ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
8hr ago
· Edited 8hr ago
Group A generally finds right answers, but for wrong reasons. Group B generally finds wrong answers, but for right reasons. Which group would you rather be in?
How fast can you fail, are we talking locally wrong or globally wrong, and to what extent are As constrained? Though again, this is progressivism/traditionalism/conservatism/whatever Six Foundation thinking is calling itself these days [as A] vs. and classical liberalism [as B].
I feel like there's a reasonable case that Group A is preferable.
Which is why most people are, at the intersection of all identities, generally in Group A (as well as the fact that 'right answers for right reasons' are inevitably incorporated by A when discovered by B). You'd have to be some sort of principled libertarian to be in B, which is why B tends to have a lot to do with those who find wrong answers for wrong reasons.
Yet the fact remains that A is completely unsustainable without B- you claim that A "finds" right answers, but generally speaking, they do no such thing. The reverse is not as true, which creates a lot of existential angst for A (and most A memes are designed to shut down and delay realizing that cognitive dissonance, ideally past one human lifetime).
If a certain type of reasoning generally leads you to right or good answers, doesn't that in itself make that type of reasoning right?
Well, yeah- when A was racist, racism yielded a global maximum of results (or perhaps the predictive power of racism yielding excellent local results lead to the As at the time incorporating it). A rapidly discovered and incorporated the epistemic virtue of racism.
But that's too reductive- it's more accurate to say that racism was a local maximum (which is why As were racist) in a particular time and place. However, once racism stopped being that local maximum, the A at that time was completely destroyed, and a new group A' took over from A.
Naturally, A' claimed they discovered the virtue of not being racist both to siphon power from A, and disavow that the existence of A' owed its existence to grabbing whatever B had for anti-racism and erecting an entire moral edifice around it (as those who choose A have as much a psychological dependence on that morality as those who choose B depend on the idea that the process of correct morality yields positive results). But they're both still A, and once the takeover has concluded, A has 'always been at war with Eastasia', so to speak.
A guess that randomly lands on the right answer is not epistemically virtuous
From B's viewpoint, yes- they might be locally (or even globally) correct but they're also horrible people who should never get anywhere near real power, the Puritans being a classic example (note also that "puritanical" is a B meme).
From A's viewpoint, there's no dissonance here, because they don't perceive it to be random- they are good people and deserve good things.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
11hr ago
Moral development (per Kohlberg) and IQ are somewhat positively correlated.
If the same is true for AI, then sure, you can stop it from taking selfish shortcuts- but you won't get any transcendent thinking from a system that only follows a specific procedure, which is what you actually want.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
11hr ago
Disqualify everyone who thinks more about pussy than x-risk and you’ll be left only with the scheming eunuchs.
The eunuchs are the ones disproportionately involved in creating the AI in the first place.
The selection effect is actually really noteworthy here because all modern eunuchs are self-made. (They don't actually call themselves eunuchs these days unless maybe you're on the WPATH mailing list- but they are very womanly men all the same. Perhaps the way certain scientific types act to give birth to some massive project is uterus-envy?)
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
11hr ago
I will ignore your warnings of potential catastrophe unless you forswear any lifestyle choices of which I disapprove; therefore, if you do not change your lifestyle to fit my demands, you rank prevention of catastrophe as less important than your lifestyle choices.
Funny, this is exactly how I feel about global warming 'enthusiasts'.
Of course, the difference between this and that is that said 'enthusiasts' have an obviously massive amount to gain politically from most human activity being banned like they want; the 'ban AI' faction isn't quite there yet (and dependent on who it takes down first- maybe they're on the side of weird sex, maybe they're not) so it's not clear if the origins of the group will be a liability.
When the practises in question entirely involve mutually consenting adults, whose standards for consent are probably a fair bit less flexible than the median
The usual playbook here is "change the rules, accuse of rape ex post facto", so the truth's not going to matter anyway. Of course, the weird sex people (or at least, their allies) are the same ones pushing in the #fightFor25 direction more generally, so maybe they don't have to worry about that for the foreseeable future.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
11hr ago
Maybe none of the struggles of the past decades have been enough to demand political unity.
You've had political unity among the people to which that matters plenty of times; all you do to see evidence of that is national election results. And that was even in a hyperreactive filtered mass media environment perhaps to an even greater degree than today; it's a lot harder to disagree with the TV when the books giving it context are 5 years away from publishing.
