coffee_enjoyer
☕️
No bio...
User ID: 541
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
18hr ago
The reason to hide the real cause of death would be: to not alarm the public; to not accelerate a hot war with China; and lastly, to not make your own priceless talent fearful of working on government projects
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
is the recent spate of deaths among American and Chinese scientists the beginning of a -hot- warm war with China?
From Newsweek: Chinese Scientists Have Been Dying Mysterious Deaths Too
The star of China's booming artificial intelligence defense sector had been working on Taiwan invasion scenarios—until he died in an unexplained car crash in the early hours of the morning in Beijing, aged just 38.
Many questions remain over the July 1, 2023 death of Feng Yanghe, a professor at the National University of Defense Technology, who had won national competitions with his pioneering "War Skull" platform. Such as, why did an obituary in the state-run science news website, Sciencenet .cn, say he was "sacrificed"? Why was the brilliant scientist from Gansu province buried in a special cemetery in Beijing for the Communist Party elite, state heroes, and revolutionary martyrs?
The phenomenon mirrors the wave of disappearances or deaths among American scientists that is now being investigated by Washington. In the U.S, there have been 11 cases, in China at least nine. It's prompted a disturbing question among some military analysts: Is there a silent "scientist war" going on?
”Feng was a mastermind behind AI simulations of potential Taiwan scenarios and it's very odd that the accident happened in the middle of the night," said an experienced researcher of the Chinese military who works at a Western think tank and who has been monitoring the situation.
The author is a senior reporter for Newsweek, with publications in the NYT and some other major publications. She is also a former senior fellow in the Asia Program at the German Council on Foreign Relations and a nonresident senior fellow in the Atlantic Council’s Global China Hub. Not a crackpot contributor as might be expected from the insane premise! She seems to have connections within the Chinese circle of influence.
If there’s really a tit for tat of targetting each other’s scientists, then I think our immigration policy will prove to be a grave mistake. There are 265,000 Chinese students in America, and probably hundreds of thousands of Chinese who own or work in the huge nationwide Chinese restaurant industry. The CCP would be able to place agents around America with complete ease. America would have a difficult time doing the same. We saw recently in Iran how effective it is to place drones around an enemy country, and Iranians were so afraid of threats from their immigrant community that they deported 1.5 million Afghans.
This theory would explain why America has had disappearances and not just deaths:
Also missing is William Neil McCasland, a retired Air Force major general, who hasn’t been seen since he walked out of his Albuquerque, New Mexico, home on February 27, leaving behind his phone, prescription glasses and wearable devices […] McCasland was at the center of some of the Pentagon’s most advanced aerospace research and once commanded the Air Force Research Laboratory at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. Months after the 68-year-old went missing, officials still can’t say where he went, why he left or whether someone else was involved.
The above sounds to me like a VIP being escorted to a safe area where he can’t possibly be targeted, hence the leaving behind of electronics.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1d ago
IMO, (2) is not really going to move the needle wrt birth rates / relationship rates. The sociological finding that women prefer a higher status male is robust. Whether the man is unemployed or whether the man is doing drywall is not going to make much of a difference. (And yeah, being very beautiful or very charismatic will negate the negative occupational status effect, but if we want to fix an entire national trend, we have to think realistically about the statistically normal case). And the finding is really about status and not work per se. In every city there are deadbeat arts types or popular social media figures who make no money but have their choice over women in finance. That’s because their status is higher. Or in Haredi culture, women are expected to work and men are expected to study all day, but the men have innately higher status than the women + studying is high status, so women don’t mind it. This is not so in American culture. Women believe they are higher status than men as a default, and many of them believe that typically-male beliefs are low status (ie conservatism). The easiest fix to this is literally just to prevent them from working in high status occupations. That’s easy in the “fix everything button” sense, but difficult in the “and who will bell the cat” sense.
The US can pack up and go home if they offer Iran genuine compensation. We can take off sanctions, pay back the damage we caused, give them loans, open up our markets to their saffron and other products, allow a certain number of scholarships for their students… there are hundreds of creative solutions we can devise that will convince them to open up the strait. The problem is, per Joe Kent, the Israelis needs to be “reigned in”. Right now, America can’t actually be trusted, because of the free reign that Israel has over Trump. So the compensation we provide has to involve genuine “costly signals” of our good faith. So the deal could include reducing the extent of our relationship with Israel, signing a real treaty with Iran, etc. Is any of this likely under Trump? No, I don’t think it’s likely at all, because of his pride. But getting the strait opened isn’t some Herculean task.
