SophisticatedHillbilly
No bio...
User ID: 1964
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
Force sale of X% of shares he held by his estate on the open public market at whatever the price was at his death (or some randomized time before it to prevent gaming) and the government collects its cut as those sell. Seems like a simple enough solution but I'm probably missing something.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
You must adjust high African scores down to increase their accuracy, and you must adjust low European scores up.
I've no education in statistics, but isn't this double counting? The average score for Africans is calculated including the high-achievers and low-achievers. If Africans score an average of say 85, and you then apply a penalty to the high achievers, by doing so you move the average down below 85, in which case a stronger penalty must be applied to future tests and so on, right?. You would improve the average accuracy of any individual test, but you'd skew the whole. I guess it's probably resolvable by keeping nominal and adjusted scores separate.
But really, how much of a concern is the precise accuracy here anyway? An IQ test takes what, an hour? Make people take one every year, or every time they apply for a job, or whatever. If the collective accuracy of 10+ IQ tests isn't good enough for society, then God knows how we've made it this long.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
Don't have any genetic tests, but I have unusually large amounts of exposure to both the Sioux and the Navajo reservations through work.
Pure-blood natives are rare, but they do exist. Somewhere around 1/100 maybe. They're usually easy to spot in that they speak very differently (not sure how to describe this, it's like they struggle with making certain sounds and so replace them with similar but different sounds) and look quite different (similar to the Aboriginal examples above)
Additionally, they're all quite old, and will be gone within a few decades. None I've known were married to a pure native.
Unlike with whites, no one I've met seems to care about this racial mixing. Most see it as a cultural identity more than a blood identity (though non-zero blood relation is typically a requirement, and some have stricter rules)
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
While I understand your point, in some sense taxation is the central example of theft.
How many people get robbed each year? How many get taxed?
How much money gets stolen? How much gets taxed?
Any examination of other forms of theft are basically looking at weird hobbyist fringe-thieves.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
With sufficiently good AI art, it won't be possible to tell the difference. If nothing else, it craters the value for anyone who would create the real deal for money. People would still exchange verifiably older images sure, but crushing the creation of new stuff is the goal.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
Testing, testing, testing. Unless it's too late, that is?
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
I disagree on a few core points: I understand blue tribe is their own thing separate from the Democratic party, hence my point about blue-tribe conservatives.
The majority of the country watches, listens to, eats, drinks, and generally has the values and preferences of blue-tribe. First generation immigrants do not, but second-generation do by a massive margin. Perhaps the one major exception is LGBT issues, but that does not disqualify them completely.
Minorities may have a fewmajor cultural differences with blue tribe, but they align far closer than they do to red tribe. Immigrants typically are not at all supporters of the small-government, pro-gun, pro-christianity, pro-self-sustainability, pro-private-property-rights, anti-elitist, anti-intellectualist value set of the red tribe. AADS are probably the closest match, but they try very hard to signal that they are not of the red tribe, and red tribe does the same in return.
Do minority groups behave exactly the same as blue-tribe whites? No, but they aren't meant to. Many cultural groups have different roles for different classes of people, and blue-tribe is no exception.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
Only a blackpill if you for some reason have no respect for strength or power, which would be odd given how important they've been for all of history.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
Is there any school of legal interpretation that is explicitly outcome-blind? It's really the only thing I want in a judge, but none of the main schools seem to believe in it.
By outcome-blind I specifically mean that there is no sense that a ruling should be decided differently just because the 'correct' legal reading would result in something absurd or horrible. It seems like there's always this tendency to say "but if we rule the way that is obviously correct, it causes problems xyz and we can't have that" even among textualists and literalists.
I'm thinking of the "An AR-15 is not technically a gun" kind of ruling, or the "EPA gets to regulate every puddle" kind of ruling, or any of the various "such a precedent would eliminate most of the executive branch" kind of rulings. Though I can't link specific examples as I'm in a hurry and on my phone.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
This is especially true when what we know of reality contradicts these ideas of infinities. You cannot divide a line an infinite number of times. Even a line the length of the entire observable universe can only be divided 205.2 times before reaching 1 Plank Length, beyond which there is simply no smaller unit to divide the line into. Infinities are useful abstractions, but reality operates in discrete units.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
which is absolutely howl-worthy when you consider how convenient it was that there were clear and obvious miracles right up till the point we could properly document and examine them.
