@Templexious's banner p

Templexious


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2023 April 03 01:26:19 UTC

Stuck in time


				

User ID: 2308

Templexious


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2023 April 03 01:26:19 UTC

					

Stuck in time


					

User ID: 2308

Optimizing for defection by caving to the demands of defectors is bad.

This got a good chuckle. Well played.

American unemployment is at something like 4%

Only due to the way we collect these statistics, which is suspect at best in order to make the party in power look good. Working Amazon or gig economy is often considered "employed", but it's not really living, either. Might as well be a slave.

Outside of the current Overton Window:

Crush zoning laws. We take it as a given that everyone will commute, but these are largely from zoning laws. Housing should have close access to groceries and cheap local services - ie, within walking or bike distance. If you have a pseudo-communal housing area, the community can hire maids to come clean houses and assist in the most labor-intense aspects of kids without significantly increasing the cost of living. Additionally, if fathers live less than 20 minutes from their places of work, then women will be more likely to discount the cost of having kids because their partners will be nearby in the event of emergency, et cetera.

Sounds like you're strung up on is/ought.

The Supreme Court is an inherently political institution, therefore it is good to ensure that we cycle through members of our highest tiers of government on a regular basis to prevent too much power creep.

The severability section at the end amuses me greatly.

That is, in fact, the premise of both democracy and republicanism. Until some other form of governance appears, it is what the USA operates under.

Catastrophizing over a long-ass shot like this is unwarranted. This SCOTUS reform bullshit is less likely to happen than Trump being elected for a second term. Additionally, this catastrophozing has the exact same crunch as the people who cried over Jan 6th, calling the participants traitors.

Therefore, until we have a text that actually states how it would work, there is really no point in debating exactly what would happen.

Additionally, if I was so concerned about this, the solution would simply be to make sure to win and get justices in that will give rulings I want on a consistent basis. That would necessarily require making sure my party continues to get elected.

Similar to how the "fix" to project 2025 for Democrats, should it succeed, is to make sure you win the follow-up elections.

Mild aside: whenever it's discussed if Google is censoring things, an old litmus test was to search for the documentary Demographic Winter.

It's a pretty banal HBD documentary all in all. They even stay out of discussing IQ! However, for a while there the entire thing had gone down the "we're definitely not censoring anything" memoryhole. It's only been un-search-holed in the last year or so.

There was a similar pro-abortion style of ad that was run back during the McCain v Obama era, so at the very least, it's not a new style of Ad.

Does it matter?

Trump flops on all the hard questions in a way that asks whether or not there is anything deeper in there than making the liberals cry. Of course there is, and of course he understands but he and every supporter of his don't actually care about that.

Getting dragged into the harder questions is a sign of weakness.

fabricating

Not having read your article, and in isolation of whether or not this is actually a "problem", per se, this seems like a bad-faith article. If you go back and read old lesswrong articles and their comments, you will find now-known neoreactionaries like hanson posting on lesswrong, including roko.

Additionally, breitbart in 2016: https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2016/03/29/an-establishment-conservatives-guide-to-the-alt-right/

In your defense, even lesswrong somewhat disagreed

  • -45

It's usually not very strict, otherwise you would hear about things like subway's breads being classified as cake from the US instead of just the EU.

I have nothing but applause for your constitution in being able to endure everything between those polar points.

I've yet to see the mods knock an actually-good two-to-three paragraph post, so I'm dubious this is a report on the reality of the moderation's behaviors.

Seems self-evident that it's more difficult to moderate six+ paragraphs with five sentences each on each comment.

In an unrelated note, since there's no better places to discuss this, instituting a more strict character count per comment would bring a breath of fresh air to the thread.

Reading the motte has become a dull slog, and many of these top-level comments consist of word soup with BIG TITLES pretending to say something meaningful without corresponding substance.

I find the need for "steelmanning" of trump to be silly.

He's running for president. People like him for what he stands for. They can vote for whoever they want, it's a republic with tinges of democracy.

I will be voting Democrat because I don't like Russia/Putin, but that's the extent of my reasoning for my presidential picks. I understand and see why people like Trump, and to say that he's being unduly attacked because he doesn't "fit in" to the establishment is not a lie.

They're very clearly trying to pin him to the wall for things that would be relatively minor scandals with a few fees and a public apology and then it would be over with any other ex-president. It's really satisfying to see how hard the establishment strains at gnats to pin him to the wall, when we know that they've gotten used to letting people like epstein go around as an open secret.

This thought occurred after Christmas this year during a few activities where family members wanted to play a game, so they pulled up a YouTube video to demonstrate how a thing is done, and it was incredibly gross.

99% of modern kids will never have the ability to be forgotten- parents post their pictures online when they're not able to give consent, including embarrassing and compromised photos. This includes YouTube videos of moms putting their daughters in compromised positions and posting them on the video site.

Such videos are easy to find- the mom often speaks, and their prepubescent girls do a seemingly-innocuous activity. Those girls will always have those videos on a stranger's hard drive at best, or at worst, end up as data used for ai generation.

I'll note that I don't have a proposed solution to this. The laws on child-porn already exist, but this content skirts the edge of acceptability. The girls are usually 10-13, and doing an innocuous activity- like playing pattycake or ring around the rosie, usually in mostly-acceptable clothing.

When you stumble on one such video, you can tell what I'm talking about. It's the camera angles.

For this reason, I come to TheMotte- have you seen the videos I'm talking about? What do you think about them, and how would you evaluate whether or not such content is okay to post online?

If you have kids, do you worry that there's some random perusing Instagram or willing to train ai on them?

After seeing these things, I can't get it out of my head, nor can I come up with a reasonable solution.

The thing is that the romney campaign didn't reciprocate with those punches, and instead held their tongues.

That mitt romney article reminds me of one from the bush campaign where they claimed that the John Kerry kids were awful and rude and used slurs and a bunch of other bullshit.

His kids at the time were two-four years old. People will write literally anything during campaign years, so long as it makes the other side look bad.

Tangentially to this, toward the end of the bush years, there were media reports on msnbc and cnn that basically questioned whether or not bin laden even existed.

No one else remembers that, but good to know people still believe that he existed.

The trick to competition in my experience is building up an internal mythos for why one loses while absorbing other intuitions for how to actually win.

Every person I know who wins a lot that also loses a lot has this ability to shunt the pain of losses into the ether. They may also just know exactly why they lost and what they do to correct it.

Still, I find myself in a similar boat as you. I avoid public competitions, as I am not very competitive, though for me it's not the pain of losing- there's no personal investment when losing. But if I think I have a chance, I'll give it a shot.

oh it's this guy again

My top 5 candidates to be techno-king in 20-30 years:

  • Sam Altman
  • Elon Musk
  • John Carmack
  • Demis hassabis
  • Xi

Unless Sam exits ai development, he is the most likely candidate for the future techno-king in the US.

Xi is obvious- all corps in china are extensions of the state, so whatever ai is built will be built with oversight from The Party officials, and whatever Xi wants.

The mid-late 90s were a pretty excellent time period to be alive.

I'd skip vietnam and nix nixon. I certainly wouldn't complain about going to see Queen in concert or buying in on the 90s tech sector.