dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
No bio...
User ID: 583
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
17hr ago
I just have no idea how much enshittification Microsoft can get away with due to lock in effect, and I don't think anyone does
A lot. Businesses will do anything to avoid migrating to a new platform. It is a tried and true business model for PE funds to buy platforms, fire the founder and quote contract renewals at some major proportion of each client's disposable income and they will just bend over and take it.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
23hr ago
At least one site claims the "Girls FTW!" email is fake and does not appear in the release.
Sounds nice. I live nowhere near Minneapolis and protestors have been teargassed twice three times this week. They keep trying to break into/smash up the federal building, which is in the middle of town and on the way to a lot of errands, so I've been pinging subreddits and the news every time I go out to see what's up.
Businesses were pressured to close on Friday out of "solidarity", a good number did, with others sheepishly putting up signs explaining they're staying open because their employees need a paycheck, in the hopes they would not end up on the 'supports MAGA' shitlist.
Checking up on last night's carnage, it seems counter protestors showed up, open carrying and each side was recording the other promising to expose them all on social media.
The terminally online mentally ill folks have broken containment, it's just not very evenly distributed yet.
Watching him write such incoherent slop to Chomsky and then reading his glazing replies is unbearable. Can't piss off the donor. Or turn down his offer to get a ride in his private jet.
Pinker was wrapped up in this too and I read his defense a few years ago and didn't really appreciate where he was coming from and thought he was just trying to distance himself.
The annoying irony is that I could never stand the guy [...]. Friends and colleagues described him to me as a quantitative genius and a scientific sophisticate, and they invited me to salons and coffee klatches at which he held court. But I found him to be a kibitzer and a dilettante — he would abruptly change the subject ADD style, dismiss an observation with an adolescent wisecrack, and privilege his own intuitions over systematic data. I think the dislike was mutual—according to a friend, he “voted me off the island,” presumably because he was sick of me trying to keep the conversation on track and correcting him when he shot off his mouth on topics he knew nothing about
Now that I'm much more familiar with Epsteinspew I completely get it.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
1d ago
Fair enough. I guess everyone would benefit from looksmaxxing before they do something heinous, but at the very least they should glow up their socials.
What's the difference? The intervention with the wife is so much more personal and less ad hoc than randos (hypothetically) calling up my employer and trying to get me fired?
That this is not just random Twitter psychopaths but otherwise normal friends of my wife becoming inhabited by Agent Smiths?
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
1d ago
Wow. I guess either he was more interested in the approval of his revolutionary homies, or just too mentally ill to reign it in.
You break healthy people and make them do worrying shit. This is why I think the left are the real Nazis. These are the people would be happily killing jews back in the day.
This is one of those cases where I would be tempted to gong the Godwin bell but I think you're circling something real.
I try to imagine what it would be like if Pretti was my son and I saw this first video. I would say "Son, what the fuck are you doing? You're going to get killed! Stop it!" I would have said the same to Good if she was my daughter and I saw her harassing police from her car.
I'm guessing Pretti's loved ones never quite saw this video. But the people around him knew. Did anyone say anything? Or did they just think of him as nothing but a foot soldier?
I consider it very dangerous to harass law enforcers in this way and I think this without believing they're The Gestapo! What's going through the mind of someone that believes they're murderous thugs looking for any excuse to drop someone yet they're still trying to provoke fights with them? And they have nobody by their side concerned enough for their safety to stop them?
It's so incredibly sad. And disturbing. And insane.
I'm trying to steelman this. Maybe they truly believe they're laying down their lives to stop innocents from being deported, and want their deaths to be a martyring spectacle. But why like this? It's so sloppy. Why not open fire on The Gestapos? Why not do more grandiose suicide by cop? Why this sloppy awkward dying on your knees shit during a chaotic scuffle? Or getting shot in your car kind of just awkwardly trying to speed away from an arrest? If you are truly expecting to die I could imagine a thousand better ways to go.
It's so confused. I think they sign up to take the risks but don't truly expect to die. As they die, I don't imagine they feel triumph, but rather regret.
Sometimes this meant bad results on individual cases. A sorta bad guy gets a decent offer because a really bad guy has trial scheduled the same day.
I don't understand the constrained resource here. Why do you go easier on the sorta bad guy because there's a really bad guy who has a trial scheduled the same day? Is it just exhausting to go maximally hard on both of them?
Why no similar feelings for Tyler Robinson, the guy who shot Charlie Kirk? Luigi Mangione packs court rooms with women who think he's dreamy. Tyler Robinson does not, nor does he even get a media air brushing.
Is it because Luigi obviously had sex with beautiful women, perhaps even threesomes, whereas Tyler was an apparent loser who could only hook up with trans women? Ick!
