NewCharlesInCharge
No bio...
User ID: 89
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
I think most people who support euthanasia have an ideal case in mind: the person is not going to survive much longer, they're in constant, terrible pain, and so it's a mercy to allow them to end their lives.
This is similar to animal euthanasia. If a dog's existence consists entirely of only suffering, most people seem to think it's a mercy to end its life, even if we have no way to know if that's what the dog wants.
However, to euthanize a dog who isn't in that state, and hasn't shown itself to be irredeemably dangerous, seems monstrous to most people. Imagine a person who has grown bored of their dog and so kills it.
This seems much closer to the bored-of-my-dog case than the life-is-endless-suffering case.
I have to wonder if this woman would be alive had she been exposed to different ways of thinking about adversity rather than to be medicated so heavily that she complained she couldn't feel anything anymore. It seems the doctors had nothing else to offer her.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
These threads tend to be risk assessments, with some people thinking there is a serious risk of nuclear exchange, and some people seeming to discount that risk.
I'm curious about what kind of risk assessment people typically engage in.
Part of my job is identifying and defending against risks to the web service my company operates. It's impractical to defend against all possible risk, especially given our size, so we have to prioritize. This is somewhat done by gut feeling, but it's not merely defending against the most likely adverse events. Very unlikely events, but that if they happen would destroy everything, get more attention than the very-likely-but-not-existential-threat possibilities.
I guess that background informs my thoughts on this issue. Nuclear war is still a remote possibility, but it's Armageddon if it happens. Even if you survive, the world as we know it is over. I can't understand how anything can be worth increasing the chances of nuclear war. This is a giant existential risk. The web service equivalent of not backing up your database, or having an open backdoor hidden somewhere in leaked source code. It's not on fire right now, but if you wait until is, you're completely hosed. The only reason you shouldn't be working on those things immediately is if the site has already gone down.
In my opinion, one country suffering a terrible war is nowhere close to justifying the risk to the entire world that comes with prolonging that war and antagonizing the invader.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
If such people are lucky enough to pass an interview, they'll often become aware of their limitations on the job and shift to contributing in other, less technical ways. For example, coordinating diversity initiatives, contributing to codes of conduct, or scrubbing codebases of "biased" language. That last one is fantastic, because if your employer is dumb enough to measure lines of code, it looks like you're actually contributing code.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
One signal that wokeness is waning: the words printed at the bottom of the helmets of NFL players.
I don't have metrics on this, this is all just my subjective perception. I scrubbed through my recording of the games while writing this in the interest of accuracy.
At the start of the 2020 season, just a few months after social justice become trendy, the NFL decided to allow players to swap out the name of their team on the back of the helmet for a social justice message. At that time they could choose one of four messages: "Stop Hate," "It Takes All Of Us," "End Racism," or "Black Lives Matter." The league would also sometimes print these messages on the field.
At the season opener this past Thursday, with the L.A. Rams facing the Buffalo Bills, I noticed a new message: "Choose Love." I thought it was just nearly all of the Rams sporting this one, but this article says it was all of them. Few of the Bills were displaying anything except for their team name. That the preferred message was so non-specific was a signal itself that attitudes may be shifting. The article says that the NFL says "Choose Love" is a message against hate crimes and gun violence, but I would never have guessed that had it not been spelled out for me.
This past Sunday I watched three games: Cincinnati Bengals vs. Pittsburgh Steelers, Green Bay Packers vs. Minnesota Vikings, and Tampa Bay Buccaneers vs. Dallas Cowboys.
For Bengals vs Steelers I saw zero of these messages. Notably neither quarterback on either team had such a message.
In Packers vs Vikings I couldn't see any messages on the Packers, I'd say about a third of the Vikings had them. Neither quarterback had them.
For Cowboys vs. Bucs I saw none on the Cowboys, about half of Bucs players had them, which included the quarterback Tom Brady, sporting "Inspire Change."
In all of the games I noticed just one "Black Lives Matter," on a Vikings player.
Maybe I'm just misremembering the prevalence of these the past two seasons, but I thought they used to be more likely than not, especially for star players.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
A month or so ago I remember someone here linking to the discovery documents in the Missouri Attorney General's lawsuit against Joe Biden, alleging the government is violating First Amendment rights by colluding with tech companies to censor the speech of private citzens. Those docs are here (warning: 711 page PDF).
At the time I was shocked at how this wasn't apparently a big story. It's trivial to scroll through the email exchanges and find examples of government agents reporting content to tech companies, who would then take the content down. There are obvious First Amendment issues that at the very least need to be publicly discussed, but most likely need to be prosecuted.
Well, it's finally getting some press. Lee Fang at the Intercept published an article today that, among other things, references these docs: https://theintercept.com/2022/10/31/social-media-disinformation-dhs/. The article also includes details on the organizational structures involved, including many documents out of DHS that detail their anti-misinformation operations.