Well yes, because if they're not documentable, they don't eliminate the need for faith. If they are, then they would, so they don't happen.
I don't even necessarily disagree with you, but this is just a terrible point. It's countered by the very argument it's trying to address.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
The counter would be that, in determining how much society offers various parties, it should matter how many people go against our most basic urge to survive because they think the deal is just that bad. One side opting out vastly more is important data.
This does create the rather intuitive answer that impoverished black men on average get a better 'deal' than the average middle-class white woman.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
I wouldn't say they're bad per se, rather that they're a stabilizing agent. If there were only strong men, there would be no society at all, as there wouldn't be enough of the type who mindlessly upholds status quo. Too many however, and no necessary advancement and adaptation can occur.
They're the stabilizing rods of the great nuclear reaction we call society. Too few and it explodes, too many and you choke out the necessary chain reactions.
SophisticatedHillbilly
1yr ago
Admittedly it's been years since my experience with it, but I don't recall that being an option at the time. Could've just missed it though. Thank you for mentioning it, it'll likely help me out in the future.
SophisticatedHillbilly
2yr ago
Good to know, and I'll take your word for it over random-poster-on-other-forum.
SophisticatedHillbilly
2yr ago
Now unlike the above, this is merely "something I read somewhere at some point" and not official, but:
I've read that it's worse than that. They've frequently messed around with search function, and how they evaluate the changes is how many searches a user makes. I.e, if you type in a search, immediately find what you need, and leave Google, that's bad, while you search 4 or 5 times to get Google to finally show what you wanted, that's good.
The A/B testing is specifically trying to make the experience worse for users.
SophisticatedHillbilly
2yr ago
Honestly it's one of those things I read somewhere, but I don't have the source on me or the time to find it. I will note that it was for general quality on numerous metrics which extends beyond physical attraction.
As to your point, it would only be true in a case where:
-
Everyone must have a long-term partner
-
No two people can have the same partner.
Both of which are distinctly untrue. Just means more women will share the non-1s or end up alone. People, especially women, have standards, and won't just end up with trash because everyone else was taken. There's always the option of getting knocked up from a man a couple notches up and being a single mother.
A man who is actually a 1 in attractiveness is actually horrible, given that even a total uggo would still score above a 1 with nearly any redeemable qualities. Single motherhood is almost certainly preferable to even being in the same room as such a man, let alone interacting with him.
SophisticatedHillbilly
17d ago
if a model was right, you wouldn't give up and call it merely useful.
This is only true if a correct model is useful, which is certainly not always true. Even further: the most correct model isn’t necessarily the most useful model even when it is useful.
If I remember correctly evolutionary simulations consistently show a fully accurate perception of the world is generally actively harmful even when there’s no associated resource cost. Autistic analyzers often have more accurate models of social dynamics but do worse at socializing. Blind optimism, undeserved confidence unfounded worries etc are all extremely useful, and moving to a more accurate view is less useful.
It’s possible to have wrong and useless models of course, but that’s the point of the adage.
SophisticatedHillbilly
8mo ago
Yeah aren’t American conservatives one of the only non-hyper-religious groups left with an above replacement fertility rate? (only like 2.3 if I remember right but still)
SophisticatedHillbilly
9mo ago
I’ve heard from multiple people and personally seen one example where the following is true:
It’s basically just overly low risk tolerance around food safety, built in on an evolutionary level. The solution is having the whole family eat the same thing repeatedly (for like a week straight) and nothing else. That food will then be added to their ‘safe food’ registry and they’ll be fine with it forever. Rinse and repeat with each food.
SophisticatedHillbilly
9mo ago
What are they, if you don’t mind sharing?
SophisticatedHillbilly
9mo ago
In that same vein: determine which presidential+congressional ballot is more likely to be split and vote for them. Seems like R president and D Senator? Perfect. Hate D president but think R senator can win? Vote for them. And so on.
SophisticatedHillbilly
11mo ago
Yeah the beauty of modern drone weapons is that pretty much any electronics hobbyist has more than enough skill and money to build and fly them. State-level weapons at individual-level prices.
SophisticatedHillbilly
11mo ago
Understand that for many the problem is in fact the suffering the homeless people themselves are experiencing. You might not care about them, but many do, and this is one of the core disconnects in these debates.
True, and I think conservatives are generally outclassed. On this we agree entirely.
More options
Context Copy link