Nicolae Carpathia
Come on. I understood that reference, but others might be left behind.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
12hr ago
Elite human capital is pretty much always liberal across the world.
Liberal as in classic/libertarian, or liberal as in progressive? (Not that the conflation isn't intentional, of course.)
Remember, this is complicated by the fact that progressive is just "conserving the current privileges of EHC to have zero competition for driving socioeconomic growth"- it scratches the moral conservative itch for smart people. This is in contrast to traditionalism, which does that for dumb people; classical liberalism complicates things simply by having been around long enough to inherently be a conservative position.
One of the big reasons being that social conservativism even if it has the right answer will do so for the wrong reasons.
Which is exactly the same as progressivism: intersectionality is more correct than androsupremacy, but the only people generally pushing intersectionality do so only to advance gynosupremacy, not because they're interested in applying their system fairly.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1d ago
Latency, it's the single most important thing. My professor went on for half an hour about it, there were internal studies showing users freak the fuck out if Google doesn't present results within K milliseconds.
They might get mad, but what are they going to do, not use the Internet?
Gestures at literally every automotive infotainment system
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1d ago
Search engines are popular because they're fast and comprehensive, and AI summaries don't add anything to that.
Well, Gemini certainly doesn't.
But today, I can just ask frontier AI what a size of a given component for a particular year was and it'll just do that, and that's not something Google ever really did.
The smart guys who built the system knew that customers care about latency first
Since when do customers care about latency? Every button on any website takes like 5 seconds to resolve the action because every time you navigate you have to load 10 GB worth of JS libraries to align the text on the screen to the left.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1d ago
discourse should really be more aggressive, and adding a real life dueling section to the middle of public debates (with wax bullets of course) would be very kino
The modern form of this is dest1ny and the cultural meme of '1v1 me rust intervention only' more broadly.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
1d ago
I suspect some women don't have a lot of experience meeting this type IRL
I think it's just rare and a natural adaptation for there not being enough for those types for everyone.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
Ah, ok, I think I see it now. I thought that was MMM at first and simply missed the context clues from the post.
I do notice that the pairing appears to be highly masc/androgynous masc/actual girl, though, which is interesting. Seems like it's really convenient to have both a physical rock of the relationship, and then one who's more 'aligned' with the girl's other interests, yet also have them not be the same person.
It makes me suspect that there are a couple of possible attraction modes for the modal woman: one for physical dominance where it would be unattractive for them to worry about the alignment/feels stuff, and one for alignment/feels where it would be unattractive for them to worry about the physical stuff, where one man also serves as a stabilizing force for the other, or rather, isn't going to be turned off by the attribute that's unattractive to the woman. I get the distinct impression that trying to do both ends poorly.
And I see no indication why that wouldn't hold sexually as well, or even necessarily be unworkable in practice- though it does mode-lock the more andro male into a role that might not necessarily have been the most productive thing for them to do.
(And really, if there's only one objection I have to being in/trying to start a gay relationship with someone, it's this. Sure, I could lock myself into the physically dominant role, which is what he clearly requires of me to bother flirting back, but that's not where I get most of the joy out of a relationship... and so inevitably I'd end up doing the exact same threesome thing to do the emotion/build-up things I couldn't do with that partner, which from other experience is inevitably going to feel like cheating, because in truth it kind of is.)
My read on yaoi fangirls is that they're more aware of this dynamic than the general populace. Which, if it's written by more-aware-than-average women, seems correct, but falls short on productive ways to deal with that (other than explicitly form a polycule, which seems like a hyper-autistic solution to both recognize and resolve the cognitive dissonance about 'cheating' I described earlier... and evidence bears that out).
(As an aside, I notice that there are some women who sometimes aren't always aware of this, and get kind of confused when this 'threesome' dynamic asserts itself under certain conditions, because [if you only consider the existence of the physical dom position] the andro man is by that definition malfunctioning because there is no 'andro' role, so what is [in full context] male co-operation can only [from the first perspective] be observed as 2 doms fighting over the single position. Maybe men instinctively understand this dynamic better, but good luck getting them to tell you it exists.)
I don't know if this effect is symmetric or mirrored across to yuri fanboys or by extension MFF couplings. More research is clearly required.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
is that the accuser might wait until other accusations have been made for fear of not being believed.
That's horseshit in #currentYear, and every woman over the age of 10 knows that.
