Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
Hello back frens
User ID: 2022
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
24d ago
In terms of Joe, the best evidence that he didn't take bribes was that Republicans (a hostile party) subpoenaed his bank accounts and repeatedly found nothing of the sort.
Im not up to speed on how this discourse went, but I dont think kickbacks to Joe personally are especially relevant? He could have just played his part so that Hunter would have money. I mean whatever he was taking in at that point was mostly for the next generation anyway.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
1mo ago
This kind of posting is AI-tier, you only know its real because its naughty.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
2mo ago
the Holocaust mythos is the bedrock of Western slave morality
Slave morality is not the belief that you are guilty, its a standard of good and evil. This is usually communicated together with the holocaust story (as well as elsewhere), not because of a logical dependence but because both are needed functionally to get to the "you are guilty" point.
Now, if someone is very invested in the idea that the germans actually passed that standard, and the jews are the evil oppressive ones, then I think he believes in slave morality. Its certainly possible to be a holocaust denier who considers it important in the purely tactical way you outlines above, but that just isnt the impression I have of them, and yes you do know what I mean. (You personally are far from the worst on that front, but it does still seem to be there)
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
2mo ago
But it's not edgy at all.
The edgy thing is saying that youre any kind of holocaust denier even when its entirely unnecessary to communicate your position. They are the same picture indeed; I just disagree that anyone is fooled in the way you say, and thats so obvious that it cant have been the intent.
It's true that "this is like the lead-up to WWII" is often invoked, but that is always invoked as a nod to the Holocaust
A tightly coupled package is not "all about" the one piece that you love to talk about. Certainly the uses against Putler recently have no even pretend connection to killing jews.
the way that a religio-cultural narrative can shape not only the moral narrative of a society but radically change the genetic fabric of a civilization within a single generation.
That part at least Im fairly sure can be understood independently. And... look, you have all these smart sounding reasons why its important to talk about holocaust denialism, but youve seen a lot of it, the people writing it and their emotional emphasis etc, and I think you understand why it seems like slave morality to me - so, why isnt it?
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
So if some pre-state people, like native americans from outside US territory, came in for a raid, that would not be an "invasion" and children they have on the way would be citizens?
And what about the not-normal crimes? Do others with a partial immunity, such as government officals, also not count as under US jurisdiction?
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
I think it seems that way to you because youre not an autistically-literal person by disposition. If you think "I know it when I see it" is a workable legal standard for constitutional rights, then the status quo is fine.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
What other group is being imagined here?
As I said, natives living on land not even claimed by the US. Or maybe natives living on canadian land and only coming over for the raid. Or maybe the mongol hordes coming across the Bering straight, plundering a few US towns and then going back home, but with a baby born along the way, if you just cant process anything involving natives. I pick these examples because Im quite sure they would have considered that an exempted invasion at the time.
I don't understand why they wouldn't both be criminals.
Practically speaking, we treat organised crime like this because we expect that we can dominate them completely, and with the opposing army we dont. The rule of condemning all is powerful but brittle, and must be used carefully. Note that CSA soldiers were criminals rather than foreign soldiers to the US, but were largely excused. But this is getting very substantive, in a branch that I dont strictly need. Better to stop it here.
I think the people that literally constitute the sovereign whose jurisdiction we are discussing are under the jurisdiction of the sovereign they constitute.
So do I. Yet you have made your case on a principle implying they arent. You cant shrug off weird implication just because they would be weird.
I think enemy civilians would fall under the jurisdiction of the government being occupied.
As in, they would get the citizenship? I think people at the time would disagree.
I disagree.
No you dont. What youre describing is not a counterexample, but an attack on plausibility. What I said is that the simple principle of government doesnt want you to come in = refusing jurisdiction agrees with all cases known from before the time of immigration restrictions. Im also not saying the immigrant is an army - I dont see the illegal immigration exemption as a subtype of the invasion exception - I think the plausible justifications for the invasion exception also justify that one.
Invading armies, organized under the auspices of some government, seem to me quite different than a group of unrelated people not organized with each other or by any government.
