Well, that and she wasn't present in the room to see Taylor's reaction to the body bag, might have had a couple seconds warning if she saw Taylor.
And hey, props to both Alexandria and Tagg for pulling off a convincing enough act. I was half expecting Taylor to cling to the possibility that it was someone else who was dead, rather than reasoning herself into it being one of her friends.
Still, a full flock of insects bee-lining (heh) for your face is going to give you enough warning to clamp your jaw shut and try to cover your nose.
And if she is indeed vulnerable in this way, the way I would go about trying to kill her (which I literally thought of just now) would be getting a shot of containment foam down her throat. Yes I know its breathable, I'm saying it would probable seal the protective flap shut when it expanded.
faceh
2d ago
It seems like the social effects of modernity and the internet are broadly similar everywhere.
Yeah. I just significantly updated my priors on the "problem" with current social norms stemming primarily from the phones, the apps, and the algorithms.
Still reserving a lot of space for Covid just nuking people's social skills in general, though. The phones might just be what is 'locking' them into a bad equilibrium.
Hahahahahahaaa oh its a challenge.
The core group of people I invite go to my gym, which is a mix of single and coupled people, and I try to invite the most agreeable sorts to come and leverage that to get some of the flightier ones to show. I find mediocre success.
You seem to notice the same trend I have. It is very hard to cajole any decently attractive single lady out to an event unless they have reassurances there are other ladies there. And that becomes a Catch-22.
So when I try to play mastermind, I invite out the couples who are friends with the single ladies so I can then invite the single ladies and reassure them "Oh X and Y are coming too!"
I begin to pick up on certain dynamics. As in Abby won't show up unless Britney is also there, but Britney only shows up if Charlie is going, and Charlie and Derek are best friends so if Charlie's there then Derek is likely to show, and Derek is a bit of a loser so he kinda deters others from coming but you gotta invite Charlie so Britney will so show Abby will show, and risk Derek being there too.
I give up on trying to orchestrate things precisely, but just be as strong a 'center of gravity' as I can so hopefully I can pull people into my orbit through pleasant but persistent pressure.
Anyway, all of this has led me to realize why Club Promoters have such an 'important' job. Keeping a roster of hotties who will actually show up if you text them so you can reliably promise attractive women will be at your event, which instantly raises the profile because now its more appealing for other attractive single ladies to arrive, and of course men will flock there if they can be in the presence of pretty women.
Hot single ladies are an ideal nucleus to build an event around, I'd wager, but they're also not the type to lift a damn finger themselves, and they have options so its always finicky to get even one to show, let alone 6 or more.
I get small rewards in this life. I don't claim to be completely altruistic when I do this.
The event I hosted this past Saturday (UFC 324 watch party) was a success overall, and I have a decent number of leftover snacks to munch on for the week. People love to bring beer to the event (even though I supply plenty) so I have a beer fridge that literally never runs dry and a couple stacks of various beverages on standby.
I am Quixotically DEFYING the new social order that arose Post-Covid. There WAS a time when people would just host small gatherings spontaneously on regular enough basis that you could usually have one to go to every other weekend. After Covid nuked this and people got used to food delivery and vidya at home, everyone's energy level for both hosting and going out seemed cut in half and they haven't even tried to recover it?
But to the extent my goal is to re-awaken the local social life and inspire others to also host in their spaces, I'm clearly not making much progress.
In the friend group's main chat, people like to semi-obviously hint when they would like to do some event or other, which then falls on me to make the actual plan and demand others' commitments to it so it actually happens. I do some operant conditioning and lavish praise on anyone who actually puts forth and executes on event ideas themselves, and I make SURE to show up to those and raise the energy level.
I will not go quietly into the night. At the very least, give people the experience of socializing so those skills don't devolve.
That's an excellent point, since I definitely learned some marketing skills from Runescape just as a matter of course.
And it only took ONE person convincing me to "Come to Wildy and I'll drop rune armor" to grok "oh, people will exploit your trust mercilessly when there's no consequences."
Final Fantasy 14
That one does have the rep as the sole 'non-toxic' MMO in existence. At least with any popularity.
For some reason, young people are just not that interested in doing stuff organized by people much older than them, or in hobbies that require them to follow a set schedule
I've seen a bit of this. Millenials could be flakey but generally apologetic if they miss something they said they'd go to.