And yes, I do give intentionality to not going to the authorities right away- you can't gather evidence 50 years after the fact and I do not for a second buy "it would be traumatizing to have another person touch my [pp]" (it's just hiding behind Privilege and reserving the ability to do this for later). You either want it prosecuted (and signs of assault will be present only at that time as well), or you don't.
The "bunch of angry women claim a crime was committed 50 years ex post facto" is exhibit A for why a reasonable statute of limitations, especially for matters involving a negotiation between two or more parties (sex being the oldest example of this) is a requirement for a well-regulated society.
(And yes, it's kind of obvious that the gender, for who stability is by nature for granted, seeks to undermine that for everyone else whenever they enjoy the privilege to do so. When men have that privilege, they tend to front-load excessive punishments for similar reasons, which makes sense considering that stability is what men are in charge of providing.)
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
I mean, they do have sex to please other people; plenty of documented cases of that.
But that's why I consider it to not really be that unpleasant. Sure, maybe I'd rather be doing something else, but barring any other good ideas as to what else to do on a Friday night I might as well do the thing.
What did it cost, time and a bit of physical discomfort? (Sounds like work that I'm doing because I'm after the reward rather than because I enjoy the work, but then again, that's Type 2 vs. Type 1 in the sense of 'it would be nice to see from the summit' vs. 'hiking is fun enough on its own'.)
I grant that I'm not really the central example of how I "have" fun, but maybe there's a bit of anhedonia running in the background I'm taking advantage of that other people don't really experience. Or maybe I understand it better if we start from the assumption that what actually counts is some deep-seated excuse to not have to be in the driver's seat (or maybe compensate for being somewhat empty inside, or where most of my favorite things to do being inherently single-player with little room for other interaction requiring seeking activities I don't actually like on their own) as far as the experience goes, which from what I can gather is also more of a woman thing.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
But most people no longer Google, they just ask AI.
I will point out that, while guilty of this, I continue to be thankful the system can cite its sources. It's kind of the ultimate extension of the "just type your question into Google using natural language" thing that I've witnessed a bunch of, well, lower-tech users do back in the 2010s and its implications for searching a wide body of knowledge really should have been something Google was first to market with given that I believe this is what the typical user actually wants their computer to do.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
spuydjeks
You'll have to forgive me for not knowing the background: what exactly is this?
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
Type 2 activities are those that take some amount of effort to do and aren't actually pleasant in the moment, and less 'can't wait to repeat' and more 'this is kind of a drag, but it's pleasing to the other person/that's just how they function, so here we go again'.
Inherent narcissism does the rest- progs believe men simply don't get to require a woman do anything she doesn't want to, and trads are men who tend to forget to set up the conditions for sex to qualify as type 1 for his wife (or that women would even want sex in the first place).
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
I'd say sex itself can be that way, too.
Progressives claim that all type 2 sex is rape, because that is exactly how a maximally selfish woman acts in a relationship (she doesn't give a damn about pleasing her husband, or even if she does, she can't even understand that women's desires aren't the only ones that matter).
Traditionalists claim that type 2 sex is the only kind there is, because that is how a maximally selfish man acts in a relationship (he doesn't give a damn about pleasing his wife, or even if he does, he can't even understand that women can be pleased by sex).
Both are in perfect agreement that relationships do not involve love or commitment of any kind- it's purely a business transaction, sex-as-a-service. Which is why the edicts they issue, when either have the power to do so (currently, this is women), are always such destructive crap; they make it illegal to have a functioning relationship because they don't understand what that looks like, so they try to substitute for it the best they can with concepts like "consent".
It's all so tiresome. A good chunk of men complaining about this are only doing it because they just want to replace destructive female behavior with destructive male behavior without any recognition of why they failed so horribly the last time.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
Which is an odd thing to attempt, considering sororities have that reputation by default.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
2d ago
With what explanation?
Angry feminist regime butthurt they couldn't convict a semi-high-profile public figure for rape in a very similar case to this one. There's really no other charitable explanation other than Believe Wimminz.
Was there a recent case around that?
Just look up Jian Ghomeshi, you'll find it pretty quick.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
3d ago
Her sex was taken for granted, taken advantage of; they treated her like a piece of meat.
Well, no.
I get that it's kind of a meme for angry men (hereafter referred to as "traditionalists") to state this, because men (and especially the more trad ones) don't actually understand that a good chunk of the benefit for women is that they don't have to be in control to have the sex. "Vampired billionairely across the room" is a meme for a reason- it's someone you don't want to be in control of because the symbols that you're going to have a good time with this guy are already there.