And I argue, both in OP and here, that this is simply asserting a distinction that you dont actually have a good way to draw, as evidenced by the difficulty in detail we have explored in this thread.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
Most governing coalitions are 2 parties, and when there are 3 one of them is generally small and has little influence. When the governing coalition changes, the new one generally has one large party in common with the old. These are found empirically, and there are theoretical reasons to expect it, so its propably not some hidden sign of not really having elections. And this means that the usual size of a swing is much smaller. Coalitions can also last quite long, because they do react to changes in the relative vote contribution of their members.
The US also votes in a new executive and legislature. They are not necessarily the same, but they are more than half the time. Almost every president had at least one 2-year period with a congress of the same party, so we should still expect one potential flip per president.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
Did you just ignore the rest of the paragraph after that? Its fine to have a change like this, or maybe even a few back-and-forths, every few decades or so. And/or more gradual change all the time. But if you do it every 4-8 years, youre really not gonna like the results. Theres also the part where these swings come from relatively small changes in the electorate; unless this specific system is the only one that may ever count as representative, they are propably not too difficult to avoid.
My point is not that you cant change things, but that something will prevent the scenario OP outlines, and you should be afraid or not of those somethings instead.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
Look at that damn thing and tell me that it has much relevance to proto-lemurs.
As far as I know, the only way neurological facts go into this figure is the relative size of the body parts. You could have made this figure based on a lemur model, walking on all fours, (or really any five-digited tetrapod) and it would be equally correct.
What wemp said about other cultures is a good point, but I think you really overestimate how much of this I find plausible. I think there are some leftovers from pre-bipedal bodies, and I make no claim whether this causes furries.
I find this interesting mostly in how this illustrates a way of thinking about trans-. The part where the theory is not total whack and you can believe it if you really want to contributes to the accurate immitation, just like the ultrapersonal grievances turned into a general theory of politics in the other posts, and the all around excellent mental health of the author.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
4mo ago
A "handwritten low-effort wall of text" is pretty much a contradiction in terms
No its not. I could write a full page rant in maybe double the time it takes just to type.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
6mo ago
I dont think it caps. Most of that effect is few partners you can relate to, and very high IQs more often being symptoms of a problem (think dwarfs vs pygmies). Both move with the population average.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
2yr ago
Of course it's not exactly hard to figure out why that might be
And if there were a lot of overlap, it would not be hard to figure out its because the revisionists are far-rightists and so obviously carry water for Putin.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
7m ago
Prescribing cocaine and heroin is, unfortunately, not a viable cure for depression.
Has anyone tried? In the manner of these studies I mean, not by just looking at addicts. People whove done heroin generally report that naive use is an experience beyond anything they had before. I would not be surprised if this influences people even months later. But it also might not, there are always those pescy details. E.g. maybe it overlaps too much with the alcohol high to show effects in our society.
Its more that we have now found multiple drugs with different mechanisms of action, but apparently similar in terms of how they are used and effect against depression, and all of them are used recreationally for their short-term effects. That suggests to me that it works off the recreational bit, and it again wouldnt be super surprising if it did. "Drugs can make you feel better when used responsibly" is hardly a new insight - the entire problem is the way they lead to non-responsible use.
Also curious what you think of this one.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
3d ago
logos means 'word'
And "Stimme" means voice, and "Pravda" means truth, and "Rta" mean order, and yet their derived terms overlap strongly with its and each other. In this case the concepts, if not the words, seem to be by shared descent, but I wouldnt be surprised if the chinese have something like it as well.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
5d ago
Have you ever actually gone in, and lost the whole budget quickly? I can understand that the experience of winning might override the knowledge of -EV, but thats definitionally not something that can happen most of the time.
Im especially wondering about the olde times when there was no house and its all peer-to-peer betting, where presumably the others want to stop betting as you want to keep going.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
5d ago
Do you mean that "normal" tomboys are autoandrophiles?
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
5d ago
At least where I live, the alcohol thing is stable without any real legislation (beyond the age limit). You can buy it at the supermarket and almost all restaurants, I would guess you can order it over delivery services too. But alcohol consumption around 30% higher than the US, and statistic on alcoholism... vary wildly in absolute levels but generally the US seems to be higher in most comparisons.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
6d ago
I am guessing (but this is only a guess ) that your actual preferred solution would be something like disenfranchising Jews, denying them the right to vote or own property in non-Jewish lands, and shipping them all off to Madagascar
That seems unlikely to me. SS presumably doesnt believe in magic soil, and so would have no reason to think that it makes a difference long term whether theyre shipped to Israel or Madagascar.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
9d ago
Whats the "ussri" name about btw?