Gen Z just goes radio silent.
I am not sure people necessarily perceive the value in developing hosting skills, and those who do, might be disappointed with how hard it can be to get people to commit.
YES.
For whatever reason (especially for the young) they want to maintain optionality all the way up to the last minute.
If I were a less disciplined (and stubborn) person I'd have given up hosting anyone but immediate friends like a year ago.
And hell, the reason I'm willing to host is to make it cheap enough that younger folks don't have to worry about coming out and running up a tab!
I'm never completely sure if my competition are events hosted by others or literally just watching streaming shows at home and Doordash.
"Alexa, describe my personal romantic hellscape, be sure to tailor it to demand the exact opposite of my personal preferences as the price for entrance."
The main issue is the lack of places for young people to organically meet and pair up.
Interesting that this isn't just a problem in the U.S. For some reason I assumed that the social scene for 20 and 30 somethings was still somewhat hopping in Europe. They seem to brag about walkable communities and friendlier social norms. At least parts of it.
I have bent over backwards to try and host spaces for people to hang out casually and meet without much expectations but also clearance to flirt, and somehow I virtually NEVER (like, once or twice in the past year?) get invited to spaces hosted by other people.
So maybe a combination of fewer 'third spaces,' (or the third spaces being too costly for young folk!) people not having spaces large enough to host others, AND a generalized decline in 'hosting' as a skill people develop at all?
faceh
4d ago
I think we disagree on which steps are both necessary and sufficient.
However I do think that punishing employers is necessary both from a practical and "upholding rule of law" perspective.
is more than most Americans would stomach.
For better or worse (almost certainly worse) I think Americans are learning just how much they can stomach and how sharp but limited application of violence actually gets things done.
I think Americans have gotten less stomach for lawlessness and even basic property destruction after living through Covid times.
This isn't to say they're going to side with the government, but I see a general preference for order rather than chaos, and that can justify violent action.
(contingent on how long most Americans can actually pay attention to anything or really have an awareness of the situation outside their local area)
I mean, the 'root cause' is mostly that social and economic conditions suck in other countries in both absolute terms and relative to the U.S..
In the purely materialist interpretation, its the same reason wind moves along a gradient from areas of high pressure to low pressure.
"Fixing" the root cause in that case would imply raising economic standards in those other countries (has been tried), Lowering economic standards in the U.S., or, maybe, just sprinkling enough excess U.S. wealth around that its marginally more attractive to stay put than to immigrate.
Or, if we don't find those methods feasible, imposing enough barriers that the flow is actually slowed down to a manageable extent.
And given how border crossings have slowed to a trickle with Trump in office, I'd say the barriers don't even have to be that imposing.
Anyway, lets say we do put a few CEOs in jail and this convinces other CEOs to avoid hiring illegals, which has a noticeable effect on, e.g. self-deportations.
What happens when the next Democratic president pardons them all, and then re-establishes the same status quo which allows them to hire illegals with relatively little concern for enforcement?
How do you get immigration restriction locked in at the political level?
I humbly suggest you gotta do more than merely slapping the employers around.
faceh
4d ago
I mean, any large agri-business, large construction company (which adds another layer, they work through contractors), restaurant chains etc.
That's the flip side. A lot of the employers are small businesses themselves, so there'll be a lot of them, and thus enforcement efforts are going to be a bit more involved to catch any significant number of them.
This is something you'd really want to solve on the systems level, similar to the demand for voter ID in elections.
In theory it should be. Yet no one does this. Why?
This is a full-on guess from my side.
At the top level, its not great optics. And from the corruption angle, some don't want their donors arrested.
On the practical, ground level where the prosecutions happen:
How do you prove that a CEO was knowingly complicit in the hiring process, was directing people to hire illegals, basically fully aware that the company relied on this to function?
A number of middle manager types would probably take the fall for the guys in charge in most cases.
Its a trickier prospect than proving that someone was de facto here without permission, and thus can be summarily removed.
It's absolutely true that if we could magically teleport every last illegal out of the country, it would wreck a lot of the economy.
I think "correction" is really the term to use. That is, there's clearly a ton of 'distortions' in the economy that will be removed if immigration laws are aggressively enforced.
