@Stefferi's banner p

Stefferi

Chief Suomiposter

7 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 20:29:13 UTC

https://alakasa.substack.com/

Verified Email

				

User ID: 137

Stefferi

Chief Suomiposter

7 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 20:29:13 UTC

					
				

				

				

				

				

					

User ID: 137

Verified Email

Well, for one thing, right from the "concentric circle 2", I quite wonder why I am supposed to sympathize with white nationalism at all, considering the stakes, if I'm not firmly within the circle 1, "whites in every situation".

More to the point, though, these sort of of ponderings demonstrate, more than anything else, that race is indeed socially constructed, at least in large part and perhaps the most important part. If one was to consider human race on a firmly biological basis, it would probably be based on human genetic clustering studies like the one which procuded this image, I'm pretty sure everyone here has seen it. Yet, those clustering studies tend to demonstrate that Europeans and Middle Easterners are indeed closely very genetically related compared to other major continental subpopulations (and what else would you use as a comparison); of course you could divide those clusters to more and more groups to get the result where Europeans and Middle Easterners show more as distinct populations, but at some point it just becomes p-hacking. If we consider Europeans and Middle Easterners as a part of the same population, then surely ethnic Jews, who tend to in roughly 50 % European and 50 % Middle Easterners, are very firmly a part of that cluster.

And yet white nationalists tend to talk about Jews as wholly and unambiguously nonwhite and the migration of Syrians, Turks and Algerians as race replacement. This is one mystery that I've never quite seen firmly answered. Of course one might say that they are not white-white because they are Jewish and Muslim and so on, or because they don't identify as white themselves, but then you just prove more firmly the (partially, and perhaps the most importantly) socially constructed basis of race.

The EU has a bureaucracy that makes no bones about openly pushing for the "ever closer Union", ie. federalization of EU; that is the true ideological quest of the Eurocrats, not identity-politics or left-of-center politics as such. The federalization project has tended to be evolve at a snail's pace, though. We'll see if the coming years speed it up.

My wife just gave birth to a healthy baby boy yesterday. This is our second child, we also have a 2,5-year-old daughter.

How many other people here have children? If I remember past surveys of SSC and the SSC extended universe forums (ie. /r/themotte etc.), actually being a parent doesn't seem to be that common.

even though under most reasonable cases they would be better off if they just accepted the Israelis as their superiors and started living like your median Israeli Arab.

But Israel isn't offering them that option! Israel isn't offering them the option of "living like your median Israeli Arab", since it isn't offering them the option to be Israeli Arabs, ie. become citizens of Israel, even implicitly second-class ones like the Israeli Arabs! All that Israel has been offering them, currently, until this operation, has been the continuation of the same as now, ie. continuous humiliation of checkpoints and raids and continous expansion of settlements in the West Bank and the state of siege and isolation in Gaza; there has been no indication of this changing under whatever possible Israeli administration, and no particular reason to suspect that even if Palestinians dropped militancy entirely that this would change.

This continues to be in the same category of data as almost all ufology evidence: a guy says a thing, with apparently nothing concrete to show for it.

Maybe he’s a fabulist, or mixing up info from some terrestrial sources project - by American or other government - with the massive amounts of UFO lore swirling about in America, even in the highest circles. Maybe he’s engaging in some spook project, like what I theoretized about here.

Without anything more concrete to show for it than in previous ’high-level whistleblower’ cases, little need to adjust priors.

"I done two tours of duty in I-i-ran,

I came home with a brand new plan,

I buy GPUs from Mexico,

build a data center down Copperhead Road..."

Like I've indicated, I work in a field - translation - where machine learning applications have already been commonplace for over a decade, seeing the development of machine translation from substandard early Google Translate effort that many people still associate with machine translation with the sophisticated effort put in by DeepL and other such engines. (ChatGPT also produces an OK effort, but as recounted here, still makes some more obvious mistakes than DeepL, at least when translating to Finnish.)

