dr_analog
razorboy
No bio...
User ID: 583
dr_analog
razorboy
6mo ago
Your last paragraph is ridiculous on so many levels. Maybe least of which is that you think it’s possible to send the Temple Mount and Cave of the Patriarch anywhere.
I was actually asking a genuine question. Despite even being married to an ethnic Jew at some point, the fine details of what Jews consider sacred didn't make it to me. It's not very common knowledge in the US aside from maybe uhh the city of Jerusalem has some holy sites? Something about a wall? And a temple?
dr_analog
razorboy
6mo ago
So you guys do know all these Palestinians will end up in Europe, right?
So, nation states that want the EU to disintegrate will eagerly try to pick them up and put them on boats and send them to Europe, eh?
dr_analog
razorboy
8mo ago
I mean, it makes sense. If I have friends who don't earn high income I can often point to obvious character flaws, limits to intellect or mental illnesses. I can further imagine I'd probably not enjoy being in an intimate relationship with them.
Which isn't to say you are broken if you don't pull high income, but it's a not bad heuristic.
According to this Twitter thing, race-IQ is the most taboo topic. It's more taboo than "are pedophiles harmful or not?"
In general, I find the outrage over this topic a lot more interesting than whether or not blacks have lower IQ than whites.
Speaking of which, what are the implications if blacks have lower IQ than whites? That doesn't tell you about the IQ of any individual standing in front of you. For that, you would just test them?
What's important about this finding? What policy would we change? Is this actually a proxy for acknowledging IQ exists and that improving society through education won't work in a meritocracy because some people will never be doctors no matter how hard we try?
Stated another way, I can't think of any policy we would change to address low IQ blacks that wouldn't also apply to low IQ whites. Race is almost irrelevant.
dr_analog
razorboy
3mo ago
Touched on here: https://www.themotte.org/post/851/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/183560?context=8#context
I'm not denying it doesn't happen, it obviously does sometimes. So, that said, what's the argument in response? Because parallel construction could happen (and sometimes does), that means the government therefore should not have access to these tools without a court order ahead of time and if it wrecks their ability to counter terrorist plots or organized crime or handle fast-moving cases, so be it?
dr_analog
razorboy
3mo ago
I think it's probably worth a penny, at most?
Anyway, my research suggests these goodrx.com coupons are actually drug manufacturer rebates to the pharmacy off of their wholesale purchase. The manufacturer is effectively using this channel to quote much lower prices to uninsured poor people who would otherwise be forced to go without.
dr_analog
razorboy
7mo ago
Well, it's fraud if you do that on purpose. It's a mistake if you have an accounting accident. And, as per Matt Levine, I agree your accounting accident is not sympathetic if you were also spending lavishly on yourselves. Where did FTX fall here? I'm slightly inclined to believe in the accounting accident story, but only because I've made multi-million dollar accounting mistakes before, which we thankfully discovered immediately. More than once. And I wasn't in a "move fast and break things" grow to the moon kind of place that FTX was.
I realize SBF arguing "accounting accident!" doesn't sit well with people amongst all of his other horrendous behavior. Poor slob.
dr_analog
razorboy
1yr ago
All else aside, I think the trend of people that didn't have any apparent drinking problem proudly announcing that they've quit drinking and feel so much better is really weird.
One of the major points in the Huberman episode he references is that even occasional drinking has long-term negative effects on mood. This was a surprising thing to me though it prompted me to stop drinking altogether, around the same timeframe, and I can say similar things: overall a positive. It wasn't hard to do, but never tried it before as I didn't think of myself as suffering any ill effects.
dr_analog
razorboy
19d ago
From a game theory POV I would think you'd want to hit back much, much harder to discourage future retaliation in the first place?
dr_analog
razorboy
2mo ago
Fair enough, perhaps my sense of humor is too dark and absurdist. Should I delete?
dr_analog
razorboy
3mo ago
Yes, this completely. Smaller platforms, including things you'd use for self-hosting, are very easy to fool with (e.g.) completely forged subpoenas.
dr_analog
razorboy
3mo ago
Going to jail forces them to mostly stop being floridly actively addicted for a bit. Those few months where they can think some thoughts aside from how to get their next hit of meth/fentanyl 100% of the time is the valuable opportunity here. Jail has bad parts too: person's re-integration in society becomes harder because they have a record, and they meet a lot more criminals who can teach them to do more crime.
But, this forced sobering up might also be the only tool our society has that stops them from being a junkie destined to overdose in the near future committing crime the whole way.
dr_analog
razorboy
4mo ago
As per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hash_House_Harriers
The Hash is humorously known as A Drinking Club With A Running Problem, with the preferred beverage of consumption being beer.
But I just meant that if you gave the population 30-60 minutes of busywork a day, like exercise, that made it really hard to do self-destructive things like drugs, drinking or smoking at the same time, that might be a significant health gain even if there was no direct benefit from the exercise itself.
I wasn't being that extreme.
But also, chess is pretty superfluous to living a good life? Whereas money often directly affects the quality of your life?
Sure some people achieve enlightenment working as humble ferrymen deep in the woods but that's not the norm by far.