He stuck to a regime and has a beard, which, if not quite Dwarkesh Patel standards, is eminently respectable.
As far as I know, beard minoxidil doesnt need to be kept up. Androgenic hair is easy to get and usually sticks around.
But this only holds if all the numbers are accurate and independent
I dont think Bayes theorem requires its numbers to be independent (whatever it would mean for a conditional to be independent of its condition).
It's no surprise I didn't think of this, since my anecdotal evidence is that there's no shortage of ungracefully balding Indian uncles both at home and abroad. But the numbers don't lie here.
It might be quite heterogenous within India, too.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
18d ago
And the reason why anyone treats that credit as valuable is because we're also simultaneously in debt to the issuer (we owe abstract value to the government in tax payments in this case).
The problem is that the particular nature of this debt to the issuer is a free variable, so a thing defined from it is a function rather than an object. "Regular" debt is like this in the sense the the government can technically just decide to default, or print its exact obligations which is basically the same, but there is a well-defined understanding of what normally happens to debt that there isnt so much with money, and the bit that there is changes based on what monetary theory the state adopts.
That's what I think I've been saying from the start
What youve said at the start was that inflation is a reason you might stop spending more because you dont like inflation. What were discussing now is that the benefits of more spending stop when you start to increase inflation. Thats consistent with the old comments, but a significant and to me much more useful addition.
This is all an explanation of how it all already works.
How it works so far may be consistent with your theory, but also others where there is still cause to worry.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
18d ago
"But currency is a liability to the central bank that issues it—a promise to stand behind the currency’s value in the future."
If thats why currency is debt, then youre including that promise into "what currency is". You would then have to, whenever you try to use the fact that "currency is debt" in your reasoning, also show that the promise wont be violated, else the argument is invalid. And you of course cant already use "currency is debt" to show that something will work out without breaking the promise, because thats a regress.
It's something you observe after the fact.
Thats fine, if you can tell at the end of each period whether you went over in the previous. It sounds like youre now suggesting something about inflation as the criterion. Is accelerating inflation the right criterion and old economists where just too worried about going over, or do you object to that criterion as well? What do you think of NGDP targeting?
I suppose it just looks more like just looking at the real world.
With private debt, the strategy of taking on more and more debt looks great right until noone is willing to lend you more. People rightly want a plausible model for "observations in the real world" before making them loadbearing. The temptation to ignore limitations based on "real world observation" is omnipresent in economics ("Most people are willing on the margin to help a bit without direct visible compensation, therefore communism"), and using theoretical problems as a setup to ignore theory is precisely what keeps critics of mainstream economics outside the mainstream.
The actual concrete accounting, logic, and plumbing seems much more useful to nail down and understand first, before starting to build more & more elaborate models on various assumptions.
Even without an end-date, economics always depends on expectations about the future. Trying to understand whats happening in the here and now before you get to those doesnt work.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
18d ago
How is that uncharitable? Im not interpreting it that way so that its less defensible, but because whats even the point of the post otherwise? The turkish border is not simply a complex border, it is from a domain so explicitly political that we all know its just down to negotiating peoples preferences. There are plenty of examples of complex boundaries you could pick otherwise. The biologist arguing with king Solomon is suggesting a categorisation thats better for understanding the world, and is rejected by Solomon on the basis of prioritising economic considerations. Even the quote in my last comment is quite clear about purposes: Turkey has its exclave to honor the Ottoman ancestor, and "man" has an exclave around someone if itll save their life.
The point of the post is to change categorisation from an attempt-objective assessment to a negotiation, such that to consider someone a woman even though it causes them distress, there has to be some downside to doing so thats more important in absolute terms. A downside that occurs with regards to a specific purpose, like scientific simplicity, can still be judged as "not important enough" because its only the general purpose (in Scotts case, maximising utility) that really matters.
And what concrete test can we apply to identify such subjects, which would tell us whether and which immigrants are subjects?
More options
Context Copy link