BANNED USER: /comment/233594
>Unban in 0d 20h 27m
erwgv3g34
My Quality Contributions:
User ID: 240
Banned by: @FCfromSSC
erwgv3g34
4d ago
A key that can open many locks is called a master key, but a lock that can be opened by many keys is a shitty lock.
erwgv3g34
4d ago
Reddit is mainly overrun by "If Trump wins, the orange traitorous insurrectionist Putin agent failed businessman will put all the LGBTQ people in camps and bring about Christofascist dictatorship" types of posts.
erwgv3g34
5d ago
I'm not gonna believe this until he posts a tweet containing the word "nigger".
erwgv3g34
5d ago
I'm going to have to crank up the music in my home office even louder than usual for the next 4+ months.
Protip: Closed door + white noise machine + earbuds + music completely drowns out all other noise.
erwgv3g34
5d ago
I really am starting to wonder if Joe knows he's dropped out yet.
I was stunned by Biden's withdrawal, though probably not as much as Biden himself.
erwgv3g34
6d ago
This is the 1998 list. Are you going to do the 10th anniversary edition? Most of the titles are the same, but 23 new movies made it in.
And speaking of classic movies, I enjoyed the Oscar Madness retrospective on Academy Award Best Pictures Winners.
erwgv3g34
7d ago
People don't typically burn down other people's houses, accidentally or otherwise. People DO get into car accidents every few years. There's a difference.
erwgv3g34
7d ago
There’s also the men who complain how expensive vidya is.
Skill issue. I have a whole-ass algorithm for getting games on the cheap using Steam. Namely, you may add any game you want to your wishlist. However, you may only BUY the game if the following conditions are met:
- The game must be on sale. Steam does so many sales that there is no point to ever buying a game at full price.
- The game must be at its lowest price ever. If it was that price once, it will be that price again. You can check a game's lowest price on SteamDB.
- The game must be at least 5 years old. This ensures that a game has had time to be patched, had all the DLC released, gone down in price, etc.
- The game must be under $19.99. Anything more than that means it's still too expensive.
By following this simple algorithm, you can usually get games that retailed for $50-$60 brand new a decade or two ago for $5 or less.
A note on bundles: Only buy bundles if every single game on the bundle follows this list. Otherwise, the bundle discount will be more than outweighed by the extra price you will pay on the non-compliant items.
erwgv3g34
7d ago
This is why I always get the bare minimum insurance legally possible. Self-insuring is much simpler; I understand that I am on the hook for anything other than $10,000 worth of damage to other people's stuff, and act accordingly. If their insurance covers me when they total my car, great; if not, or if I am the one that crashes my car, I'll just have to buy another car. It helps that I have never owned a new or expensive car; all my cars have been 10+ years old and worth only a few thousands of dollars on the used market.
But most people are constitutionally incapable of saving money for some reason, so this is not an actionable plan for them.
Similarly, when my job offered me a bunch of different health insurance tiers, I deliberately picked the ones that would deduct the least from my paycheck, on the idea that I probably wouldn't be able to navigate the insurance bureaucracy anyway (I was right; my contract was not renewed, and I barely got a couple of primary visits before my benefits lapsed). I am aware of my own limitations and deliberately try to opt out of interacting with complicated systems whenever possible.
Which is also one of the reasons I have a prepaid phone instead of a monthly phone contract. It's so simple; account balance is near zero or time is expiring means I need to buy another card, same as I buy gas when the tank is empty. What could be simpler than that?
Isn't this the same broad who was literally cowering behind Trump and the other agents piled onto him instead of forming part of the scrum?
erwgv3g34
8d ago
Comparing yourself with a third world country is not the W you think it is.
erwgv3g34
10d ago
But ok, let's see what you've got: what are your ten books that should have made the list?
