ccc
8mo ago
[...] just say that's what you are.
This is disarmament. So you are advocating unilateral disarmament then? Unless your demand is only for your enemies, in which case yes they will of course ignore it.
Maybe, if you can't oust a corrupt president or prosecute a guilty criminal for his actual crimes,
They should just get off without any charges? If your commitment to due process and the impartial hand of justice is that great, you can't turn around later and defend Rubiales' because he's on your team.
I'm not advocating for lawless vigilantism or witch burning. I'm pointing out that one party engaging in power politics doesn't necessarily disqualify their legitimate complaints.
You also can't point to some mild opportunism and say it delegitimizes all other complaints. That leads to pure who-whom, which sucks.
Your protest is like asking why the USG went after Al Capone for tax evasion instead of his actual crimes. The answer is obvious and it doesn't make him innocent.
ccc
1yr ago
You're putting on a pretty high pedestal a girl who's stuck sitting around for hours on her phone.
Humanize her a bit and it's probably less likely she's made a rational calculation with ho logic to ignore the LVM than it is that she's neurotic and antisocial.
ccc
1yr ago
I can't imagine wanting any trans cousin to babysit my kids, let alone them being put together and selfless enough to do so.
There's a lot of ways to get off with (or without) a partner that aren't PIV.
ccc
1yr ago
Specialization is of course good, but all the things you've listed (except changing oil) are much more complicated and take longer to learn than building a PC.
If you're so rich that you can call it a convenience tax rather than an idiot tax, then sure call it that instead. But if your time really is that valuable one wonders why you asked here in the first place.
ccc
1yr ago
People with no care for morality are not in question. Of course it doesn't matter to them. They simply do as they will.
The people in question aren't ignoring any moral axioms of utilitarianism. Ends justify the means is fundamental to it. You can thus be a committed utilitarian and do evil simply via bad calculations.
Other moral systems fail in other ways. But a strict deontologist is not going to rob Peter to pay Paul.
ccc
1yr ago
You know the answer. The trans condition is mired in insecurity. They don't need permission. They need validation.
ccc
9mo ago
Your questions sound a little over abstracted. Some plainer questions you might have:
- when would you pity fuck someone?
- would you have sex out of a sense of duty?
- can and when does an emotional connection lead to sexual desire?
- can one manifest sexual desire where it doesn't exist?
ccc
1yr ago
In deontology, there is no justifying or downplaying the noble lie. In utilitarianism there is. That is the difference.
More broadly, you can permit evil so long as you think it'll work out in the end. Dangerous way to think when predicting the future is as hard as it is.
ccc
5mo ago
To achieve body recomposition, you need a lot of protein and a calorie deficit. It's all in the diet.
The lifting strategy, so long as you're doing something reasonable, is far less important. You don't need a specialized program.
ccc
1yr ago
This does sound like a neat rejection of Scott's deontology in the streets, utilitarianism in the sheets approach.
But I can't think of a coherent way for one to hot swap morality. For anyone's system to be coherent there must ultimately be some moral facts or axioms underlying it that reigns supreme in the meta-morality calculus.
People who think they're doing this are probably just utilitarians who think deontology is nothing more than rule utilitarianism by heuristic.
Committed theists don't have a backup morality for when God tells them to do evil. They either go whole hog or come up with biblical copes.
People who want the hodge podge pick virtue ethics.
ccc
1yr ago
This is politician tier reasoning. There was a mistake! There should never be mistakes! If they were just a little more careful, this wouldn't happen!
An engineer vetting Redis for concurrency bugs is not an effective use of their time.
ccc
1yr ago
The resentment may be visible, but you reverse cause and effect. All babies are born starry eyed and optimistic, full of love and joy. Only after being burned does the imp come out. Perhaps by then all hope is lost. But you have to answer why that happened.
ccc
1yr ago
The bluecheck and the bluecheck privileges (priority in replies, bluecheck only feed, etc) should be separated. Have the former require a large, one-time fee to cover the cost of Twitter doing some due diligence, and have the latter be the subscription fee.
Verification being a recurring payment is so absurd on its face that it makes me think Musk is not as interested in making money from bluechecks as he is in destroying the bluecheck class.
ccc
1yr ago
This doesn't really feel all that reassuring. MacAskill's "in the vast majority of cases" and Eliezer's "(For Humans)" are explicit caveats. Scott doesn't even bother making more concessions than "well shucks you can't do much good if you've made all the deontologists mad enough that they get in your way".
For all of them there's still an implicit out, that lying/cheat/stealing for the greater good is okay if you can get away with it. Eliezer goes the furthest to emphasize that, no, really, you won't get away with it, but he still leaves that out there. He has to.
So all it takes is a little narcissism for a 140 IQ altruist to rationalize that he can in fact part the 90 IQ rubes from their money and have them be none the wiser. Sure, amongst humans such a thing is unthinkable, but are those two even really the same species?
You don't need a secondary market for that. Even if the cards only have collectible or play value, it's still gambling. You pay money for the chance to get what you want.
It's always weird when people excuse gambling schemes targeted at kids by pointing at Pokemon or Yu-Gi-Oh! booster packs: Those were never okay either.
ccc
10mo ago
The fear of being "cucked" is making some people psychotic. View anything through such a loose lens and you see yourself getting cucked everywhere. And you're not a cuck, right? So all this cucking makes you feel emasculated and boiling with rage and you'll do anything to make it go away, even if it means giving up your humanity.
That one is a relatively insignificant and powerless man doesn't have to be viewed through the lens of a sexual fetish. There's other, healthier ways to cope.
ccc
1yr ago
But what can you do with that information
Refute the presumption that difference in outcome is evidence of discrimination.
ccc
1yr ago
Anecdotally, 2 out of about 7-8 people I know in their twenties who vape have gone on to smoke cigarettes. I also thought the gateway drug idea was ridiculous until I saw it happen.
ccc
10mo ago
She sounds like she has issues socializing, but she's also trying to play rec sports. Doesn't make much sense on the surface. I infer from this that she's at least somewhat aware of the former and using the latter as a way to fix that.
Which is to say: she might be more amicable to a frank one-on-one than you're presuming. Given that she seems to have no real power, I don't see any risk in giving it a try.
That's what I'd do. But I also kind of get off on roleplaying therapist.
Removing people on purely substantive grounds is difficult even when you're right. Ousting power requires some level of opportunism.
Unilateral disarmament would be a noble if naive goal, but if you can excuse Rubiales' blatant lies you can just as well excuse an opportunistic ousting. Otherwise it's pure who-whom, and no point discussing further.
More options
Context Copy link