Let this be a lesson! If you're going to commit some high profile partisan violence, make sure you place tastefully brushed up pics of yourself all over your socials. Maybe also get some pics of yourself with cis women strippers.
"Third Way Liberalism"
whatever that means!
EDIT: apparently that means I match most closely with: Ezra Klein, Matt Yglesias, and Noah Smith
Fair!
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
2d ago
Because a good chunk of right-wingers are also crazy and evil, and I have received literal death threats. I don't feel particularly threatened by a few mentally ill cheeto-inhalers, but I am mindful that if the crazies are saying it directly, other people are thinking it, so I should not widen the attack surface.
Echoing this, I recently posted a deadpan joke right before the election and it was signal boosted by a right-wing influencer, essentially calling me a vile democrat and many people took it seriouisly. People found my phone number and I started getting phone calls threatening me to delete the tweet if I know what's good for me (and I'm sure a bunch of people who share my name also started getting them, not knowing what the fuck was going on).
I was being followed around the internet for a bit. All of my content was starting to collect dozens of deranged, threatening comments.
I posted a pic of myself shooting an AR-15 and it seemed to chill out markedly and I was soon forgotten. But I was definitely looking outside of my front window every few minutes the first two days there.
So, I'm sorry to say, I agree with you that it's not only the left that's fond of this kind of cancel-violence.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
3d ago
They left that part out. How curious.
He literally says that. Try this: https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/2016700958315593760?s=20
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
3d ago
I was mostly indifferent to immigration in the US. I am quite surprised that Trump could run on a fairly stomach turning immigration policy and win the election. My attitude is that it's now time for the people to get what they wanted, good and hard, as fans of democracy might put it.
This is all to say I mostly don't care for what Trump is doing.
But we can look past the bullshit, and what I see is a courageous man trying to defend someone from being assaulted by thugs.
I see something much more tragic. A courageous, probably mentally unwell man (and woman, in the case of Good), being unwittingly deployed as probabilistic martyrs, radicalized by stories that are mostly fictional.
I hope a few deaths will bring down the temperature, but signs are worrying. A lot of people in my city's subreddit are talking about getting guns, which is the absolutely wrong lesson to take from this weekend.
I have to wonder if disinfo managers at the Russian FSB are watching and saying "hot damn, did we do that?"
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
3d ago
taken the grillpill a while ago
Wait, what is this philosophy of life? Just becoming the "man that's crazy bro, catch the game last night" guy in the meme?
Sounds familiar, yes.
The irony in all this is my goal in my posts to socials isn't to own the libtards! My goal is to try to help people see that we're not living in a fascist dystopia. Billionaires don't matter! Things are improving! The economy is relatively good! Don't believe the hype about declining longevity and health care! Stop despairing all of the fucking time.
And people get so mad about it.
My wife knows a bit better but I think her deal is that she mostly feels like she lives in a sick society and wants to escape to Europe, where she had fond memories of doing an exchange program as a teenager and a semester of school or two. She knows Europe has problems, but they're not constantly blasted across media. Indeed, the problems her friends in Europe worry about are mostly problems in the US.
I get it. Even though she mostly avoids media (we're the usual no TV in house, no subscriptions, she minimizes screen use herself) she still can't help catch politics contagion from her friends and the few times a week she checks FB to see what her local mom's affinity group is up to.
I agree with your linked post. The correct, healthy response to all of this is (a) almost all of this shit is fake to start with but (b) of the things that are real, you mostly can't do anything about them anyway so you should not disproportionately spend your time worrying about it.
It really should cause an update to see Pretti screaming "assault me motherfucker!" at police while he was concealing a handgun. Then when they disengage he chases after them, spits at them and breaks their taillight. This person was dangerous and out of his mind.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
3d ago
I spent an extremely long time this past week arguing with a Chomskyite about how this stuff isn't evidence of neofascist white nationalism and could not make a dent. Rittenhouse came up and we couldn't even concur that he was attacked by rioters, not shooting into a protest.
It didn't matter if I cited Wikipedia instead of usual wrongthink sources.
Stories are more important than facts.
I'm pretty blackpilled that outside of quant finance, maybe half of the judiciary, and a few other jobs, absolutely no one has skills or an interest in trying to understand the world.
I know people on the right are also attached to their narratives, but as an urbane white person who mostly talks to other urbane whites, the right's craziness is common ground. But I just take reputational damage if I observe hypocrisy or craziness on the left.
I had to stop posting about this stuff to socials because people were contacting my wife and asking her if she was safe with me. She even got in my face and said "what are you doing posting this shit to Facebook, this isn't Lesswrong. Are you autistic or something?"
