@dr_analog's banner p

dr_analog

top 1% of underdog fetishists

4 followers   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 14:10:31 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 583

dr_analog

top 1% of underdog fetishists

4 followers   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 14:10:31 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 583

Verified Email

But I would fault a person who had prolonged, extended, beneficial relationship with Epstein while fully knowing who he is.

That's the key here. How do you prove someone fully knew who he was? My contention is that the people who were curious about it were probably satisfied pretty easily. From my original comment:

A man with that much social approval could easily say, if anyone ever confronted him, "oh, that. yeah, it was a thing with an escort. it was consensual. she said she was over 18. it got blown up into something. I paid my dues. trying to move on" and be happily believed. Due diligence: done. Very few people with the liberal morality to be condemning him for hiring an escort wouldn't have bought that excuse

Absent seeing him mess with underage girls, or noticing a lot of underage girls in his company, it's probably not that legible.

Well, what's the actual difference between someone who marries you that thinks you're perfect versus someone that marries you because you check a lot of boxes but not all of them? The person who thinks you're perfect could still discover some other person that's better than you in some way and leave you for them?

I still have a hard time believing the average person would not accept an invite to a party at a rich guy's mansion if it had a few household names in attendance. And feel chuffed to bits if Epstein took a liking to them and wanted to introduce them to more people, and would easily look past his minor legal trouble.

97% is hyperbole but it would be high.

The other day, quantum computing expert(?) Scott Aaronson wrote about how he didn't meet Epstein and summed up in a comment something I had been thinking as well.

I had a further thought. Back in 2019, when Epstein became a central topic of conversation following his arrest and then death, and lots of my scientific colleagues were telling stories about their contacts or near-contacts with him, it struck me that there were zero stories about any scientist—liberal or conservative, male or female, morally naive or morally astute—saying, “no, of course I want nothing to do with you, because you’re friggin’ Jeffrey Epstein, the infamous mass rapist!”

So I concluded that, if anyone now imagines that they would’ve responded that way, it’s almost certainly pure hindsight bias. Indeed, even after Epstein’s first conviction, a short jail stint in one’s past for “soliciting prostitution” simply doesn’t sound disqualifying, according to the secular liberal morality that most academics hold, unless you researched the details, which most didn’t.

All of the pearl clutching about how powerful men (and women) who associated with Epstein must have clearly known what he was about and what he was up to as a convicted pedophile ephebophile, when it's almost certain that 97% of the population would have gleefully accepted an invitation to one of his parties filled with leading scientists from MIT and Harvard, heads of state, CEOs, inventors, billionaires, and the rest of the somebodys.

A man with that much social approval could easily say, if anyone ever confronted him, "oh, that. yeah, it was a thing with an escort. it was consensual. she said she was over 18. it got blown up into something. I paid my dues. trying to move on" and be happily believed. Due diligence: done. Very few people with the liberal morality to be condemning him for hiring an escort wouldn't have bought that excuse and gone back to dreaming of rubbing shoulders with the who's who and maybe getting a sweet private jet ride. "Can he really be such a bad guy if all of these other great people are hanging out with him?", thought all of the other great people hanging out with him.

By "sex was hot af" I don't mean "the person was more attractive", but rather "sex with crazy/sociopathic people is exhilerating".

Do men not have the same thing?

Men also have that borderline girlfriend, you know, the one that's an artist, where the sex was hot af but the relationship was otherwise tumultuous and they had to stop seeing them because they kept getting fall down intoxicated in public while out by themselves. Eventually they "settle" for the girl who doesn't have the mental illness and drug abuse issues but it's true they don't like to dirtytalk as much.

One of my great fears is being caught in a struggle session like this. I'm not really kidding. I used to have nightmares about it as a kid, when I didn't even know what a struggle session was. I would dream that there was a huge crowd around me and they were angry at me, and someone that was my friend would be interrogating me with inane questions that seemed to have no right or wrong answer, but no matter what I answered the friend would announce it to the crowd with disgust and I'd be booed and jeered. Just complete lunacy.

I put myself in the yoga studio manager's position and wonder what I would say. The troll in me would lean into it: "do you stupid motherfuckers think we took the sign down because we're trying to welcome ICE agents to do yoga? do you think they do yoga?" and "so, what I'm hearing is you're mad that we had the anti-ICE sign up but had to take it down? how mad are you at yoga studios that never had the sign up to begin with?"

But I realize the right move would be to say "actually, " lowering voice " one of our dark skinned owners is anti-ICE, but she's afraid her green card will be revoked if ICE finds out she had that sign up. Please be her voice out there, because she cannot speak for herself, here" and then we all :resist-fist:

I think all those facts might be related. If you're old enough and wealthy enough that you don't have to work anymore, it can be a shock to your sense of identity. What do you do with those extra 2,000 hours a year?

I can just imagine society finally becoming wealthy enough by 2035 that we could institute a sweet UBI for all, and then by 2037 we have the most brutal civil war because we believe we're the most oppressed people ever.

Prediction markets probably have no good things. The author of The Laws of Trading wrote about why prediction markets can't deliver what they promise. A bit technical on the trading side but should be navigable by laypersons.

In 1964 there were 458,000 measles cases, and 421 deaths, over a smaller population, no lockdowns.

How barbaric. Our ancestors were truly uncivilized.

Isn't it, compared to influenza, 10x as infectious, with 10x the hospitalization rate and 5-10x as deadly?

If we had a vaccine that reliably stopped influenza (instead of the bullshit yearly one people try taking which misses 75% of the time) I can't imagine why we wouldn't all be on it? But the measles vaccine is a lot more reliable than the influenza vaccine? And you don't have to take it annually?

It seems like a tragedy that our society is rejecting the measles vaccine. What am I missing?

I mean, 99.9% chance none of that happened so I'm okay with saying if your state is that competent and brazen you deserve to dominate us.

I'm still skeptical, as it ascribes to netanyahu/idf intelligence a level of power that seems unreasonable on multiple layers, but it would be the very, very funniest writing of this season if the thing that gave away his cover was a public (now-private) fortnite profile, of all things.

If the Israelis busted Epstein out of jail and left a body double and he's just been hiding out in Israel this whole time they deserve to rule the world.