Iran commits piracy and extortion
They are obtaining compensation and deterrence against a country that wants to destroy their civilization, kill all of their leaders, kill all their negotiators, kill all of their scientists, and thinks it’s okay to kill 100 students and then pretend it was Iran that did it. They are in a fight against a force that represents, like, a Disney villian rendition of pure evil as personified by Trump. At this point he is like the personification of greed, corruption, and the shadowy underworld (Epstein). And most of the world sees this, which is why they aren’t helping America but actually doing what they can to obstruct their efforts (closing down airspace etc)
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2d ago
That whole BAPsphere, as far as I can tell, hasn’t done a single positive thing for advancing the Right. The closest they’ve come is creating an online bookseller, but it’s not the 1960s and ideology is no longer disseminated by written material.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2d ago
Effective altruism is most interested in the formulation of rulings which permit the outsourcing of compassion to rationality altogether, so that the correct moral choice can always be made without the evolved intermediary emotion of empathy, which never has to be consulted and thus can fade out of human phenomenology altogether. This leads to endless quibbling over whether we should donate most of our money to shrimp welfare or to African malaria nets. An issue with this legalism is that compassion is an instinct, an evolved emotional reflex rather than a “strain’d” rationality. There is no human instinct to allocate compassionate concern based upon abstract calculations involving shrimp farms we have never seen. A genetically compassionate person will help the unfixable homeless vagrant for the umpteenth even though it is irrational because his instinct compels this response to suffering per its evolved utility, when healing a visibly hurt tribe-member aided the reproduction of the giver. In the EA dystopia, the bleeding heart compassionoid is sidelined (receiving little status) so that the bleeding brain rationoid can “produce the most good” through his sheer intellectual output alone, no feelings required, indeed feelings only getting in the way. But what happens if you select for such legalistic rationalists, these Alt-Man entities, who can memorize and answer the correct decisions without any feelings behind the curtain? What happens over time? You will eventually find that there are fewer people around who have the instinct for compassion, and they will apply the same legalistic thinking to things that have no basis in human welfare, and will demand a pound of flesh because that is the law and the law should be followed because the law is intellectual and the first principles, and there’s no instinct or ambient social valuation which pops up to feel disgusted at a first principle which makes no sense (like giving all your charity to shrimp).
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
2d ago
It’s at best highly speculative that you could bribe Sudan to stop their civil war, whereas it’s obviously correct that we could have withheld our alliance to Israel (and threatened sanctions) and thus stopped the mass starvation of children. Also, America allocated 300mil to famine relief in Sudan
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3d ago
Do you mean by being the world police? I don’t think the progressives upset about world events want American soldiers to police these places, they just don’t want America to throw their support and money behind them.
USAID found no evidence of that. AFAIK no evidence was ever presented to journalists or the public. No international organization has supported Israel’s claims. And note the infeasibility of Hamas members (20,000) stealing ~1 million unique aid packages daily or weekly in refugee camps monitored by drones with facial recognition software. Any widespread theft and redistribution would be trivially easy to record. And if this were happening, Israel would have gladly allowed aid simply to be able to target and track Hamas militants. The whole area is under constant surveillance by the most advanced aerial surveillance system in the world. Meanwhile you have prominent Israelis in Netanyau’s cabinet who have promoted the idea of starving them: Gallant, Smotrich, Ben-Gvir, Eliyahu, Katz.
This event is significant to the overarching question of whether the whole world holds a bias against the Jews or whether the Jews hold a bias against the whole world. Their most consistent historical stereotype is that they lack compassion for outside groups. You find this in Tacitus, in early Christians, in medieval writers, in Shakespeare. The basis of Western religion is the the split between the mercy-laden story of Christ bringing in outsiders and the hardness of heart of the Pharisees, the forebears of modern Rabbinical Judaism. The occupation of note in Jewish history is moneylending, something the Jews made impermissible to do to another Jew because “one should not swallow up the wealth of his friend without his [even] feeling it, until he finds his house empty of all good, as this is the way of interest, and the matter is well-known”. The most beautiful passage about mercy in the whole English language is literally someone trying to persuade a Jew to be merciful to an outsider:
PORTIA: Then must the Jew be merciful.
SHYLOCK: On what compulsion must I? tell me that.
