gattsuru
6mo ago
(The Haaretz figure on the original Hamas incursion, half-complete, is that Hamas killed just 20 under-18s)
This is a list of names cleared for publication, not all killed.
Basically, it’s a physical simulation of sex with a man. What more need be said?
I recognize that this is probably an 'arguing over definitions' sorta thing, but you've got me curious, now.
Is a strap-on tentacle gay (after all, it's not like any guys other than cthulhu have one), and if so, more or less than a phallus? If it’s a dildo not strapped to someone’s hips? What about anal beads? Where does rimming fall, from the top or the bottom? Intracrural? Would it be straight to fuck Buck Angel in the vagina, or do you have to rub his beard while doing so, least gay guys come away with insatiable lust for boobs?
gattsuru
5mo ago
Redefining a public space into "their land" where putting a phone at someone face is unacceptable is a good part of what I'm criticizing.
gattsuru
5mo ago
I'm going to focus on what I think is your real question, the much more circumstantial "Why is Kissinger hated so much more aggressively than other ghouls and swamp creatures like a Donald Rumsfeld or a Paul Wolfowitz?"
I'm not sure even that's a necessary question: I'm pretty sure a lot of the progressive movement would like an advent calendar of all of the people they disagree with politically.
gattsuru
6mo ago
other factors(Islamophobia, superstitious fear of opposing Israel, dislike of the people siding with Palestinians, lack of concern over settler colonialism and a general principle granting states the right of self defense, genuine pro-democracy sentiment, etc).
Boy, this summary sure makes me think that you've given a particularly charitable analysis of motivations. Let's go get a big drink of water and:
Red tribers in general are likely to see actual-religious evangelicals as moral exemplars even if they don't intend on waking up that early on Sundays, but IME the way that filters down, even to the ones that go to church, is usually more "God will punish us for not intervening if Israel falls" and less actual love of Israel.
most of them don't know what a nakba
Would you actually find it useful to see a steelman, or is that not really the point, here?
gattsuru
1yr ago
There's a small chance that it's some sort of comedic joke, given that Trump endorsed McCarthy. But it's more likely that Gaetz is just a putz; I doubt he expects any of his constituents to take notice of that compared to the rest of this circus.
ADS-B records strike me as closer to court records or traffic cameras, in my mind: you're required to transmit them (barring a few exception not relevant here), they can be easily recorded with commonly-available antenna, and they're commonly used for the same class of purposes. They have some bad uses (ie, paparazzi), but they're not really centralized to those bad uses -- in addition to the anticollision efforts that drove the ADS-B development, they're regularly useful for tarmac scheduling and safety purposes (eg, if someone doesn't land at or near the scheduled time but doesn't have flight following, it can be a quick way to check if they just got a headwind or if they're in a ditch somewhere) in the United States.
I can understand Musk not wanting to be That Sort of Site, in the sense of drawing a broad line around the torah, but there's some limits to what can be done, here.
gattsuru
4mo ago
I just reread all those posts of mine you linked to. I can see how you might disagree with some of the things I said. I can see how I might have worded some things better, or might even walk back a line or two if I were re-editing myself now. I cannot see where you get (what I perceive to be) an accusation that I am lying or arguing in bad faith or ignoring your counteraguments. For the most part, I stand by what I said and have not changed my opinions.
Because none of these things would break from the standards you demand, now!
Time, after time, after time, after time, you propose horribles or parades of horribles of things that are Worse that are your evidence that conservatives need sit down and take it, not just in response to civil war rhetoric but even to matters as simple as turnabout being fair play.
And then I provide examples that those parades of horribles are happening, or being attempted, or in rare cases have been room temperature for a decade or been applied to me personally. In some cases, you explicitly say that "mostly, it's not happening" and a "gish gallop", even after I provide explicit evidence, without even the slightest effort to point to a single one that I'm actually wrong on. Other times, you just ipse dixit, or simply duck out because my claims "doesn't impress", none of the examples I bring were persuasive enough for you to even bother responding to.
And now it turns out it doesn't matter! It wouldn't change the conversation even if conservatives were being literally marched into concentration camps -- which, to be extremely explicit so you don't deflect down that rabbit hole again, I'm not claiming is the current state. If A(3) or A(4) are what we're trying to talk about, we've had concentration camps before! Why the hell were you asking me about shit like voicing conservative opinions in public or struggle sessions? You, in this thread, brought up "(Or even, say, the level of a fringe political or religious minority in previous eras in US history.)" as what you were arguing against, and by definition even if I could have demonstrated this to your requirements, it'd still not have been novel at all!
Well, okay, maybe the conversation topic just drifted in the last handful of posts. You've said our real disagreement was about whether the severity and novelty of the gish gallops examples I provided weren't serious enough to justify defection. That's something we could discuss seriously, and I spent a thousand words doing it: why evaluations of novelty are vulnerable to giving you whatever answer you came in wanting, and why defection is both necessary and laudable before the more extreme degrees of marginalization and exclusion from the public sphere hit.