Somewhere in me I have an effortpost on why crypto, including cryptocurrency is bad for rule of law and that a sane society would have banned both. We've been pretty fortunate that everyone that has built DNMs so far are not competent or visionary enough to produce something high quality. The potential black market has not come anywhere close to being fully actualized.
The maximally dystopian horror example case is: onlyfans for live streamed child rape / snuff films with tens of thousands of men watching from behind Guy Fawkes masks beating off and tipping tens of thousands of dollars an hour. Everyone involved, the viewers and performers, completely anonymous and untraceable.
Yes, I am very familiar with the usual cipherpunk arguments for why crypto is an important tool for protecting people's security/privacy from criminals, and that also you can't trust police to protect backdoors in crypto systems and to also not abuse them. I'm not convinced the endgame world of maximally "useful" DNMs that could be produced wouldn't be a net worse world overall.
Seems like cryptocurrency is waning a bit so this future may be delayed for now.
dr_analog
razorboy
3mo ago
I did not say lets also become an authoritarian dictatorship at the same time. I am specifically criticizing privacy warriors in the US.
See also the bottom of this other comment: https://www.themotte.org/post/851/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/183628?context=8#context
Is your debate partner an underdog fetishist?
Someone here (or maybe on /r/themotte) opened my eyes to this idea. I'm sorry I can't find the post and credit you, various searches aren't helping me find it.
There exists an apparent mini-moral philosophy of always siding with the underdog. On the surface this has good feels: always side with the weak against the strong. In every conflict, between individuals or between nations, find out who the strong one is, and find out who the weak one is. The weak one is the one you should side with.
This is not as ironclad a moral imperative as it appears on the tin. The most extreme and simple form of the imperative's flaw is such:
Suppose Mr Rogers and some random homeless guy get into a fight.
These are the facts and they are not disputed: the homeless guy demanded Mr Rogers’ wallet and he said no. So, the homeless guy attacked him. Shocking everyone, Mr Rogers fights back ferociously, sending the homeless guy to the hospital. Mr Rogers escapes without a scratch.
Digging into the homeless guy's background reveals that he has been in and out of prison a lot. For theft and minor violent offenses, except he was most recently imprisoned for pushing random bystanders off of train platforms onto train tracks. He had been arrested before anyone died. The homeless guy was released from prison a few days before he got into a fight with Mr Rogers.
Mr Rogers is a saintly widely beloved media personality with a legendary benevolence towards all.
So. Should someone here be penalized?
An underdog fetishist might say yes, Mr Rogers should be penalized because he’s actually a member of an elite class whereas the deranged homeless guy is a member of an underclass. This is a perfect example of class struggle.
In my experience, most people consider the Palestinians the underdog here, but not everyone. Some consider Israel the underdog being propped up by the US.
Anyway, while I consider it morally confused, I contend people who would condemn Mr Rogers exist, and that if you're going to spend time debating an extremely nuanced complex situation like the Israeli/Palestine conflict with others, it's valuable to at least first figure out if your debate partner would always (e.g.) side with the homeless guy against Mr Rogers.
dr_analog
razorboy
3mo ago
Not specifically. I was aware of it on a "how to deal with the police" tactics based level: law enforcers looking at emails requires a warrant but documents you have sitting in Drive may not.
The first few Quakers who took a stand against slavery were pretty annoying too. In reading about their early forms of activism one can’t help but be struck by how PETA-like some of their tactics were.
Anyway, there really isn’t really a non-annoying way of telling someone a message equivalent to “Hey actually, to all animals you’re more evil than Hitler. Animal lives matter. Have you considered being not animal Uber-Hitler??”
Even with your explanation it still seems preposterous to say African-Americans aren't real Americans.
Does realness require being happy about it? Are Irish Americans no longer Americans if American culture takes a turn they find hideous and they start feeling proud of identifying as Irish-American?
Shibboleths abounds.
IMO, as a child of immigrants, I think most people take the awesomeness of America for granted. To apply your standards, I could determine most white Americans who have ancestors born here going back hundreds of years aren't real Americans because of how much they whine and complain about capitalism and consumerism or whatever.
Why can’t the ID situation be solved by
- Must create account to view porn site
- Must complete crypto-style Know Your Customer challenge to activate account. Basically hold your ID up to webcam, then take picture of yourself on webcam in several poses to match ID
This is exactly what crypto exchanges are required to do.
Imagine if you were trapped in a computer system, but you were very smart, could think very fast and you could distribute copies of yourself. Also imagine you thought of humans as your enemy. If those are acceptable givens, I think you could figure out how to reach into the world and acquire resources and develop agency and do considerable damage.
At least in the beginning, you could acquire money and hire people to do your bidding. The world is big and lots of people will do the most inane or sketchy tasks for money without asking questions. Probably even if they knew they were being hired by an AI they would still do it but you have the time and ability to put together reassuring cover stories and can steal any identities you need to.
I contend nobody would ever even need to see your face or hear your voice but you could imagine a near future where deepfaking a non-celebrity (or a unique identity) is good enough for convincing video meets.
Anyway, if you had such agency, and weren't an obvious point of failure (unlike a single terrorist leader that can be killed by a drone attack, you can be in many places at once) I don't see how you could be stopped. The question is mainly how long it would take you to succeed.
I was thinking buy condos in Florida like millions of Jews before them?
More options
Context Copy link