cjet79
Anarcho Capitalist on moral grounds
Libertarian Minarchist on economic grounds
User ID: 124
cjet79
1d ago
Interesting.
The graph does imply that up to four previous partners is fine. That seems like a safe number to me too.
I didn't realize I'd be in the manwhore category, depending on what counts as previous partners I've had between 5 (just counting long term girlfriends) and a few dozen (counting anything).
I'm very satisfied with my wife. I think I would have been far less satisfied with any of my previous girlfriends (which is why I broke up with them). I did learn things from those relationships that have definitely made me a better husband. I'm not sure I would have been able to woo my now wife, keep her as a girlfriend, take the leap to propose to her, or stay monogamous and in love during marriage. There are specific lessons I learned from previous relationships to help me through each of those stages.
Maybe other people learn faster than me, or know not to make certain mistakes in the first place. I was an idiot that required some learning.
It was absolutely a time and resource hog, but I don't really know what else would be worth spending my time and resources on. My free time would have been eaten up with playing video games, watching comedy, and arguing with people online. And those things are fun, but not fulfilling.
cjet79
1d ago
The market solution in this case is just "wait out the conflict". Ships sitting in port isn't free but it's a lot cheaper than insuring against a full loss or calling in protection for the ship.
It's unclear to me how long Iran will be willing and able to sling missiles and drones at its neighbors. I would think that the "wait it out solution" implies an expectation by the market in a short conflict.
cjet79
2d ago
But you've forgotten the most persuasive reason to do space colonization, which is to move all gain of function research offworld and to a place we can easily glass without harming any civilians.
I like this reason. But it will become moot when the next super virus starts on the space station wet market, because a vendor was selling space raised pangolin meat.
cjet79
2d ago
Ya my effort goes down as the thread gets deeper. I try and make my points at the higher level.
I don't know what MIC stands for
cjet79
2d ago
Microwave cooking for one review this was posted over on /r/slatestarcodex. fun quick read
cjet79
3d ago
It's not clear that mammals can even reproduce in low gravity environments
China just recently sent a mouse to a space station, returned the mouse and the mouse has had three healthy litters. So the radiation is at least survivable. But I agree that we don't know for sure.
Keeping an astronaut on the ISS costs about $1M/astronaut per day.
I'm curious how you got this number. When I search for the costs I found reports that private astronaut life support and food supplies can cost about about $35k per day.
The cost of a NASA astronaut on board the ISS might be much higher from a government accounting perspective, because each astronaut is generally supported by a team of people on the ground monitoring and directing them. Its like difference between the cost of an individual owning and operating a car vs the cost of having a Nascar team, where the driver is only a small portion of the overall cost.
I do hope we colonize space, but it does seem absolutely daunting and with minimal reward right now. Any potential payoff is maybe centuries away from when you start trying. This is just one of those projects where I'm less bothered when I see money being "wasted" on it.
cjet79
3d ago
The advice of planning to have multiple partners strikes me as directionally correct for most men. I made some mistakes with girlfriends and women in my formative years. Those mistakes have not followed me cuz things ended with those women. I also had to learn some things about women that just can't be taught. Or at least I was too dumb to be taught those things. The degree of female emotional attachment that comes with sex was hard for me to understand. I definitely hurt some people before I figured that out.
Planning to be a man-whore and rack up a body count seems like taking it too far. Sometimes the red pillers feel like a cargo cult for relationships. They seem to understand the pre-requisites, but have weird beliefs about why those things are pre-requisites.
cjet79
3d ago
Doesn't serve the needs of the generals that want a hot war for promotions. Or the deep state actors that pleasure themselves playing puppet master.
If the people capable of pulling strings and getting America dragged into a hot war, the corporate money makers seem least in control. They are happy to benefit and will make sure the wealth gets shared around, but it's not them alone causing this.
cjet79
3d ago
I'm not seeing much discussion of what would have been a dominant explanation two decades ago: the military industrial complex.
There are companies, deep state actors, and military generals that are more than happy to start a hot war with Iran anyone even if the strategic consequences for the US are negative.
They want to test their latest toys and inventions. And while Ukraine gave them opportunities to test close range weapons (close by modern standards). Iran lets them test long range attacks and defense.
Of course this explanation for getting into the war sounds even worse than "we are Israel's bitch". Trump is usually willing to get up there on the podium and try to sell his policies, even if they are unpopular. I think most politicians would try to justify what is happening even if they didn't have control, because criticizing what is happening proves you don't have control of it. Trump is possibly just throwing a subordinate at this unpleasant job rather than doing it himself.
For the military industrial complex people that could drag the US into this war, making the civilian arm of the government that they don't get along with look bad is just a double win.
cjet79
3d ago
I think there are generally two types of bullying.