(It doesn't need to be a stable time, it just needs to be sufficiently good. Employers hire this way all the time- they have the money, but no agency outside of their employees, so it's in effect the employees that dictate the direction the employer takes. The same dynamic applies to the statistically-average woman "hiring" the statistically-average man to give the prizes of labor in exchange for that sex, in this case drugs/a party/an invitation to what was understood to be basically a sex show at said party.)
"Consent" simply doesn't work the same way for doms/men as it does for subs/women; subs/women only really have the one option of "fuck this, I'm out" (for the same reason they can't send open-ended rejections as it's still a signal that they might be open to further pursuit with suitable improvement- it has to be completely unambiguous rejection and even that doesn't work all of the time.).
Doms have a much broader array of tools simply because the mating dance has "be able to be talked into, and then it just happening" as a primary feature of the selection on the part of the sub. That is the appeal of it; if the fanfics are to be believed, the lead-up to the sex is the overwhelming majority of the sexual pleasure.
This, of course, creates some unique liabilities (disease, pregnancy, being shamed by progressives for undermining their collective sexual bargaining) that it is perfectly reasonable on the side of the bottom woman to believe they weren't appropriately priced in at the time. And men that don't intentionally place themselves in that situation will never really realize that (generally because it's against their nature to do so).
The woman is now allowed to cry that this was rape, so she does, and the consequences after that are generally uninteresting power politics that have more to do with privilege of group actors than they do the woman herself.
The only way out I personally see is to deny that asking her consent is sufficient repayment for a woman's sex, and look down on men who attempt that. But that is a stance I was already happy to take.
I mean, thanks for acting as exhibit A for why a social conservative/traditionalist and a progressive are exactly the same, I guess? Though the irony there is that both of them treat women's sexuality as a tool and not as an end, though in truth both pretend as if they're on the side of women. (Much like classical liberalism and the sexual revolution do for men, at least when using a traditionalist/progressive lens.)
The rage is over men's, as a collective, perceived ability to dodge consequences for sex.
Again, something on which trads and progs agree; trads because they don't understand women, progs because they are paid a salary to intentionally misunderstand women.
But it is aggravated by any incident where a woman is forced to pay for sex while a man is not.
The woman paid for the drugs and the party with sex; the men paid for the sex with the drugs and the party. The woman is now trying to renegotiate that contract because she doesn't think those things served as sufficient payment even though she clearly believed they were at the time (and further text messages apparently corroborate this, which is why more progressive countries, like Canada, intentionally exclude those as exculpatory evidence).
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
3d ago
Not unable; perhaps as a refinement, 'recognizes and answers the meta-question'.
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
3d ago
But you contradict yourself:
Crimestop is designed to prevent a rational consideration of undesirable matter
the cow question, if pondered seriously, would most likely lead people to
become disgusted and more entrenched in the value of their current culture[the definition of crimestop]
The question is designed to get those kinds of people- the ones that have disgust-forward personalities and conventional morality (we're talking Kohlberg 3/4s)- to throw out the survey.
Crimestop by contraposition, if you will; this works because Kohlberg 3/4s see the behavior of 5/6s as indistinguishable from 1/2 and, by observing that they are quite literally morally superior, are emotionally protected from the cognitive dissonance that someone actually better would feel if they let their moral indignation get in the way of being able to answer the question.
See also: bell_curve_iq_meme.jpg (positions are 'answers question', 'noooo u can't that's disgusting and sacrilegious', 'answers question').
There used to be a time when resistance to the attempted assault was a precondition to criminal liability.
Well yeah, this is why certain religious texts have "if it took place in an area where people could hear her resisting" as a pre-condition for prosecuting rape. Feminists hate that because it's fair to men (while at the same time intentionally ignoring the fact that, if the act doesn't take place in a place where anyone could reasonably hear, it's treated as having been resisted by default).
Incidentally this is why I can't accept full consent-based morality without both a harm requirement and some social guardrails for individuals of 'reduced capacity.'
It's probably worth remembering that the people who came up with that in the first place were autistic/academic types (the same people who were advocating child sex 10 years prior, but that detail seems to have been conveniently forgotten). If you asked EA to be in charge of sexual morality, this is what they would do, because (as autists) they have no other workable protection from bad actors.