Furthermore, translation is a classic example of a field where overtly enthusiastic tech types have been predicting "human worker replacement by machine" for ages and ages now. An anecdote I often recount is when, during student days, I had been drinking with a friend who also studied translation and we went to a pizza place at the end of the night. We were accosted by a drunken engineer who started explaining how translation is a dead-end field and machines are going to replace translators any day now. I replied that when there's going to be a machine to replace the translators, it's also going to replace the engineers, and he got quiet and left. (At this moment, I wouldn't be surprised if the engineers weren't replaced before the translators.)

How has machine learning affected my workload? Well, the amount of money I've been making has if anything increased during the recent years, though this is also probably natural career development (and also a necessity to answer the rising inflation). For a long time, fair amount of my work has been checking and editing machine translation, a job that is common enough to just generally be referred by an acronym in the field (MTPE, Machine Translation Post-Editing). At the same time, I'm still able to charge 2/3 of my usual word-based rate for MTPE, evidence that there's still a lot of work to be done to not only fix the various errors that even advanced models make but get the "smell of machine translation" off the text.

Obviously, this is an issue of margins. While a lot of text is translated from one language to another, vastly greater amounts of texts getting produced right now aren't, including in commercial applications. Translator workloads getting lighter and translation getting cheaper has thus far just meant that more and more texts get translated now than previously. We'll see if the wall hits at some point.

Like I've also recounted previously, during the past few years I have, if anything, got less MTPE than previously, even though machine translation has improved. This is partly just random chance (ie. I've worked in projects which just aren't that suitable for modern MT applications) but also because some customers explicitly forbid translators from using MT, presumably because end-client companies are afraid that some trade secrets end up in Google's files. Of course I can't be sure they have means to actually check if I use MT if I just edit it good enough, but I can't not be sure of that, either, and getting caught for something like this would be a good way to lose a regular client.

From what I've learned, the biggest game changer in the field - from the point of view of a working translator - was when electronic communication enabled the translation from regular in-company jobs to enterpreneuer-based freelancing. This was actually going on while I was at the university - the teachers still mentioned in-company jobs as something to strive for, but often acknowledged they probably wouldn't be forthcoming and this would (negatively) affect pay for translators. Furthermore, even before machine translation, as such, got common, there have been the so-called translation memory programs, fairly simple tools that mostly replicate existing translations to new ones, and have done their share in making translation faster. Even in white-collar fields, the automation of gruntwork is hardly a new concept.

Of course we'll have to see in the coming years how, exactly, LLM's affect this field. One particular potential field for advancement would be when we get models that can, with some reliability, provess image, audio and text at the same time, since this might have a considerable effect on subtitling (or dubbing, but that is pretty rare in Finland, outside of children's programs). On the other hand, I work in a co-operative office and regularly chat with another translator who basically does not do MTPE at all, rarely uses MT in general and is generally not particularly aware of the developments in the machine-learning field. She seems to get by quite fine, nevertheless.

Well, one of the reasons might indeed be that there were considerable advantages for Ukraine for holding Mariupol: it kept Russian troops tied and away from the Donetsk front at a crucial time, and the bravery of the troops at Mariupol also served as an obvious inspiration at a dark period for Ukraine and offered propagandistic material, both internally and externally. This holding action got Ukraine through to the period in the summer when Western aid started showing up and making some difference.

More to the point, though... maybe it is true, the Russians really just don't have the sufficient spirit to do it?

Throughout the war, the pro-Russian side on the Internet has banged the drum about how Ukraine (as an entity separate from the Russian world) is FAKE FAKE FAKE, an invention of the Austrians and Poles and Germans, imagination of the exile communities, forcibly maintained by Nazi Banderites, an unsustainable made-up chimera, a "Reddit-ass country", "fighting for globohomo and Pride parades", a number of similar claims intended to bolster the idea that at any moment everything would just break and Russians would be received as liberators in the end and so on. Meanwhile, of course, Russia is a real country, the realest there is, and Russians would of course fight for it in the same way as in 1941 and would gladly just rather die in a nuclear hellfire than lose.

Well, the proof of the pudding etc., and the taste of the pudding would now seem to indicate that Ukrainians, individual cases indicating otherwise aside, are truly fighting like hell for their invented made-up Reddit Nazi globohomo country, while russians, individual cases indicating otherwise, are losing whatever spirit they might have had at some point, as indicated, for instance, the massive waves of exiles leaving the country at whatever indication there has been that they might be conscripted and have to fight.