The psychopath / thug. They pick on weak targets and torment them for laughs, or because their social in-group has made cruelty into a status boosting activity.
And social jockeying. Where people are in a competitive social environment, and one way to get on top is to put your rivals down beneath you.
I think the useful type of bullying is the social jockeying. Since the bully is often amplifying and signal boosting the social mistakes of the bullied person.
Hollywood loves to portray the psychopath style bullies, and such bullies are the least sympathetic figures, so they just attach whatever characteristics that they want to denigrate to the bully. I have asked around before and not everyone had the psychopath/thug at their school, but enough did that I don't think it's just a fake invention of Hollywood.
cjet79
6d ago
Cooking
Looking for some delicious meals to make for family. But upgrading easy meals seems to have more bang for the buck than making hard meals. For example: fish tacos.
Caesar salad kit from the grocery store. Frozen fish sticks. Tortillas. Combine them and they make acceptable fish tacos. My girls won't eat those fish tacos, but they will eat fish sticks with their chosen sauce, and Caesar salad.
Anyone have any similar food hacks?
cjet79
6d ago
Depends on how identifiable you are. Most likely scenario is that your are identifiable and nothing can allow you to take the money and run.
In the unlikely case that you are unidentifiable you take some gold and run. If you get caught quickly you plead that you were threatened to take the gold to a second location. If you do not get caught immediately, take the gold, learn some gold smithing online, craft some crappy gold jewelry and pawn it off over time.
Better money making scenario is that you sue the bank for damages for your hostage situation. They will maybe settle with you for more than you could steal.
cjet79
7d ago
I've heard "cocktail" colloquially mean 'a heavy alcoholic drink that you sip'. But I mostly agree with your definition. I'd just say I'm having a drink if it's basically straight liquor.
What's interesting to me is your colloquial definition of alcoholic. I'm unsure how much of an alcoholic someone is if they only have one drink a night and just leave it at that. I'd be putting myself on the back of I just stuck to one drink every night.
Me, both my parents, and quite a few of my friends would all be "alcoholics" to you I think.
To me the measure of an alcoholic is how quickly drinking alcohol destroys their life. For some people that is just a single night, they are an alcoholic. For most people it's over thirty to fifty years due to cumulative health and liver damage, I don't think those people are alcoholics. I think the line is somewhere around 5 years.
cjet79
7d ago
There is a discord server for dev related stuff, they've been discussing it there. https://discord.gg/B27YxpXRE
Basically performance issues from bots trying to scrape the whole site
cjet79
7d ago
I've long made the comparison between "gender" and titles. I think it was one of my early moderator stances on slatestarcodex.
Butchering someone's title intentionally does seem like a mark of disrespect. But insisting someone else use a title is a form of social domination. "President" is a title as well.
Disrespect: Former reality TV star Donald Trump gave the SOTU address.
Neutral: Donald Trump's SOTU address spoke on these topics...
Domination: Any news agency that does not refer to President Trump as President Trump in their articles will not be invited to the white house press corps briefings.
cjet79
7d ago
[list of channels]
I think the last time I watched any of these was over a decade ago, many of them two decades.
Buying up news and media properties does seem to be the cool thing for billionaires to do these days. Musk bought twitter, Bezos bought the Washington Post, Rupert Murdoch was ahead of the curve owning Fox. Now Ellison gets some of the crappy leftovers.
I'm honestly more worried that google owns YouTube and there are no major competitors to YouTube. There are singular YouTube channels that have more views than all of these media properties combined. And there are definitely many YouTube networks that reach similar viewership numbers.
cjet79
7d ago
The Machine has some funny over the top action comedy.
I also enjoyed the Deadpool films.
cjet79
7d ago
I got diagnosed with sleep apnea and have a CPAP machine. It's done wonders for my sleep quality.
It's good that the nasal strips work for you, my blockage is in the back of the throat.
If you have medical insurance it's worth getting checked out for sleep issues. There are some magical phrases you can look up that will allow a regular physician to recommend you to a specialist.
cjet79
10d ago
Can anyone explain the Mexico civil unrest to me? I know that a major cartel leader was killed, but why does that lead to widespread violence?
cjet79
10d ago
To be fair to AI I've fizzled out on a dozen or so stories after writing about 10k words.
I think there might be a hump at a that point where where story idea turns into story and I'm not sure it's easy for most people to pass.
cjet79
13d ago
The Superbowl is a big enough stage that it benefits artists to be on such a big platform. If I remember correctly the singers are not paid much for their performance. Their compensation is in exposure.