A couple of choice quotes:
During the 2020 election, the Department of Homeland Security, in an email to an official at Twitter, forwarded information about a potential threat to critical U.S. infrastructure, citing FBI warnings, in this case about an account that could imperil election system integrity.
The Twitter user in question had 56 followers, along with a bio that read “dm us your weed store locations (hoes be mad, but this is a parody account),” under a banner image of Blucifer, the 32-foot-tall demonic horse sculpture featured at the entrance of the Denver International Airport.
“We are not sure if there’s any action that can be taken, but we wanted to flag them for consideration,” wrote a state official on the email thread, forwarding on other examples of accounts that could be confused with official government entities. The Twitter representative responded: “We will escalate. Thank you.”
“If a foreign authoritarian government sent these messages,” noted Nadine Strossen, the former president of the American Civil Liberties Union, “there is no doubt we would call it censorship.”
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
Chinese protests are a top story in Western news media. I don't think they're entirely organic. Some are likely intelligence agency ops.
Here's the first thing that made me think something was off: https://twitter.com/quanyi_li2/status/1596784472740937728
First, some of the signage doesn't look right. They use traditional characters instead of simplified. They also sometimes use pinyin, seemingly unable to recall the "qi" in "Urumqi," the biggest city in Xinjiang, even as they were protesting on Urumqi road. Mainlanders wouldn't do this. This is beyond mere misspelt Tea Party protest signs, I'd say it's akin to protesting against Biden with an English-language sign with Cyrillic characters accidentally slipped in. It's a clear signal of "not from around here."
Second, the protests don't make much sense if your goal is to reach other Chinese folks in China. You can't share such protests on social media, and news agencies won't cover them. However, contrary to popular narratives, demonstrations are allowed in China. You can't call for the downfall of the national government, but you can plea for the national government to come in and fix local issues. You can also take to the streets because you're really worked up about foreigners insulting China.
So, the intended audience is probably Western news media and consumers of such media.
Third, advocating against the national government and leaders is punished, and everyone knows it. It's unlikely that Chinese citizens would take such a risk when it's so easy to put on a demonstration that falls short of impugning the national government. I think it's likely that these were non-citizens, perhaps Taiwanese, or perhaps expats, that aren't risking their livelihoods. The use of traditional characters makes this more likely, only Hong Kong and Taiwan use them. Western media are unlikely to take note of such things, or to take note of Taiwanese accents.
This aligns with what we've seen before in intelligence ops.
We've seen evidence that intelligence agencies have helped along color revolutions in the past, including protest leaders in Hong Kong meeting with at least one state department official. Much of this is actually done in the open, with the National Endowment for Democracy sending money directly to dissident groups.
Note that an intelligence op doesn't mean that everyone involved works for the intelligence agency, or that they even know that the agency is involved. Every country has its collection of folks who would like to see the government fall. Intelligence operatives identify and befriend these folks, nurture their revolutionary sentiments, and help to remove hurdles in their way. It's the same tactic used to get a group of right-wing men to agree to kidnap the governor of Michigan, except that no one stops the plot from continuing to move forward.
NewCharlesInCharge
1yr ago
In Washington we had a judge rule that magazines aren’t firearms and so aren’t subject to Bruen.
Every time I see this kind of behavior I wonder if the judges reflect on the intended purpose of the second amendment and proceed to ignore the constitution anyway. A refreshing of the tree of liberty would surely swamp any possible deaths averted from magazine restrictions and assault weapons bans.
NewCharlesInCharge
8mo ago
Am I misremembering how Presidential campaign losers tend to behave on election night? I think I remember Gore, Kerry, McCain, Romney, and Clinton speaking to their supporters on election night, delivering the bad news but giving some message of unity or thanking everyone for running such a great campaign and such.
Kamala has decided not to speak to all of the people that showed up for her party at Howard University. She's said that she'll speak tomorrow.
NewCharlesInCharge
1yr ago
Why suppress this? I can understand suppressing such writings generally, but AFAIK this is the first time such a thing has actually been kept under wraps for any length of time.
I doubt anyone would be inspired by it, and it's certainly not going to spark a movement or any kind of adoration for the shooter like we saw with Elliott Rodger.
Maybe Crowder isn't printing a genius rhetorical flourish, but I really doubt it given the kind of thinking on display.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
I recently watched "The Outfit," which was a pretty well done mystery/thriller set amongst 1950's Chicago gangsters. Also an Amazon production.
Late in the film a group that had previously only been referred to by name shows up, and they're black. The characters are still interesting, central to the plot, well-acted, etc. But knowing Amazon's diversity rules, it kind of breaks the fourth wall. I know of no notable group of black Chicago mobsters during this era. I do know about Amazon's rules. So, this probably wasn't an independent artistic decision, but rather the result of those rules.