This just has the same affect as all the previous similar pro-Russian predictions and accountings I've read. Always the same terse, affected style, supposed to convey an image of brute realism (very unlike those pro-Ukrainians who are so soyjack and Reddit in their childish enthusiasm and with their memes! Adults speaking here!)... and that realism always ends up being that this time Russians are just on the cusp of total victory and destruction of the Ukrainian army.

The fact that pro-Russian sources have been making similar prognosis for the entirety of the war is not mentioned, or if it is, it's excused as merely a result of Western support and "mercenaries" (we're just going to use that word to describe all volunteer foreign or returnee troops in a conflict from here on, aren't we?) or by Russia holding itself back from sheer kindness or incompetence... and now all that is ending, and the inevitable victory is on the way, and in a few months we'll lather, rinse, repeat. Of course pro-Ukrainian sources do the same - the ever-starting Kherson offensive and so on.

Of course it's always possible that Russians will eventually win, even in the coming months, wars often hinge on factors not currently visible, but this analysis doesn't really offer anything that hasn't been seen before or would convince me it's more than usual pro-Russia boosterism. Why feature it at all?

I'm not saying anything more than we know about the facts of the case, but I continue to be flabbergasted by the way the "look at how weird this guy is, he could possibly not be a far-righter!" argument is used! It's perfectly plausible these days (typical? No, but plausible) that one might have a guy going from hippie new age Green Party type to far-right within a short period - I've witnessed numerous similar types doing the same thing because of Covid here in Finland, and there's an entire microparty - "Kristallipuolue", "Crystal Party" - which consists of alternative medicine / new age hippie types who went hardcore antivaxx and anti-measures during the pandemic, started picking up things like anti-immigration thought, and are now in an electoral alliance with a couple of far right parties.

The pipelines from new age to right-wing are often quite clear. Left-wing conspiracy theory gives way to right-wing conspiracy thinking (QAnon and so on). Localist preference to local products can be expanded to general anti-internationalist thinking (opposition to UN and EU, and so on). "Get your vaccines out of my body!" is expanded to more generic libertarianish thinking. "Male and female energies" earth-mother-type thinking can become advocation for traditional gender roles. And so on.

There are plenty of right-wingers who are generally able to conceptualize the fact that left-wingers can take sharp turns to the right, even suddenly, who have done the same themselves, but who then instantly start feigning ignorance of such potential mechanisms when it looks like one of those recent converts might have done something, you know, crazy. Something with bad optics. Then you can only be counted among the right wing if you've been a stable and solid normie law-abiding middle-class whitebread person for your entire life.

Yes, we (or at least people who have followed Ukrainian affairs for some time) know about Zelensky's status as a comedian, or connections to Kolomoisky, or corruption, or whatever. The whole point of the post you were replying to was that he's an unlikely hero due to that stuff! It's not a debunking to post the same stuff that essentially forms the crux of the argument!

Muslim terminology is becoming popular online — I have seen cases of Muslim expressions like inshallah and mashallah entering terminally online lexicon (which is the first step to normie lexicon).

"The normalization of cyka blyat in terminally online lexicon - the first step towards Russianification of the Western mind"?

There's been decades of predictions about the weak secularized West falling prey to the Islamic influence ("strong horse defeats the weak horse"), and it never seems to materialize. The converts are the same as always - some (mostly women) converting for their spouse (and I rather believe that people tend to overestimate the number of such converts since they see white or light-skinned immigrant Muslims and confuse them for converted Western women), a smattering of criminals, a few "religious travelers" who might soon travel right out of their Islamic waystation after travelling in. It still is considerably more common for people wanting a "strong religion" to choose another variety of Christianity - say, Orthodoxy or Pentecostalism - from their usual one.

Meanwhile, at least this Substack article presented many strong arguments for Muslim integration (really secularization) continuing in France. Of course that can't be generalized, since France puts a specific attention on laïcité, and really all such statistics not only differ considerably country to country but also immigrant group to immigrant group.

OpenAI announces leadership transition

The board of directors of OpenAI, Inc., the 501(c)(3) that acts as the overall governing body for all OpenAI activities, today announced that Sam Altman will depart as CEO and leave the board of directors. Mira Murati, the company’s chief technology officer, will serve as interim CEO, effective immediately.