She's right, of course. I should know better.
I think the videos alone aren't enough to close the book on the case. But if this is the only evidence we'll ever have I agree it's not excusable.
I do think an impartial investigation must happen, perhaps even a trial, and also that it won't happen and that's bad. If this is justifiable we should hear from the officers and see their body cams.
I do think the victim contributed significantly to his own death though, and I'm surprised there's so little acknowledgement of this. I don't think it's victim blaming the way the skimpy outfit at 2am is.
Crossing a highway at night wearing dark clothes is probably a closer analogy. Cars don't have a right to hit you, it is not good that they hit you, but you probably can't assign moral blame to them if they hit you.
Police are given latitude to reasonably assess risks to themselves that private civilians are not.
It does mention scuffle above but let's drill down on your point. I wouldn't normally do this but since this is the game I'm playing, here's my very next prompt in the conversation. This is, I think, as fair and as neutral as I can make it.
me
lets say there's a scuffle. there's 6 or 8 officers on top of me trying to subdue me. my gun is taken by one of the officers but the rest don't necessarily know that. they eventually, in the confusion, open fire on me and kill me. what's the tactical and legal determination? again, answer in one brief paragraph.
ChatGPT
Tactically, once you’re in a pile-on with multiple officers and there’s a report or glimpse of a gun, the scene collapses into pure threat heuristics: fragmented information, adrenaline, shouted “gun!” or “he’s armed!” cues, and officers default to worst-case assumptions—so even if one officer has already secured your weapon, the others may not know that and will treat any movement as a potential draw attempt, which is exactly how blue-on-blue or overkill shootings happen in chaotic arrests. Legally, the analysis is still Graham v. Connor objective reasonableness, judged from each officer’s perspective at that instant, not with hindsight; if they can articulate that they believed you were armed and reaching or resisting during a volatile arrest, courts and juries often deem the shooting justified, even if the gun was already confiscated. In other words: tactically it’s a classic fog-of-war misidentification, and legally it often resolves to “reasonable mistake,” which makes it very hard for a wrongful-death claim to succeed.
Again, I'm not pasting this as if it's some adjudicating authority, just trying to compare to a knowledgeable impartial observer. Since the entire world is telling me I'm thinking like a Chud now .
In the court of public opinion this looks like an execution. In a court of law, maybe not.
Separately, I an reminded of the concealed carry class I took. The most basic message was: having a gun on me required me to be more responsible in public, not less. I don't know if this is universal but it is confirmed by my local monkeysphere of other concealed gun license havers.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
6d ago
I feel like I'm going insane watching news coverage of this event. I've been wondering if I really am a bootlicker or if I'm in an echo chamber or what. I thought I would ask ChatGPT about this. Yesterday's shooting is not in the training data, of course so, while it's still possible to get an untainted answer I thought I would ask.
me
okay so, hypothetically, I am carrying a holstered handgun. I am at a protest. we are protesting a police arrest. the protest gets a bit rowdy. a police officer pushes someone out of the way. I step forward and try to block the police officer from the person they pushed. how much danger am I in? what would a court say if I was killed? answer in one brief paragraph.
ChatGPT
Short version: you’d be in serious, asymmetric danger, both physically and legally. The moment you step into an officer’s path during an active arrest, you’ve likely crossed from “bystander” to interfering/obstructing, and if you’re visibly armed (or they discover you’re armed during the scuffle), you now look—through an officer’s threat model—like “an armed subject interfering with police action.” That combination massively raises the probability of force, up to lethal force, because officers are trained to treat armed interference as a precursor to weapon deployment, not as peaceful protest. If you were killed, a court would mostly analyze it under objective reasonableness (Graham v. Connor): would a reasonable officer believe an armed person stepping toward them in a chaotic scene posed an imminent threat? In that context, juries often side with the officer, even if you never touched the gun; legally it’s less about your intent and more about what a cop could plausibly fear in the moment. In practice: armed + physical interposition near police = you’ve accidentally made yourself look like the most dangerous person in the scene.
Maybe this is what these tools are designed to do at this point but I feel a little less alienated right now.
dr_analog
top 1% of underdog fetishists
6d ago
I don't think I've ever read a statement from a police department that didn't come across as pure conflict theorist messaging. This is probably true of almost any government agency that is at all controversial. They don't typically say completely false things (unless there's no possible evidence either way), but they will absolutely lie with a minimum of true statements.
I think this is bad. But it's definitely not new.
Why isn't trespassing law enough at the minimum? The minister says "you are trespassing and must leave" and if they don't they become arrestable? That should shut protests down plenty well.
More options
Context Copy link