PORTIA: The quality of mercy is not strain’d,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath: it is twice blest;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes:
’Tis mightiest in the mightiest: it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown;
His sceptre shows the force of temporal power,
The attribute to awe and majesty,
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings;
But mercy is above this sceptred sway;
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings,
It is an attribute to God himself;
And earthly power doth then show likest God’s
When mercy seasons justice. Therefore, Jew,
Though justice be thy plea, consider this,
That, in the course of justice, none of us
Should see salvation: we do pray for mercy;
And that same prayer doth teach us all to render
The deeds of mercy. I have spoke thus much
To mitigate the justice of thy plea;
Which if thou follow, this strict court of Venice
Must needs give sentence ‘gainst the merchant there
SHYLOCK: My deeds upon my head!
I crave the law, the penalty and forfeit of my bond.
So maybe there is a peculiar lack of compassion for outsiders in the Jewish worldview. This has explanatory power. If this is so, then it’s something they can work on in order to repair their reputation in the West globally.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3d ago
We can make reasonable extrapolations from this poll:
-
A family with limited food is not going to single out their youngest child to go without eating; the human instinct is to feed the youngest and most vulnerable. If children under 3 are going a full day without eating, then this is at minimum how long every child is going without eating. The youngest is who needs to eat the most frequently.
-
This poll wasn’t conducted on a day with a particularly limited amount of food, but sampled on a random day. This means they are continually going full days without eating.
-
Doctors who worked in Gaza have confirmed this: Mark Brauner, Tom Adamkiewicz, Nick Maynard, Joanne Perry. (These are the non-Muslim names).
Do you deny that this is starvation?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
3d ago
Polling indicated that 1 in 3 children in Gaza during the height of the blockade went full days without eating. There are 600,000 Gazans under 10 years old, meaning that 200,000 children were consciously starved by the Jewish State during the food blockaid.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
4d ago
The point of being vocal is to change something that you can affect in the world. Americans can’t affect humans rights abuses in Iran, Belarus, or Sudan. But we could have influenced the food embargo in Gaza and stopped a few hundreds of thousands of children from starving. That would have been cool.
I don’t recall anyone online saying a positive thing about that terror attack. I do remember, however, the posts about how the Rabbi who died had a habit of spamming X with calls of “Amalek”. (Amalek being the enemy of the Jewish people whom the Jews are mandated to blot out from existence, including the women and children). So, for instance, he often called the Hague Amalek, because the Hague was shown videos of IDF soldiers cheering the slogan “there are no uninvolved civilians [in Gaza]”, and I suppose he didn’t want the goyim to know that, so that made the Hague Amalek. Then he called them Amalek a couple other times, and in response to a video of a starving Palestinian woman who hadn’t eaten for five days, he simply called that AI. I think this sort of merciless disregard for the good of others does not engender the sort of sympathy normally allocated to victims of horrible tragedies, even though it was a tragedy all the same.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
4d ago
Young men are primarily motivated by sex and superiority over peers. In the new social media age (and I mean the new new one), attractiveness spells the difference between obtaining unlimited sex + positive female attention and being relentlessly bullied by anonymous strangers online. It is believed to be extremely important because it is extremely important. Social media is now about posting videos of your face online and yapping, so the stakes of facial attractiveness are enormous. If you ask a young man, “do you want lots of intercourse with the most attractive women in your vicinity, or do you want the more expensive PC / car / apartment / vacation”, they are going to choose the former option. That’s just the reality of young male biology. So they are making a rational choice based on the prevailing social conditions. This is exacerbated by: male fitness culture causing many males to judge other males with a homoerotic standard; rap music, which glorifies nothing other than sex and influence; changes in social media that reduce “peer checking” of behavior; shows like Euphoria or whatever else which glorify bad decisions.
the importance of balancing other skills and traits in order to achieve social success
That’s not really a thing at their age. They will suffer longterm consequences if they don’t focus on their career, but that will only impact them later down the road. You don’t actually need any skills to acquire the kind of social success than young men are chiefly interested in, which is sex and esteem from other men.
Is there a way to become as viral as Clav by doing pro-social things (so offering a viable competing worldview)?
You would have to join up with an insular social ecosystem: a very serious Mormon church, a mosque where the girls wear hijabs and niqabs, or convert to Modern Jewish Orthodoxy. Ask: does the ecosystem control sexual behavior through shame and guilt, and does it allocate esteem for prosociality?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
5d ago
If I have any amount of alcohol I can’t sleep, it gives me a stimulant effect for some reason. So I don’t drink except for the rarest extended family occasion.
