coffee_enjoyer
☕️
No bio...
User ID: 541
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
5d ago
It’s possible they are lying on their self-reports, but this study shows mate desirability falls when either male or female participants know the number of partners of a prospective match. Maybe there’s a better study somewhere. In the case of Alex Cooper, she is famous and worth $60 million dollars. Many men will look past flaws for fame and fortune.
I’m more confused why the FreePress is running this piece. I thought this was a conservative mag? Is it not anymore?
This could plausibly be explained by genes, as the selection event that filtered Normal Irish into Traveler Irish would have selected for the most antisocial Irishman. If Cromwell’s invasion caused many Irish to be homeless, and this is the event which triggered the formation of the traveler community, which type of Irishman decided to continue living itinerantly post-upheaval? Which decided to continue this way of life over the centuries? Those who were made homeless but who were prosocial didn’t stay homeless; those who were prosocial yet born into the community would have left (throughout the 18th century). So there’s a plausible genetic mechanism by which [make most of the Irish homeless] followed by [select those who continue being homeless after a decade] would have selected for the uniquely antisocial. All that’s left would be [let the prosocial born in the community leave], which didn’t happen in the 20th century but could have in the 18th and 19th, followed by [let the most antisocial have the most children]. If the itinerant lifestyle selects for antisocial genes because the most antisocial traveler can steal the most goods and thus afford the healthier children, then we can maybe work out a genetic explanation. In the same way, the Gypsy community weeds out the most guilt-prone because they would be unable to inflict harm on another human without emotional distress via the daily scheming grind. Something something pitbulls and golden retrievers.
We could also have to look at what the normal Irish were doing 18th-21st century. Were they weeding out their antisocial by imprisoning and executing “their own”, while the travelers were simply fleeing with their criminals in tow? This would also elucidate a genetic divergence etiology
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
6d ago
Replying under myself to make an additional point: should it not in theory be easy to stop this behavior while retaining the basic structure of capitalism?
-
jail time for infractors and the expropriation of all of their wealth and property. Like, actual punishments. Why are we not actually punishing these people.
-
multi-million dollar payouts to whistleblowers, plus national honors. Place their portraits in the White House, they are model citizens.
-
a government program that sends out mailers and emails to every vendor in the country, asking them about their experiences with services in exchange for a small payment for their time (this is to know where to investigate)
-
Use AI to determine which industries should be lowering their prices (but are in an unspoken agreement not to), and then force them to or tax them
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
6d ago
In the real world the consumer has no idea what price he could be getting without the corrupt tactics employed by Amazon. He has no idea that Amazon was secretly increasing prices. He has no reason to think that this was in the realm of possibility, and would assume that there were laws against price-fixing. He would have no reason to know any of this was happening, because the lawsuit showing this was only publicized last month.
For years, Amazon has reached out to its vendors and instructed them to increase retail prices on competitors’ websites, threatening dire consequences if vendors do not comply. Vendors, bullied by Amazon’s overwhelming bargaining leverage and fearing punishment, agree to raise prices on competitors’ websites, or to remove products from competing websites altogether. This price fixing scheme typically begins with Amazon demanding that vendors “fix,” “correct,” “increase,” “raise,” or “look into” the prices of products on other retailers’ websites. These directives to vendors are backed by the threat of significant penalties for failure to comply — ranging from advertising and promotion restrictions, to demands for financial compensation, to the removal of vendors’ products from Amazon.
These memes were a way to very subtly attack the political culture of the period. Because the basis of the meme was, “we are going to pretend that this gorilla was just as important as whatever supposed human tragedy we see on the news”. That’s what made it funny. The memes were not about caring for Harambe, but the idea that you are treating a gorilla like a globally newsworthy martyr like Michael Brown.
More options
Context Copy link