but I guess it does cause us to avoid certain civilizational failure modes.
It’s either this or be like the Chinese and just preserve social harmony above all else. In the end a trade off. Hope you are enjoying the show!
Jesweez
10d ago
If that’s your model of the country then you would also be in favor of resisting unjust laws, which is how that structure got slowly dismantled over time. Either way the moral imperative shakes out the same.
It’s not a game, it’s the government storming your city and demanding to see everyone’s papers and perhaps snatching up your friends, terrorizing people to be afraid to go out of their houses. I personally would feel like a coward if I didn’t somehow do something against that. At the same time I’m sure I wouldn’t do so because I don’t get involved in putting my ass on the line over politics. I know that about myself, but if the agents were on the streets of my city, where many of my friends are indeed immigrants, I’d feel like a piece of shit for not doing something about it. A lot of people are like me but they are willing to put their own ass in danger for this sort of thing, and I respect that.
I’m interested in this seeming total lock-in to your own perspective that’s happening among many people on the right on this subject. You’d feel the same way if you perceived that masked thugs from the government descended on your own town and started harassing and snatching people from your social network. Wouldn’t you?
Jesweez
10d ago
It’s always been an American intuition that resisting a government which is domineering you in ways that you think are unjust is the right thing to do. Thats part of the unofficial founding ethos of the country. Giving federal agents prowling your neighborhood a hard time is one of the most American things you could do.
Jesweez
10d ago
Yeah, basically the goal is to ethnically cleanse the country, and if you resist the agents it’s their right to kill you
I just know that I’ve lived my entire life at the epicenter of what you guys seem afraid of, the bluest parts of the country and among college campuses.
I’ve never had anybody say anything or act in any way which would leave me to believe they harbored anything at all towards me for being white, nor have I ever seen this directed at anybody else.
So what am I supposed to do? Cower in fear of something I’ve only seen in extreme online videos? Or just live my normal life with my normal friends and not give a damn about the obsessions of the hyper political terminally online types?
Even if I were concerned with that sort of thing it’s a wave that already had its crest and has been falling since like ‘21. Which holy shit was now 5 years ago, time is moving too fast man…
In the end, just because I believe that certain people are race obsessed losers (sorry, speaking generally here, applicable to both sides), that wouldn’t change my views on things like healthcare spending, environmental protection, the value of scientific research, international cooperation, etc.
Jesweez
16d ago
Nor does your hypersensitivity.
The vast majority of people are normal people.
The online world intensifies a tiny percentage of extreme perspectives and actions.
People on the right are very sensitive to picking these very specific types of bad vibes from social media and pushed to them from their algorithms and then attributing it to everyday reality. (Similar problem obviously exists on the left but focused on different issues).
The world is not that bad out here.
The argument that I should become more sensitive to online microagressions and less in tune with the actual social world I inhabit is unbecoming.
My thesis on recent world events is that there is one simple explanation for everything Trump is doing. Namely, as a classic textbook narcissist, having also risen during the uniquely self centered context of the ‘80s and ‘90s business and television culture of the US, and having been propelled to the highest echelons a narcissist could taste, he’s beginning to sense his own physical and political mortality, certainly moreso than in his first term, and knowing that people will try to tarnish his name once he is out of power, he thus wants one and only one thing. For his name to appear prominently in the history books.
This is very simple and obvious in retrospect, but it ties everything together. Renaming major geographical features. Demolishing and rebuilding part of the White House. His fixation on the Nobel peace prize. (Note the letter he wrote today to Norway, linking Greenland to not getting the peace prize). Finally, major territorial expansion. Wait, that wasn’t the final one. Undoing the world order that was in place since the world wars. Now that would do it.
He’s seen himself as a world order undoer for quite some time now, perhaps since the beginning of his rise to power. But this, this is his greatest taste of the raw history changing might that has yet been possible. Either get Greenland and change the US map forever. Or be the sole reason for the undoing of NATO. History will never be able to ignore him.
What I don’t know is whether he cares much about whether the historical changes that he will oversee and be forever tied to his name in this ultimate egoic consummation will end up being good for the United States or not. There are obvious downsides to destroying a world order which has been meticulously crafted to put you yourself at the top. But riding the coattails of that world historical success was not fit for a man who’s ego needed to be propelled to similar—no, greater!—historical status.
Narcissism often flares out into the absurd. And we seem well along that track. But just how far it will attempt to go, in this, one of world history’s most consequential cases, remains to be seen. Trump is now a great man of history and we can only wait to see what of our era will survive his grandeur.
Edit: of course, file this for an early contender for the most obvious insight of the year award. I just think it’s a more congruent explanation for the whole set of second term Trump events that we’ve seen than a lot of other explanations I see floating around for recent events.
Jesweez
16d ago
Yes, he is acutely retardedly wrong.
He’s giving up the entire system of being the central node in the worlds largest military alliance and being the privileged position in its whole economic organization just to gain a bit of extra territory.
The territory that he’d be functionally losing far outweighs the frozen island.
But I guess “undid the world order” and “committed hegemon suicide” are both solid ways for him to get into the history books and this may be actually the main thing he’s aiming at.
Jesweez
16d ago
The left is made mostly of white people and I’ve never felt anything bad directed at me for being one
Jesweez
1mo ago
It could also be that when Arjuna was on the battlefront of Kurukshetra, facing his own kin on the other side, and thus began to question his moral duty, it was at this very moment that Lord Krishna lowered his disguise and revealed himself as an incarnation of Vishnu, and lectured him specifically that his dharmic duty was indeed not to back down from the battlefield, but rather to stand and fight, which was in fact a manifestation of his divine duty and even of the selfless love (karma yoga) that he was incarnated to embody, and that Arjuna, upon hearing this and understanding the truth of the eternal nature of existence, took up his bow and began to fight.
Jesweez
1mo ago
My new theory is that self-accepting gays and sexually malformed people become the far left whereas self-denying members of those categories become the far right.
Since Biblical times, true engine of history has been and will remain the queers.
Jesweez
1mo ago
I understand that these may be uncomfortable thoughts to consider.
However, I would just like to reiterate that if anyone is suffering in this way, please come forward privately.
With better data on this phenomenon, we might be able to improve outcomes for a generation of sufferers through evidence based practice.
It’s official. Hitler had a micropenis. Furthermore, Nick Fuentes is either a closeted homosexual or a 30 year old virgin.
I’m wondering to what extent far right political worldviews are influenced by the denial of sexual malformations or shortcomings. I decided that this forum would be a good place to explore the extent of this and perhaps collect more data on the phenomenon.
If any posters here at the motte would like to participate in an anonymous questionnaire, please DM me.
That’s kind of like asking how does algebra have a place here, we’re just trying to solve for a variable in this equation.
A hypothesis test is a method to provide evidence for or against two competing theories using data and the way that they’re commonly constructed is to assume a null hypothesis as being the one where the data are not from significantly different distributions.
A standard hypothesis test is not the only method and its use in science is sometimes over stated but it’s by far the most common approach to address such questions, and that’s just how it’s structured.
It’s kind of Occam in the end. It’s simpler to assume that there’s no difference between how fast this group of monkeys climb trees vs that one. If I wanted to posit that the second group climbs faster, I can collect data and argue that it backs up my assumption, but the null case is null because it makes less assumptions.
More options
Context Copy link