A member of OpenAI’s leadership team for five years, Mira has played a critical role in OpenAI’s evolution into a global AI leader. She brings a unique skill set, understanding of the company’s values, operations, and business, and already leads the company’s research, product, and safety functions. Given her long tenure and close engagement with all aspects of the company, including her experience in AI governance and policy, the board believes she is uniquely qualified for the role and anticipates a seamless transition while it conducts a formal search for a permanent CEO.

Mr. Altman’s departure follows a deliberative review process by the board, which concluded that he was not consistently candid in his communications with the board, hindering its ability to exercise its responsibilities. The board no longer has confidence in his ability to continue leading OpenAI.

In a statement, the board of directors said: “OpenAI was deliberately structured to advance our mission: to ensure that artificial general intelligence benefits all humanity. The board remains fully committed to serving this mission. We are grateful for Sam’s many contributions to the founding and growth of OpenAI. At the same time, we believe new leadership is necessary as we move forward. As the leader of the company’s research, product, and safety functions, Mira is exceptionally qualified to step into the role of interim CEO. We have the utmost confidence in her ability to lead OpenAI during this transition period.”

I posted this in Twitter and someone speculated that it's because Altman paused subscriptions on Tuesday, but that would alone seem like a pretty inconsequential reason for this sort of a major move.

One is drawn to make comparisons with recent country renaming, the country of Cahit Arf.

For a moment I genuinely thought that some African country or whatever had named itself "Cahit Arf" and I somehow just hadn't noticed.

I've sometimes theorized that there's a similar "race fandom", ie. people whose position (at least at first) is less like open racism but simply a deep fascination with the concept of race in a sociological sense, and who gravitate towards the online racist communities simply because the only spheres where you can really discuss this stuff deeply are the racist and antiracist ones and they don't feel they can identify with the explicit antiracist mindset to the sufficient and demanded degree.

Likewise, people tend to enjoy the same entertainment media: Strategy games, dialogue heavy RPGs, The Cyberpunk genre and it's associated political themes.

These are just some of the general cultural markers for current smart and disaffected young males, which would be the group to gravitate towards (extreme) politics.

No matter what either Falwell or the gay columnists or whomever say here, I'm really struggling to see how Tinky Winky would have been a "clearly gay and effeminate character" in Teletubbies, compared to the other Tubbies, all of which were basically weird sexless babies.

Finland has a new right-wing government. It's been called the most right-wing one in Finland's postwar history, since it is headed by centre-right National Coalition, contains the right-wing populist/nationalist Finns Party and doesn't contain the Centre Party, which has been previously been in government with these two but is, as the name says, more centrist.

Essentially, the new government is combining an anti-union, austerity-oriented economic agenda of the center-right with a list of anti-immigration measures favored by the nationalists. However, while the foreign papers have mostly been concerned with the claims that the most important thing about this govt is far-right inclusion, the economic agenda comes first; the anti-immigration measures, while they probably will lead to immigration cuts, are still not as hard as , for instance, what a roughly similar coalition in Sweden has set last year.

Among other changes, a work-based residence permit would expire if an individual fails to find a new job after more than three months of unemployment. Those with a student-based residence permits would not be allowed to rely on Finnish income support, while the tuition fees of Finnish educational institutions are to be reviewed.

The annual refugee quota is to be cut by more than half to 500 people, down from the present 1,050. Asylum would be granted for a maximum of three years , after which the need for international protection should be reassessed.

In future, obtaining a permanent residence permit will require six years of residence, a language proficiency test, a two-year work history without long-term unemployment or income support, and a requirement of an impeccable record.

Citizenship rules are also to be tightened, with the minimum residence requirement extended to eight years, along with an income requirement and mandatory civics and language tests.

Insofar as economic measures go,

The four parties have agreed on many other changes to the labour market, according to STT. It says that in the future an employee's first sick day would be unpaid, unless otherwise stipulated in their collective agreement.

Iltalehti reported that – assuming the government's plans are approved by Parliament – in future it will be possible to dismiss an employee more easily, simply citing any "reasonable cause". It will also make it easier for employers to offer one-year fixed-term employment contracts without having to cite any special reason for them.