By year of publication:
- 1632 (2000) by Eric Flint
- The Blank Slate (2002) by Steven Pinker
- Freakonomics (2005) by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner
- Lights Out (2005) by David Crawford
- The God Delusion (2006) by Richard Dawkins
- Sexual Utopia in Power (2006) by F. Roger Devlin
- The 4-Hour Workweek (2007) by Timothy Ferriss
- The Martian (2011) by Andy Weir
- The Rational Male (2013) by Rollo Tomassi
- Rationality: From AI to Zombies (2015) by Eliezer Yudkowsky
erwgv3g34
16d ago
I agree that the minimum viable prison is just a fenced-off area with some guards watching the fence who optionally throw food in.
Unfortunately, such a prison would also be a human rights violation. If you imprison someone, you take away most of their agency which they could have used to look after their basic human interests, such as being housed, fed, adequately medicated and neither raped nor murdered. I think it is reasonable that the society who imprisoned a person should take care of these necessities.
"Human rights" aren't real. They were literally made up from nothing by enlightenment thinkers. What about my right to walk the streets and use the library without being hassled by underclass vagrants? No one cares about it.
erwgv3g34
20d ago
Even in traditional Islamic countries, I think there is a presumption that men can constrain themselves from rape in some contexts. A man might trust his brother to chaperone his wife without raping her, or his son to chaperone his daughter.
In Islam, you are only supposed to trust her immediate blood-relations; a woman's father, brothers, and sons can all be safely assumed to not want to fuck her, nor is she likely to want to fuck them. Brothers-in-law are not included, for good reason; there is no biological reason stopping your brother from having sex with your wife, so you don't even give them the chance. Cousins are right out, given that they are permissible marriage partners.
erwgv3g34
21d ago
Righties don't want men to be held responsible ever for wanting to get their dicks wet, not even to the degree that we might say "Tut tut" and socially shun him. Or I guess we can do that but if and only if we also agree that women are property.
You cannot accuse a man of trespassing upon a public road.
erwgv3g34
21d ago
There is still some reserves of social capital left in the red tribe, but they are being depleted at an alarming rate. Red tribe loves television, but Hollywood writers and producers are all blue tribe, so every modern show pushes feminist memes, sexual liberation memes, pro-college memes, and rootless cosmopolitan memes. And people only watch modern shows.
Red tribe fathers who proudly quote the rules "for dating my daughter" cheerfully send their little princesses off to college without a second thought, where they will very predictably spend four years away from any male relative supervision getting covered in cum from head to toe by men who have zero chance of committing to them. A father forbidding a legally adult, academically successful daughter from attending a far away university over fears of promiscuity would be outside even the red tribe Overton window; at that point, his wife and family and friends and preacher would turn against him for stifling his daughter's future.
Even if his society is with him, a patriarchal red tribe father has no legal leg to stand on. Threatening a cad with a shotgun to get him to stay away from his daughter is assault; actually shooting the rake is murder. Physically grabbing his daughter away from a party where she is likely to end up banged and locking her up in her room is liable to end up in a cop showing up to white knight for her. If you cannot drag your daughter/wife home by the hair when she is out acting like a slut and give her a good beating and have your society, your church, and your law enforcement agency back you up and agree that you acted correctly, you cannot control your women's sexuality.
erwgv3g34
21d ago
Even from a libertarian point of view, that should be unacceptable under real world conditions. The "boss" probably isn't the CEO and if he fires someone for not having sex with him, that's a principal/agent problem; the boss's boss doesn't want him to fire people for this reason.
That's a financial matter for the company, not a social or legal problem.
erwgv3g34
21d ago
Alternatively, we could get what we seem to be getting, where young women demand it both ways and most people give it to them.
This only works until we get outbred and replaced by a more Gnon-compliant civilization, like the Muslims are taking over Europe.
What can't go on forever, won't. One way or the other, women will lose their freedom, because no civilization with free women can reproduce.
From the comments of "The wonderful clarity of white genocide":
More options
Context Copy link