cjet79
Anarcho Capitalist on moral grounds
Libertarian Minarchist on economic grounds
User ID: 124
cjet79
1yr ago
I think it's dumb.
I think suffering as a human emotion is an over rated experience.
I dislike that shared group suffering is a consistent cheat code for unlocking group cohesion. I was always suspicious of groups that employed this method to bond their underlings.
Certain levels of suffering and pain are my personal proof that a good god does not exist, and never existed with any amount of power over this universe. The suffering present by default in nature is horrific and often purposeless.
Worshipping suffering bring to mind goths that would cut themselves in highschool. Lauding it as a method for social cohesion makes me think that the person is bad at normal human connection and is looking for a cheat code.
cjet79
1yr ago
We maintain the ability to delete and edit top level posts for people to correct honest mistakes. I don't know why you deleted your previous top level post, but do not abuse that feature. If it is already under discussion, consider it out of your control.
Also this is a discussion forum for the culture war. Although jewish issues are often culture war related, it doesn't mean all jewish issues belong being discussed here. The main thread is mostly for current culture war issues. Historical analysis can be brought up in their own separate topic. These aren't hard and fast rules. But they are unspoken community expectations, which you managed to heavily violate (which is the reason for the large number of downvotes). I'd suggest more lurking in the future.
cjet79
1yr ago
I've been getting really into youtube music dives lately.
The artist Dax has stuck out to me: https://youtube.com/channel/UCvvVOIyaYu2l4jiH9L8_eRw
Its a mix of lyrical rap, themes of religion and struggle, and a tortured soul.
cjet79
1yr ago
cjet79
1yr ago
As I said: "I don't think this case illustrates that, but yes the government has been threatening for a while."
I think I posted the link as a response to another person. On mobile and can't check.
cjet79
1yr ago
I'm curious if she was actually a good friend of yours, or if the sexual tension had you more interested in her. Imagine her as a guy friend, and if you still feel it was a good friendship then maybe try to salvage it.
When I started realizing in college that many girls made for terrible friends I saved myself a lot of headaches. When I met my the woman that is now my wife, I had a mistaken impression that she was already married/taken. She was fun and interesting though and I continued to hangout with her in the same way I'd want to continue hanging out with a guy that is fun and interesting.
I also had a friend in college that I really liked talking and hanging out with. I asked her in kinda the same way you did, but in person. She said she just wanted to stay friends and not be anything more. We never talked again. It was a bummer, but it only had me feeling down for a few days.
Sexual attraction is kinda weird. I'm not entirely sure how it works for women or for men. There are some people that seem to figure out their own version of sexual magnetism. As a guy you need to work yours out. And be careful not to go after the super magnets among the women. There are some women that seem to attract a disproportionate amount of men. My sister is one of these women, she was never single for more than a month since 6th grade. It was mainly a defense mechanism for her, she just got constantly hit on by guys around her if she was single.
Find a girl the other guys don't notice. Friends of the magnet girls are a good pick. Then find your own sexual magnetism and see if some attraction occurs.
cjet79
1yr ago
The effects of regulation are usually discreet, not continuous. The pre 1970 decline in fatalities is also discreet. This suggests regulation was not the cause.
There are also known mechanisms for the continuous improvements in worker safety in the market. These market safety improvements will be tied with the general price of labor.
I'd expect regulations to have noticeable and discreet effects within an industry. But it is unlikely to show up on the overall graph of workplace fatalities.
cjet79
1yr ago
I tagged him in the original mod comment to let them know that the antagonism was noticed and not appreciated. But I also couldn't tell that he specifically meant to call you a moron. He called Canadians morons, and often when I see people doing that they are often talking about the people in the government of that country. That seemed like it was potentially the case here.
Your phrasing was more of a problem than the thrust of your criticism.
(BTW one of the most consistently annoying aspects of conversations with you is your tendency to veer off the main point to nitpick things like calling an Interpol Red Listing (or whatever they call it) a warrant -- if you are going to do that you should at least take pains not to refer to it that way yourself at other times)
Switched to:
(I've noticed in conversations with you, that you have a tendency to veer off the main point to nitpick things like calling an Interpol Red Listing (or whatever they call it) a warrant -- I'm going to try and ignore all of these nitpicks unless I can see how it clearly relates to the main discussion.)
cjet79
1yr ago
You didn't answer the question.
...
BTW one of the most consistently annoying aspects of conversations with you
cjet79
1yr ago
@jkf If you find @Gdanning annoying you should either not engage, or engage in a non-antagonistic manner.
Gdanning made the antagonistic comment about Canadians, but otherwise backed off and only addressed points about the argument.
@jkf you were antagonistic multiple times in a row, despite no escalation from gdanning. Consider this a warning.
cjet79
1yr ago
You keep getting warned and banned for low effort antagonism. (8 mod actions, and looking through your post history, plenty of posts that get reported and left untouched) This post isn't an egregious example. But its another example in a long list of them.
Do you not know how you come across? Or do you know and don't care? I suppose that is a rhetorical question. If you can't learn we will head towards a perma-ban eventually. If you don't care to learn then maybe the motivation hasn't been sufficient up until now.
I'll give you ten day ban to lurk and read more. Hopefully that will provide either the motivation, or the space to learn what behaviors we don't like.
cjet79
1yr ago
If the government were using or even threatening to use legislation or the courts to attack or compel the company, than sure.