The future government also wants to expand local bargaining – as opposed to centralised national collective agreements – to cover all companies. It will also seek to curtail the right to launch sympathy strikes and politically based labour actions.

There's also two minor parties, the Christian Democrats who basically set no demands for participation and are just happy to be a part of this government and Swedish People's Party, a liberal party that watches over the interests of the Swedish-speaking minority and had considerable troubles fitting in with the Finns Party's nationalism and probably managed to prevent some of their more hardline immigration proposals from taking force.

Making a character a vegan or an animal rights activist has been a very typical TV way of conveying that they're an annoying, priggish fanatical progressive. I'm not a vegan or any sorts of an animal-rights type myself, but I've noted this for some time now. Lindsay in Arrested Development comes to mind. Or having veganism being used to convey being a killjoy in general; Angela in Office (US) was no progressive, but still had somewhat incongruous veganism tacked on her to accentuate her being a stuck-up bore.

Of course, you also get progressive characters who are alternatively written as noble and annoying; some of Lisa Simpson's more annoying moments involve her veganism, and I hold that Hermione Granger's SPEW (which, today, seems to mostly be interpreted as some sort of a dis of antiracist activism, and thus brought up as evidence of Rowling's racism) is intended to rather be a parody of animal rights activism ("what if the animals actually WANT to be oppressed, huh?")

I've seen people on this forum and elsewhere bring to attention that Hollywood and TV shows often portray fundamentalist Christians as fanatics and bigots, but the equivalent treatment of animal rights activists (see eg. Straw Vegetarian page on TVTropes) gets less attention. I would guess most would just go "Well, but the vegans actually ARE that annoying!", though that view is probably also mediated by seeing examples of annoying vegans and animal rights activists being mocked on various types of media.

So what are you exactly claiming? That Peña is some sort of a double agent for the Dems?

How would you react if a radical-left Democratic politician had hired someone to shoot at his opponents and someone posted to this forum going "ooo, the Republicans are going to have a field day with this"?

Let's start off (unless someone fires a link earlier) with this one: Millennials are shattering the oldest rule in politics

“If you are not a liberal at 25, you have no heart. If you are not a conservative at 35 you have no brain.” So said Winston Churchill. Or US president John Adams. Or perhaps King Oscar II of Sweden. Variations of this aphorism have circulated since the 18th century, underscoring the well-established rule that as people grow older, they tend to become more conservative.

The pattern has held remarkably firm. By my calculations, members of Britain’s “silent generation”, born between 1928 and 1945, were five percentage points less conservative than the national average at age 35, but around five points more conservative by age 70. The “baby boomer” generation traced the same path, and “Gen X”, born between 1965 and 1980, are now following suit.

Millennials — born between 1981 and 1996 — started out on the same trajectory, but then something changed. The shift has striking implications for the UK’s Conservatives and US Republicans, who can no longer simply rely on their base being replenished as the years pass.

The article goes on to show that previous generations in UK and US have indeed formed a remarkably similar pattern of starting out voting for left side main parties (Labour/Dems) and moving rightwards (to Tories/GOP) with age, but Millennials aren't doing that, and are if anything sticking firmer with the left side parties with age.

When it comes to Britain, in particular, I suspect that Brexit may have a lot to do with this. For Millennial Remainers, in particular, the whole thing has evidently been a horrorshow; from following various FBPE types and hearing from friends who have lived in the UK, the thinking basically goes; for your entire life your country has belonged to the EU, which has given you ease of travel and has seemed to be without issues, and suddenly a bunch of (mostly) Tory-voting boomers decides to take the country out of the Union, and no-one still has managed to explained to you exactly how Britain has benefitted from this, or what fundamental reason for this there even was for the whole Brexit, beyond "Well, it's not as big a disaster as Remoaners are claiming when you look into it" (or, possibly, "Fuck you, Remoaner! Elitist! Take back control!")

With the Tories then increasingly becoming the party of Brexit, it would be little wonder if such types would continue to give Tories the wide berth, even if they start getting to the age where traditionally Tories start becoming more and more attractive, as an option.