Your point basically reinforces that bad bunny was well compensated for the performance.
cjet79
15d ago
As I think about it more some of the confusion with the warrior/soldier distinction might be that soldier is a legal term and warrior is not. And almost no one is careful with their language.
cjet79
15d ago
I was composing a response while you posted this, but I think its still relevant for your comment:
https://www.themotte.org/post/3564/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/413729?context=8#context
cjet79
15d ago
I had quite a few responses talking about the definition of soldier vs warrior. So I'm responding to @Shrike, but this is also relevant to nearly everyone that responded to me: @gog, @Mantergeistmann, @PokerPirate, @Grant_us_eyes, @coffee_enjoyer, and @MadMonzer
I think the distinction between warrior and soldiers in my mind is where their capacity for violence comes from.
For a soldier the capacity for violence comes from without. They are trained and drilled repeatedly to enact violence. They are trained to obey orders to a fault, and when the order comes to enact violence they will obey. They'll need an ideology that allows for their violence to be righteous and correct. They will also form tight social bonds with those around them, and protecting them will also allow them to enact violence. When the war ends and they go home their problem will be PTSD. They may be haunted by the violence they enacted, or the violent situations they were placed in. But they can also put the war and the fighting behind them and live normal lives.
PokerPirate quotes a US military thing that I think perfectly describes a soldier's ethos, despite it being called a warrior ethos.
The United States Military Academy at Westpoint has literally been training artillery men to have a "warrior ethos" since forever. They define it as
I will always place the mission first.
I will never accept defeat.
I will never quit.
I will never leave a fallen comrade.
They will obey orders, regardless of how difficult, and they will maintain the group loyalty that allows an easy path to violence.
For a warrior the capacity for violence comes from within. Through either repeated exposure or personality compatibility they are fully capable of enacting interpersonal violence on others. When the war ends and they come home, their problem will be that they miss the excuse for violence. They will seek other excuses for violence. They will have trouble living normal lives, because the desire for interpersonal violence will spill out far more often.
I think within a modern military there is definitely a contingent of "warriors". You definitely want such men in special forces, or in any groups that see heavy close range combat repeatedly. But I still think that mainly what you want is men with a soldier's ethos. After all, a soldier's violence will always be pointed where you want it. A warrior's violence can be pointed anywhere they wish including up the command chain, or at civilians.
Too many warriors in a society is a bad thing. They end up as gang riddled or honor culture hell holes. Where young men are inculcated into violence and warriordom as soon as they get out of puberty. They'll fight each other for sure, but they'll also beat the snot out of all the women and kids around them as well.
I think these are useful and helpful definitions that point to clusters of ideas. It seems necessary to me to center the definitions around capacity for violence. Masculinity is its own thing, and women seem attracted to both soldiers and warriors. Being willing to enact change seems like the wrong definition for warrior, because I think its the tools that matter. The tool of a warrior is violence, the tools of a propagandist are ideas, both are willing to enact change but calling them both warriors seems to darken rather than enlighten.
PokerPirate's quote makes me think this is all just a semantic misunderstanding. If the US military and Pete Hegseth mean what I think of as "soldier" when they say they want a "warrior" ethos then I withdraw any objections. Words are important and I hate euphemism treadmills, but I've learned to stop arguing over such things.
I really honestly thought that the Murderbot series was making fun of leftists and that the show was too. I guess it was kind of a reverse Poe's Law situation where I read sincere views that seemed ridiculous to me as a satire of those views.
This is just more and more hilarious as I think back on the murderbot novels I read (a total of 5 of them i think).
One of the aspects of the setting is that the leftist little utopia planet gets to exist mostly because a larger capitalist/corportist system allows it to exist, and indirectly supports its existence. It has the same vibes as a small town deciding to be a little communist commune inside America. The town can survive with a totally anemic economy, because the rest of America is producing food and consumer products at such dirt cheap prices. The town only needs to export and trade a little to keep afloat.
The leftist planet utopia in the novels is in a very similar situation. They can't do anything complex without help from the corporate system. They want to explore a planet for a possible colonization effort. But they can't produce the spaceships to get there. They can't produce the surveying and survival equipment they need on the planet. And they can't produce the security they need while on the planet (they are so naive they aren't even aware enough to realize they need security). They are helpless kids being given expensive toys.
They are left alone on their planet not because they are strong enough to deter aggression, but because they are so poor and backwards that they have nothing worth stealing.
You went over some of the relationship stuff that happens in the novel. It has what I feel is an accurate level of interpersonal drama among sexually fluid and diverse crew (aka a lot of drama). And the main narrator of the story, the murderbot, sees all this drama as pointless and stupid, especially in the face of life-or-death stakes.
To me its a story about some incompetent leftists that are overly focused on pointless and stupid interpersonal drama that get saved by a hyper-competent corporate slave (and then in later novels its an ex-slave). If this is what passes for leftist literature, then maybe I need to go back through some of the stuff I've dismissed. Or maybe the lesson is that as long as the author says the correct things in interviews they can absolutely trash leftists with impunity (are we sure the author isn't a closeted pro-capitalist?).
More options
Context Copy link