It's like watching R-rated movies edited for TV, or movies that are dealing in very adult material but hold back because they want a PG-13 rating. It takes you out of the story momentarily while you contemplate the production process.
NewCharlesInCharge
10mo ago
On the fake electors, I initially found this compelling, but not anymore. As far as I can tell the electors met, pledged their votes to Trump, and recorded this on paper on the appointed date. This was in anticipation that election results in their states could change, and if so there could be a problem if there were no elector votes recorded by the date specified in the Constitution.
There wasn’t a scheme to substitute these electors in place of the ones representing the state’s certified winner. On Jan 6th Trump’s ask of Pence was that he not certify the election, not that he count votes from the electors for Trump.
An alternate slate of electors also met and recorded their votes in Hawaii in 1968. Nixon was certified the winner, Kennedy’s electors met and recorded their votes anyway, and then later a recount went in Kennedy’s favor. Nixon, in his capacity as Vice President, counted the Kennedy electors from Hawaii.
NewCharlesInCharge
1yr ago
There’s no prescription on where the oath be taken. It could hypothetically be the Chief Justice answering a collect call from prison.
NewCharlesInCharge
1yr ago
During my recent two months in China I infrequently watched the news and remember seeing about three reports of uncovered spies working in the government. At the time my sentiment was “that seems like too many spies, probably this is political maneuvering.”
In light of this post, maybe not. Or maybe a bit of both.
Also curious that uncovered spies make the nightly news in China, but not here in America.
NewCharlesInCharge
4mo ago
Requiring a response violates the Privacy Act (congress makes all sorts of rules that limit the executive in various ways)
This seems too absurd to be true but it's apparently not even the most absurd bit of this law. The federal government is restricted from collecting PII on its own employees, which includes mere names and email addresses, without it being necessary to accomplish a purpose authorized by law or executive order.
NewCharlesInCharge
1yr ago
As others have pointed out, there's some sleight of hand in what people mean when the say "homeless" and what the causal factors in those populations are.
When people talk about San Francisco having homelessness problems, they aren't talking about people that merely lack a fixed address. They're talking about the people living in and defecating on the streets, frequently deranged. People that have defected entirely on societal norms.
Cities like Los Angeles, Portland, San Francisco, and Seattle have much higher amounts of these total defectors than other cities. The relevant difference between these and other cities is that total defectors are more or less tolerated in those cities. You can build permanent structures on public land and nothing bad will happen. At worst, something bad like a murder happens at the camp and then you'll be kicked out and lose the materials you likely stole to construct your building. You can do drugs openly. At the moment Seattle Police aren't even legally capable of arresting people for drug possession and public drug use.
I don't know if this environment creates total defectors or merely attracts them, it's probably some combination.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
Tangential, but there's been a massively successful anti-China propaganda effort in the United States since about 2014.
One piece of evidence: you use the abbreviation "CCP." That's not what they call themselves. In English, they say they're the Communist Part of China, or CPC.
You can also look back in newspaper archives and see the tone of coverage changing. Around 2014 the tone became increasingly negative, to the point where now it would be notable to see a news story on China display any positivity. Prior to then the dominant narrative was about wild economic growth, with a secondary narrative of "these foreigners are weird."
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
But for the encroachment, coup, and 8 years of shelling rebel oblasts, the invasion probably wouldn't have happened.
Like most wars, this one is not mono-causal. We can certainly blame Hitler for invading the Sudetenland, but we can also blame the Allies for creating the conditions that would lead the Germans to rally behind a strongman.
NewCharlesInCharge
6mo ago
But the basic research needed just isn't there, and it would seem pretty hard to hide a facility better-equipped for fundamental physics experiments than the civilian ones.
This is the core claim, that the USG has sequestered an elite cadre of physicists and kept their discoveries under wraps. One observation in favor of this claim: the dearth of fundamental breakthroughs in physics for the past fifty years.
NewCharlesInCharge
1yr ago
Remember the "don't say gay" bill? If you were being very charitable, you could say that the so-called "don't say gay" bill in Florida did prohibit "saying gay" in certain contexts, so I suppose the reporting on it comported with Scott's ideas on bounded distrust, that the media rarely concts outright lies.
But the reporting on North Carolina's HB 237 looks to consist of outright lies. Background: the state already has a law on the books that prohibits concealing your identity when committing a crime, with a consequence that the class of misdemeanor or felony commited gets bumped up by one. During the pandemic they added an extemption to the law for thsoe wearing a mask for health reasons. HB 237 removes that exemption.