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
5d ago
Those who insist that White people are natural “individualists” have no knowledge of the history and spirit of Europeans, and their inability to intuitively see their error should make you suspect of everything they say about cultural and political topics. I mean, you can pick any decade of Western history from before the late 19th century to see that White men have never construed their identity as individuals first and foremost, but as belonging to male organizations of civic, political, and religious natures — and that these comprised their whole identities, that they seldom had a thought of their individuality beyond collective affinities, and that they willingly and even joyfully gave their lives up for the interests of these collectives. Charitably, these people are using a definition of “individualist” that is so far removed from what any normal person would understand as to make its usage utterly worthless, like insisting on using the word “big” to refer to something small. Or perhaps most charitably, they are engaged in a psy-op to make you believe that White people are inherently slave atoms divorced from collective enthusiasm in a bid to make you a permanently powerless slave consumer, and they are doing this on purpose, and this is most charitable because it means they aren’t just incapable of perceiving the theory of mind behind any historical era. (Barring a few exceptions, like Emersonian Self-Reliance et al). I cannot understand how someone can read about the communist movements and fascist movements of the 20th century and come away with thinking, “oh yeah, this part of the world is individualist, they are chiefly interested in themselves”.
The tribes that White people have formed in history have been uniquely based on fraternity, or brotherly love. This separates them from the oriental whose tribes have been based on pure genetic similarity or submission to authority. Western men gathered to drink alcohol, distribute honors, and sing songs together; there is hardly a note in Chinese history of a volitional organization involving group singing like you find all throughout the West. This might be why people mistake them for “individualists”. But medieval guilds, Freemasons, Rosicrucians, monasteries, political alliances, communism, early Christianity, Greek mystery cults, fascism, etc etc were all about collective identity. White people are naturally collective-oriented, just like every other type of human. But their penchant has always been brotherhood, and especially brotherhoods based on just distribution of resources. Because, like many primates, if the leader of the primate band is hoarding resources we would very much like to form a coalition to destroy them. This is all natural, primitive. (In Christianity we wait joyfully for God to destroy them, while shaming them while they live.)
Anyway, the reason you do not have a tribe in Western culture is for the following reasons:
-
The psy-op that tricked you into including women in you social organizations, which immediately destroys the capacity for brotherly love by making everything about seducing whichever girl is prettiest. Absolute vibe-killer.
-
The psy-op to make you associate “brotherhood” and “collective purpose” and “glory and honor” with traumatic imagery from the holocaust
-
the psy-op to make you deferential to the rich, when the power behind social organizations has always been the loosening of resources from the wealthy, either through shaming them or honoring them for their endowments
-
the elimination of brotherly love from educational literature, unless it is portrayed negatively, like in a separate peace. Similarly, the elimination of coalition building in literature
-
The eradication of European patronage networks, where Patronage is the wellspring of social love. (Minorities of course can continue doing this)
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
6d ago
I don’t think anyone would think that this woman is Jewish; I assumed she was pure Anglo. These two examples were chosen because they were at the top of their respective competitive fields, while having a dishonest disposition, and it’s reasonable at this point to think that dishonesty is somewhat mediated by genes, probably via guiltproneness and neuroticism. Maybe she came to mind to me because her lover was a South Asian man. There are low-trust people in every culture, but not at the same frequency.
I think the female college-grad graph may be a little deceptive here. Now that getting a bachelors is the minimum expectation in America, we should expect the vast majority of able-bodied and healthy-minded women to pursue at least a bachelor’s. The non-degree holding cohort now has a higher rate of the unhealthy, physically or mentally. So what we’re seeing may not be a causal effect of education on marriage (“getting a degree now increases a woman’s chance of marriage”) as much as a selection effect where all the previously marriageable women are now getting degrees (and would have been married without the degree). And I think it’s probable that these women would be more likely to be married had they not pursued degrees, or at least high status degrees, but that this is obfuscated because of the selection effect in who is receiving degrees.
I also don’t think a cohort of women born in 1980 will tell us about the recent (and ongoing) shift to put as many women in high status professions as we can fit. That really took off post-2008 and, iirc, peaked around the 2010s and MeToo. It’s one thing for a woman’s status to increase upon getting a BS in anthropology and going into debt, another to be doubling their proportion of finance internships and other such things in the past 20 years. That will have a huge effect that we can’t see in the 1980 birth cohort.
Lately, I just saw that this was published online today, and it addresses some of the problem from an Ev Psych approach: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/politics-and-the-life-sciences/article/toward-individualistic-reproduction-solving-the-fertility-crisis-could-require-a-further-marginalization-of-men/F26A4750B666344157278B72CFC5D223
It goes on and on; pretty enormous paper. I am partial to their analysis but not to their conclusions. They argue that we should maximize female single motherhood and reduce the stigma attached. In the coming years I imagine this will be a popular talking point.
More options
Context Copy link