I have pointed out how they actively compete with working class/poor citizens for housing, and use up healthcare and similar public services, and of course if there's increased crime/decreased public cohesion, that is mostly borne by the poor and middle class as well. Over the long term I think it creates Brazilification..
I think that the benefits and costs are very unequally distributed and we get effects like cheap food on one hand but far more expensive housing, car insurance, and medical care on the other. Distortions in economic distribution due to the presence of an underclass for whom the 'normal' rules are not applied.
Teleporting them all away would, I'd wager, remove a lot of the benefits... which were disproportionately enjoyed by the elite classes... but also would remove the costs that were broadly imposed on the middle/lower classes.
So yes, there might be some 'wreckage.' I would be willing to accept the bet that the pain is mostly endured by the upper class and thus the vast majority of the populace would suffer minimally, especially after the things get reshuffled over the course of months or years.
faceh
4d ago
My abject guess:
On the top level its an optics thing.
On the rubber-meets-the-road level, good luck proving that a CEO or anyone in C-Suite was "knowingly" approving hiring of illegals, especially if the immigrants in question were able to produce sketchy but minimally sufficient papers to prove legitimacy.
Sure there's probably some who put it in an e-mail that you can uncover, but these are the guys who can afford quality legal representation.
faceh
4d ago
I'd guess the reason we can't currently do both is the sheer amount of enforcement resources that are tied up in dealing with the active interference from protestors and state officials.
In theory, it should be simple enough to identify the largest employers with large numbers of illegals on the payrolls, throw the book at one or two of the CEOs, and let incentives take their course.
faceh
4d ago
I'm committing to finishing up my first read of Wildbow's Worm, and I am up to the point where Taylor becomes Weaver.
[Spoilers]
Okay, I think I hit my limit of disbelief on "actually, insect control is OP" writing. You have one of the most overall indestructible Capes, who is also a tactical genius w/photographic memory on top of it, and she's somehow not able to defend against "insects jammed into your mouth" attack.
A tactic that Taylor has used ample times anyway.
I accept the premise that getting foreign matter lodged in her lungs (or drowning) would be a killing stroke, I accept that Alexandria was trying to goad this precise reaction from her... but its both hard to believe that Alexandria wouldn't think of "close your mouth and nose" as a defense, or that standard-issue bugs would actually be able to force themselves down her airway.
I was barely hanging on as Taylor is using bugs to dial telephones and manipulate the wiring in the walls to get doors opened, but "I stuffed her lungs full of roaches and spiders" was seemingly a different level entirely.
It works for the plot, and I'll keep reading, but that was the first time I groaned at Taylor being able to punch far above her nominal weight class through creative insect usage. It didn't even have the 'rule of cool' justification like when she's in a drawn out fight.
[/Spoilers]
Still beats most mainstream stories that are out these days.
faceh
4d ago
Let’s round up the illegal immigrants (kindly) AND prosecute the employers that employ them (kindly).
And if the state in which the persons in question reside not only refuse cooperation, but actively interfere, can we also go after the officials who are thwarting any enforcement at all?
Can we also arrest them?
I just want to know where the limits of 'accountability' stop and why it should extent to employers but not state actors.
Side question, is there ever, in the history of EVER, been a game designed explicitly around trying to teach a player some "prosocial" (as defined by the developer) lesson, that has resulted in a meaningful uptick in that prosocial behavior?
To ask the question is basically to answer it.
But that actually makes the point that there is no UPSIDE to making such a game, it won't achieve the intended result, but significant possible downside if you accidentally give players something to rally around for mockery.
This reads as nonserious when we JUST had a reveal and discussion of billions with a "B" worth of dollars being fraudulently appropriated for essentially fake businesses run by various immigrant groups, with one standout being the Somalis.
Largely in blue states.
Targeting employers would ignore this particular flow of tax dollars into dubiously legal immigrant communities who have seemingly separated themselves from 'legitimate' society and operate insular networks with outsized political influence.
That seems like a pressing matter that can't be ignored.
Me I'm just trying to promote an environment where connections can happen.
I don't really try to suggest who should pair off with whom, although I'll sometimes nudge a guy to shoot a shot if I think he's in the clear.
Its important for more than just romantic connections anyway. Gotta have people rubbing elbows and talking to figure out if there's beneficial arrangements to be made.
More options
Context Copy link