Of course, US and UK are a bit expectional in how strongly there's an age-related left/right split with young voting for left parties and the old voting for right parties. It would be interesting to see if this replicates in other countries where Millennials and younger voters have recently been trending rightwards and where centre-left parties have for some time been more popular among the old than the youth, like Sweden. (Indeed, I already saw on Twitter that the effect is not replicating in non-Anglophone West.)

The one big difference between the war in Ukraine and the standard War Template of the recent decades is, actually, that Russia is straight-up annexing parts of their neighboring country. It did so in 2014 and it is gearing up to do so on an even larger a scale.

Of course, all of that is particularly dire when one lives in another neighboring country to Russia (and it's only too natural for Finns to join in cheering Russia's armed forces getting rekt, especially as Russia has taken quite a few of those troops into Ukraine right away from the Finnish border), but even taking that into account, Russian behavior in Crimea is expectional compared to nearly all the other wars in recent decades, including the Iraq War. Annexing parts of another country is really one of those things that should be considered verboten in the post-Cold-War world (Cold War world too, really, that's when the standard was formed), and this implicit standard has really been one of the main pillars of stability, such as it is, in the current global structure, the one thing that has been made a horror in the international community.

It doesn't matter whether the annexing country really, really, really feels the territory is rightfully theirs. It doesn't matter if they consider it crucial to their security. It doesn't matter if the initial annexation (Crimea) was connected to a period of chaos within the original country of the territory. It doesn't matter if the original country is authoritarian, or corrupt, or even that there are militias prowling around with Sonnenrads in their gear. It doesn't matter if the population of the annexed territory agrees. Whatever the reasons, this is one cat we still don't want to let out of the bag.

I can think of one potential counterargument - US is behaving hypocritically, since Trump gave his blessing to another notable recent case of annexation of conquered territory, the Israeli annexation of Golan Hills. That is indeed something Trump shouldn't have done, but still, two wrongs don't make a right. Individual cases of the norm being broken, no matter how hypocritically, don't mean that the international norm no longer exists or that it no longer has any validity. It just means it's been broken. Break it enough times, have that breaking sanctified by the rest of the international community, and then it no longer exists, and it's a free-for-all for all countries to start grabbing parts of other countries, and the bad old times can return.

There was also a baby boom in countries like Sweden and Switzerland that stayed neutral.

At best it would be like Ukrainian nationalism where they get to wave WWII paraphernalia while the government rams through neoliberal and culturally leftwing policies.

I'm fairly sure current Ukrainian nationalism revolves around the extremely hands-on theme of keeping their country from being occupied by a hostile other nation.

The Pirate Parties, which had a brief flowering in various parts of Europe, effectively evolved more or less into attempts to establish this sort of a political party, though with the focus heavily (naturally) on IP reform and the adjacent topics. However, the Finnish Pirate Party, at least, which didn't encounter much success beyond a few places in city councils and is now a nonentity, picked up many of these topics, like UBI, electoral reform, subsidy abolition etc.

AFAIK the only pirate parties that still continue to be any sort of a political force are the ones in Iceland and Czech Republic, and I don't really know what they're doing. The one in Czech Republic seems to have evolved into being some sort of a vague progressive force for the lack of other similar alternatives on that arena. That probably reflects the chief problem; the "grey tribe" (such as it exists - I've always argued that it's actually just a subset of the "blue tribe", which is about as much as Scott said in the post that popularized the concepts) is an insignificant political force, and any successful attempt to expand the reach would mean implicitly or explicitly catering to more mainstream blues.

(Of course, the Pirate parties were also hampered by the fact that their initial appeal was basically just "legalize warez" (as the name says!) just at the time when streaming and Steam were making warez less popular...)

As a general rule, countries just plain don't want to merge with other countries. The expections are cases like the two Germanies, which didn't even formally see themselves as two countries but as one country with two competing governments, even before the reunification. The European elites have tried to push EU to become a federation for over half a century with this process progressing at a snail's pace at its fastest, with the last 15 years having been spent in an economic muddle as a result things being in a limbo after the last major integration - the Euro - having been exposed by the 2008 crisis to have major problems that have been fixed with fix-tire-with-bubblegum style measures.