Which is what they were doing and why the Biden administration has been forced by a court to stop talking to social media companies.
I don't think this case illustrates that, but yes the government has been threatening for a while.
cjet79
1yr ago
I've often wondered how much sheer productivity is wasted at large institutions.
The larger the org I've worked for the more my day is filled with stuff and the less I actually do. Current organization I work for is about 40 people. But Ive built two new websites for them, launched a UI refresh of the original website, done a large data migration on the backend, and imported a bunch of papers and book meta data onto the website that I then linked to other people in the org. That was all in about a year, averaging maybe 10 hours a week of work.
Meanwhile at large organizations I programmed at I'd maybe get a dozen website pages built in the same amount of time. Averaging 35 hour weeks
cjet79
1yr ago
it would be a stronger claim to say elon is the smartest person in the world than not, no? to say he is the smartest necessitates a higher burden of proof.
Did anyone say that? I'm genuinely curious. Every discussion I've seen so far is just whether he is hella smart (99.99), very smart (99.9), or just smart (99).
99.9 percentile doesn't make you the smartest in the world. It makes you the smartest out of a 1000 people. 99.99 percentile makes you the smartest out of 10000 people. Which means in the us population of 335m people there are about 33500 smarter than them.
Put a number on it. How smart do you think Elon is, percentile wise. For all I know you are saying the same thing as everyone else, but just not stating your numbers so you are all talking past one another.
cjet79
1yr ago
Agreed, the general area I live in is blue. The specific neighborhood I'm in leans red, or at least anti-woke. I learned that last year when there was a vote carried out to change our confederate street names, and it was 60-40 against changing them within the neighborhood.
cjet79
1yr ago
Those numbers all feel too small.
I would have phrased it like this:
Musk is clearly into the 99.5th percentile, if not 99.8th or 99.9th percentile. Is he 99.99th percentile like Sergei and Larry, or 99.999th like Bill Gates? Probably not.
Obviously when people say this they mean “compared to the average surgeon / investment banker / senior official at the State Department / STEM academic at a decent university”
Yes, and I think many of the people making the comparison live in a bubble with those people. So their idea of smart is so horribly skewed. If the range of your social circle is 98th percentile IQ up through 99.999th, then you are not going to be impressed by Musk even if he is objectively impressive. Any people in the jobs you mentioned probably have a social circle like that. I'd peg my personal social circle as 80th - 99.9th. With a few low outliers with lovely souls.
cjet79
1yr ago
I didn't mean to give the impression that street smarts don't exist. They do. There are smart people that can adapt to their environment.
I only wanted to point out that there are also dumb people out there that don't adapt well to any environment.
cjet79
1yr ago
For top-level posts we would like users to avoid just posting a link to a longer story. This is a place for discussion, and a top level post should start the discussion.
We have this rule for multiple reasons:
- Link dropping can be a form of waging the culture war. People would just constantly drop links to the latest rage bait story about their outgroup.
- There are not an infinite number of interesting discussion topics. We don't want people racing to post the latest news, because it might crowd out a more thoughtful post. Once something has already been discussed once in a week people's interest tends to drop off a little.
- If you can't find anything interesting to say about a topic, it is more likely that no one else will either.
cjet79
1yr ago
I wish it was that simple. I really do.
I've been a moderator on /r/slatestarcodex and then /r/themotte. I also semi-moderate a few different real life non-profit thingies.
I'm also an anarcho-capitalist by philosophy, and a libertarian via practicality.
At the end of the day, censorship is a consumer demand, not a platform demand. After all, if you are a platform the easiest move is not to censor anything. But there are many things that will absolutely turn off users. Maybe those users suck, and they shouldn't be so picky. But I can guarantee that you, as a user, want at least one, and more likely all three of these things censored on the platforms you use:
- Child Porn.
- Gore and death.
- Spam.
Spam is really the trickiest though. One man's trash is another man's treasure. And one man's spam is another man's news. It is subjectivity all the way down on "spam". Because spam is ultimately just content you don't want, sent by people that want you to have the content.
cjet79
1yr ago
Opposite to my last advice (but coming from a dirtbag comedian): https://youtube.com/watch?v=gFeZswzWvnI&t=5636
his advice: there is nothing you can do to change their mind. Support them through whatever.
cjet79
1yr ago
The original limited liability corporations were private.
As long as government is enforcing contracts limited liability corps could exist anyways. Dutch merchants joined together to form expeditions to the East. Not all expeditions returned, but those that did made a ton of money.
cjet79
1yr ago
Income tax was originally only created for the ultra wealthy. It probably doesn't matter who the rule is targeted at right now, you can be pretty sure that it will apply to everyone within a decade.
And the ultra wealthy can afford to hire accountants and legal advisors to deal with the reporting rules. For everyone else it will be an additional burden to entry that makes business ownership and self employment more difficult.
I don't think the trade will be successful, they will wind up with both the suffering and the loneliness.
Men don't come back from combat and war and feel that they are no longer alone. They come back missing the level of camaraderie they had. Many of those same men went in relatively fine too.
No, plenty of things don't have a political slant. If it does have one it is probably an artifact of demographics. Whichever quadrant young men are in is going to be where this is at.
More options
Context Copy link