End of the day, even with your proposed high tech solutions, there will always be a 'mind reading' element b/c men are extremely motivated to seek out sexual contact and initiate the encounter whilst women, when their desire is inflamed, are ALSO motivated to seek sexual contact but to never, ever make that overt, or at least to rarely actually initiate it and always maintain some plausible deniability as to whether she wanted it or not right up until the event horizon is crossed.
It doesn't escape my notice that the 'consent' framework (as originally designed, not the modern perversion) is the kind of thing a sufficiently-intelligent little kid would design (or a classical liberal, but I repeat myself). In fact, said demographic tends to approach sex this way; why would they do otherwise, considering that 'mating dance' is not the information-gathering approach they're trained on and sexual activity at that point is more opportunistic fact-finding than adult pair bonding (because the subsystem for that isn't ready yet).
Consent's meant for a type of fact-finding that happens to carry certain novel risks (that's kind of why it's the legal standard for every other activity of this nature), while normal sex uniquely runs on pair-bonding- feminists are correct that the act of sex in truth extends to the way the 'mating dance' is conducted right up to the request to initiate it (their conclusions being entirely selfish doesn't diminish that). The fact that the former framework is easily hijacked such that "unaware of certain risks" could be set up to exclude women entirely was probably not considered in the analysis.
95% of the problems could be fixed by returning this sort of 'consent violation' to being the civil matter that it is (theft should probably be treated that way too, though it already is in practice- but this is unambiguously a privilege fight since men treat petty consent violation as seriously as women treat petty theft, so punishing one yet exempting the other is what you'd expect when one or the other gender is privileged).
ThisIsSin
Like a wild animal, the threat to our body was coming right for us
5d ago
You have limited slots of good-enough jobs for a huge population
We've already established these places are overpopulated relative to the available economic opportunity.
Absurdly wasteful education schemes are a religious rite. The youth have the 'youth' part of themselves sacrificed in exchange for a promise legitimizing the killing of anyone who flips the table.
I’d say it’s more like tryouts
I take the opposite view, where the genre (and its conventions) exist as a natural extension of how people subconsciously act -> it works because it inherently resonates. Categories for the (wo)man, and all that.
And sure, that's complicated by the lowest-effort to express, perhaps like love triangles are for het or yuri romance (such that I believe this is just something the typical man likes and that criticisms that it's "tropey" are more from people who have enough mental capacity to both notice that pattern and get bored of it), but if it works for most people in the target audience, then it's probably a signal about that audience.
Which is why it seems that a solution to that paradox is to spend effort abstracting that tendency into a symbol [of... attraction, acceptance, devotion, I... guess?] and move on (and so places where that abstraction breaks down re: 'mansplaining' are going to feel worse, since that abstraction is broken -> proof/meaningfulness of accepting it happens is not only denied and the person/group for whom that emotional work was done is now the exact thing denying its worth). Reminds me of how certain Christians approach God for what I'm pretty sure are the same reasons. (See also: notice me, senpai!)
If I recall correctly, the second quick pass of the given examples suggested it was the black one. The white one does have some signals of this (most stereotypically the glasses), but he also appears to be quite a bit larger and isn't usually doing the 'girly' thing in the linked example.
This is more trying to compare and contrast how straight men see MFF throuples in opposition to how [straight?] women see MMF throuples (I guess I could just read Ouran High School Host Club for a bunch of other examples that I remember even the show just outright stating, but anything other than MM non-twins aren't currently in scope and that's not really the only dynamic featured in there). Gender isn't a symmetric "object" so it's not just "the same thing but flipped" should you examine it in front of a mirror, so to speak (for instance, men and women both might find opposite-sex-twins-on-self-insert hot, but I don't get the impression that men are attracted to the cascade of background of emotional connection leading up to whatever it is they're doing that women seem to be), or rather, examining "what lines up with what" seems to me to be the wrong tool with which to examine the question.
Yet you still seem to require some background awareness of it, especially when you're trying to flirt with someone who doesn't know that. And then that background awareness colors every other interaction (even when it's not meant that way).
For example,
Yeah, totally a mystery as to how that would be appealing to straight women at all- either of the two modes it's going to go into (which is either 'why yaoi has that name' or focused a lot more on the emotional side, which is something that isn't really found much in yuri made by men even though it's something I would naively expect from both sides of a lesbian relationship [but for different reasons in each participant]). Then again, I'm also aware that lesbians are very unusual, so...
More options
Context Copy link