MotteInTheEye
No bio...
User ID: 578

Is any action necessary to suppress them? I didn't read the OP as saying "let's do x, y, and z to stamp out complaints of incels" but "by revealed preferences they are content to stew in porn and video games so why stress about them?"
I don't agree with OP because I am not content to just write off huge chunks of the population which could be leading fulfilling lives and useful to other people, but your objection seems like a non sequitur.
If that's the purpose then I would say that it is essentially a lie. When your data is stored with a major cloud provider, it is not just on some computer similar to yours somewhere, it is replicated in enterprise grade data centers across multiple geos and there is a rotation of highly paid engineers on call if anything goes wrong with it.
It appears that you are just using Jesus's words as a jumping off point for a claim you want to make rather than seriously engaging with what He meant. He tells the parable in response to a troublemaker asking for a rigorous definition of whom he needs to love as his neighbor, and after telling the story he asks "which of these was a neighbor to him?" - in other words, trying to limit to whom the commandment applied and to whom it didn't was the wrong spirit in which to approach it.
Then the Christians you know are very unusual, even just considering the set of Christians alive today, let alone considering the set of Christians across history.
By removing a small number of people from the streets we can have a drastic reduction in crime.
I think this is plausible but doesn't follow inevitably from the rest. Presumably the progressive response would be that the societal niche exists independently of the specific person who ends up filling it. Consider an analogous claim that, because 1% of people (fast food workers) do 90% of the deep frying in the US, we could improve obesity stats by removing a small number of people from the streets.
Your prediction is a useful one to distinguish between these hypotheses, but also hard to differentiate from a deterrent effect making crime less attractive (which we would also expect to see if we arrested all fast food workers).
GP's point is that air travel is not analogous to surgery because nobody ever dies from not being able to catch a certain flight (Saigon and Kabul aside).
Not with that phrasing, perhaps, but the idea that crime is caused by systemic issues and social conditions is equivalent to saying that those things create a social niche which someone will fill.
I'm genuinely confused now, I thought it was common sense that people were favourable towards coethnics and their homelands. Isn't that the whole ingroup thing in a nutshell?
This isn't compatible with even the most cursory reading of I Can Tolerate Anything Except The Outgroup, the fact that your ingroup may not be ethnically similar nor your outgroup ethnically distinct from you is literally one of the first thing he addresses.
The left has been running the "blame your political opponents for bad weather" play for 20 years, but that doesn't make it any less stupid when the right does it.
I think they got much more widespread criticism than they expected and will quietly step away from the bowdlerized versions. I doubt they will fly off the shelves, so I don't predict that they will be unavailable for sale in a year, but I predict that the original versions will continue to be widely available.
The Catholic Church's opposition to the death penalty is well known, but their doctrine explicitly allows for the possibility of just warfare.
If your claim is just that they teach that war is bad then I fully agree. I read eetan's "endorsed by the Bible" to mean permissible under some circumstances, not preferable or desirable.
There is no secret sauce, they are the BEST.
Couldn't the secret sauce be that they have been using their model to facilitate their work longer and more effectively than anyone else? It would explain why it has accelerated so much over the past 6 months.
Those aren't contradictory views, both those things can be true. They could have met in the middle.
I expect that what he has in mind would be something like government-sponsored genetic engineering or embryo screening for prospective underclass parents.
I hadn't considered leaving the oil in the pantry in the fryer between uses, if you use it often enough I guess that's workable.
I had also forgotten that deep fryers have lids which will trap most of the oily steam. So consider me convinced on that point.
True, I should have said "another explanation".
I guess a corresponding benefit could be dramatically reducing the overhead of a small business. But only in a fantasy world where all state taxes followed suit.
Maybe he lost a limb.
And the flip side is that most grandparents are too old and frail to contribute much to the household by the time they have grandchildren.
The primary method of cheating in chess is to use game engines to suggest better moves than a human could think of. Modern game engines are much, much better than any human players and at this level of the game it might only take a couple of key moves to sway the outcome.
Of course over the board tournaments have lots of rules and procedures to prevent this, so much so that many think Niemann could not have circumvented them and that if he cheated it must have been through spying. But the bandwidth of information that needs to be transmitted to and from an accomplice is so low that I don't think you could ever be 100% sure it didn't happen. Which is unfortunate because it means an accusation of cheating is essentially unfalsifiable.
Do you have a link to a recipe? That sounds fascinating and delicious.
That's like saying "if you were going to let the Nazis occupy France, you may as well let them occupy England too". The fact that the death penalty takes decades to apply is the result of action by its opponents, defended against mostly unsuccessfully by its proponents.
Indeed. I imagine that a teacher has a breakdown on this level once a week or so in this country.
It's a very good question. I would guess that with billions of dollars at stake, they have their ear to the ground in ways that we don't, and they must have some indication that Trump is coming in better prepared to actually get things done this time around, for whatever reason.
- Prev
- Next
I find the finger-pointing about who called it what kind of attack and how quickly certain details when out in the several hours immediately following a shooting like this profoundly petty and mean. Once people are actually awake and have had a little while to sift through some reports, there is often plenty to criticize, but it's tautologically true that you would always be able to criticize the first few reports for being incorrect about some details and/or too reticent.
More options
Context Copy link