News media are reporting that North Carolina is banning mask wearing in public. Some examples of those spreading the idea that this is a general ban on public masking:
- Winston-Salem Journal: Bill to end masking in north Carolina clears Senate. Health advocates say completely barring masks could hurt people who are immunocompromised
- US News and World Report: North Carolina Lawmakers Push Bill to Ban Most Public Mask Wearing, Citing Crime
- Charlotte Observer: The party of ‘freedom’ wants to ban mask-wearing for health reasons in NC
WaPo adds some more context, and describes the law as a prohibition on masking during a crime, but still lies in their headline by saying that the bill bans mask wearing at protests generally:
NewCharlesInCharge
3mo ago
uncontrovertable evidence
There's the rub, right? Miracles tend to be one-off historical events, not laws of nature you can subject to experiment, so you end up having to rely on witnesses. And witnesses are easily dismissed as liars or suffering from delusions.
Though even the kinds of miracles that can be literally put under a microscope seem not uncontrovertable. Take Eucharistic miracles for which there are consistent findings that the material being examined is human heart tissue, that had been subjected to great stress, was very recently alive, of blood type AB, and with DNA that can't be sequenced. Some of the folks that investigate these even contracted with secular labs to do sample processing to avoid the appearance of bias.
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
My greatest hope with these export controls are that they're merely graft. Biden has been championing the domestic semiconductor industry, with Congress granting tens of billions in subsidies to build domestic manufacturing. Maybe he's getting a kickback from the companies that benefit. Not the actual semiconductor companies, but the firms and unions involved in constructing and maintaining these specific facilities.
The alternative is that this is preparation for imminent war. The administration are not so dumb that they think this will permanently hinder Chinese industry. I've seen experts forecast that they'll probably be able to develop what they need in 2-3 years.
Why disrupt American industry so greatly for a mere 2-3 years of strategic advantage?
As Gwern points out, this may provoke a response from China. America dictating to a Taiwanese company that it can't sell its wares to China certainly seems like a violation of at least the spirit of the vague One China policy. That's a policy that the West already gets almost all of the benefit from. All China gets out of it is face-saving. The West and Taiwan get to treat Taiwan like a country in every way except name. They even get to have diplomatic relations, and embassies, just by another name.
What would America do if China controlled a vast amount of the world's rare earth mineral mines and decided that they'll no longer sell the products of those mines to America or its allies? Wait, they already do control a vast amount of rare earth minerals. Maybe that's the next step in this dumb escalatory spiral.
What if it were laughably trivial, and instead China secured exclusive access to all avocados grown south of the United States border? Would the United States do nothing?
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
You think that Russia would've invaded Ukraine in Feb 2022 if Yanukovych had never been deposed?
Why would they bother?
Without the coup, there would have been no rebel oblasts. With those oblasts continuing to participate in elections there probably would have been no government elected that would seriously entertain the idea that Ukraine join an anti-Russian military alliance.
On Russia and Europe: Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin have all floated the idea of Russia joining NATO. No one in NATO has ever appeared to like that idea, with American Presidents and Secretaries of State dismissing it. It was the Americans that pledged there would be no NATO expansion into former Soviet states after the fall of the Soviet Union, "not one inch eastward." That was obviously a pledge broken, and not even in response to any Russian hostilities.
I'm American and I can't make any sense of our foreign policy strategy in regards to Russia. It all seems like dick-waving with potential nuclear consequences. What do we even get if we "win?"
NewCharlesInCharge
2yr ago
I think most people have no experience with startups and thus no appreciation for how absurdly productive a small group of unbridled engineers can be.
NewCharlesInCharge
11mo ago
I'm seeing a lot of rumblings in Catholic circles about the drag performance aping The Last Supper. A lot of "there's one religion in particular where they never would have engaged in this mockery."
Also for extra Culture War points they included a child.
The trial of Darrell Brooks is set to start this coming Monday, October 3. Brooks is accused of running over 77 people at the Waukesha Christmas Parade.
Brooks will be representing himself. His motion to do so was granted today. There have been a few entertaining / exasperating videos of Brooks and the Judge going back and forth on this matter.
Brooks believes himself to be a sovereign citizen. In one of the videos he's crossed out the words "I understand" and replaced them with "I have been informed of." These were on a form he had to sign that warned him of the perils of self-representation. It turns out this is a sovereign citizen thing. They believe that to say "I understand" means that they "stand under" the court and are subject to its authority. In the video granting his motion the judge finds that "I have been informed of" is functionally equivalent to "I understand" and Brooks objects, saying he never said those words.
Culture war angle: this was a big culture war story last year as people perceived the attack as both under-covered and when it was covered, downplayed. The Rittenhouse case got many orders of magnitude more coverage and had an order of magnitude fewer victims.
Additionally, on the videos I discovered that YouTube tacks on a link to the sovereign citizen movement page on Wikipedia, giving it the same treatment as COVID-19 misinformation.
More options
Context Copy link