Did your response here engage with any of that, either? You literally can't see how you're ignoring my counterarguments or arguing in bad faith, with all that?
gattsuru
4mo ago
... I came of age before the time period you're discussing, and ended up a bi furry in a state that had a (admittedly rarely-enforced at the time) ban on sodomy. The sexuality-related tech of the time isn't the only or top-five biggest issues of that time, but there's a sizable portion of the populace for whom it didn't work out well for.
While I'm not happy about the extent traditional retail has gone tango uniform in the last two decades, it's also a place where advances are vast. Comparing DigiKey today to the DigiKey of 2004 is a tremendous change, and the Radio Shack of 1998-2004 was nowhere near able to contain a lot of the space it missed.
gattsuru
5mo ago
We have reached an agreement in principle for Sam Altman to return to OpenAI as CEO with a new initial board of Bret Taylor (Chair), Larry Summers, and Adam D'Angelo.
…
Larry Summers
Fuuuuuuuuuuuck.
gattsuru
5mo ago
No one is “redefining a public space” here, we are using the limited information we have to make preliminary judgments on who is likely the instigator.
...
(2) the altercation took place on the Palestinian side, which greatly increases the odds of the Jewish man having instigated the conflict (what was he doing “encroaching on their land”? There’s clear borders put in place by the authorities, the yellow tape);
gattsuru
5mo ago
King David had a non-terror objective, if a stupid one
Wikipedia has a few different cites saying that at least one of the goals was to destroy paperwork linking the Jewish Agency to attacks, but even if you're skeptical of that, somewhere between half to two-thirds of the hotel had been used for the British Mandate's administration, which was heavily disrupted by the bombing. Clearly not worth the moral sin (or negative publicity), but very separate from the purpose of changing policy by violence (which they did use elsewhere) or violence for its own sake/'revenge' (ditto).
Those resulting in fatalities usually result in conviction and serious sentencing by Israeli justice systems
Well, of the two I linked... for the Duma arson, Amiram Ben-Uliel was found guilty of the Duma arson and sentenced to life imprisonment, though the minor who assisted in planned only got a short sentence (~10 months plus what had been served during the trial). For Abu Khdeir, Yosef Haim Ben-David got a life sentence-plus, one of the unnamed minors got life(ish) and the other 21 years (... probably will end up closer to ten).
((This complaint about too-short sentences isn't specifically tied to the Israel-Palestine stuff; see Schlissel. But obviously there's both more options and more harm in the context of the West Bank.))
There have been failures to convict (or even try or find) some Israeli civilian murderers of clear homicide, and the environment there makes claims to self-defense extremely difficult to treat fairly, so there's a reason I say usually. And the rules of engagement for the IDF specifically are a very bad joke. But there's a lot of summaries of settler violence that try to give the impression that it's a no-bag-limit hunt, and the presence of any convictions makes that hard to support.
gattsuru
6mo ago
To steelman, the Jerusalem Post columnist is less responding to "pro-Palestine marches", but what he sees as specifically pro-Hamas and often pro-October 7th protests. It's a little less easy to provide examples in the United Kingdom, given the officially-steep punishments for support of Hamas or violence, but to everyone's non-surprise enforcement is a more complex matter and explicit support of Hamas, intifada, or generally "from river to sea" style not-very-deniable stuff were supposedly pretty common. And the head of police decided that the police shouldn't be making charges for hate crimes acts where it's political or anything.
To break that steelman, even that has been a sin to other alliances and allegiances. Reacting to "KillAllMen" or "EndWhiteness" or Solanas fangirling or the like hasn't been acceptable in mainstream discourse for literally a decade, if not longer. For whatever these laws and rules and norms that the Post author wants to bring down might have claimed equal protection and equal restriction to all, in practice they exist to protect 'the powerless', where this is defined in some coincidentally very political directions.
So in many ways, it's 'just' that Freeman is surprised to find that groups he likes are on the other side of that scale for once. And there's certainly people for whom that's a cutting criticism, not just of their current arguments but their entire philosophy -- Chemerinsky is the punching-bag du jour, as he's provided long and significant philosophical support and institutional inaction -- but it's not clear Freeman, specifically, is a particularly central example of that set. He's no universalist hero who complained when other people's ox were getting gored, don't get me wrong, but neither was he waiting until this moment to notice that his group was often pushed to the outside.
gattsuru
7mo ago
I don't know how to tell you this but there's a difference between a government passing a law imposing criminal or civil penalties on someone and them clicking the equivalent of a Super Report button.
That's not really my point; I can instead point to environments where Mere Polite Requests were obviously immediate jawboning, and were Masnick's twitter still open I could show more clear examples. But look at the articles and compare the dramatic differences in charity or even mere honesty in describing them -- most evidently the Super Report button instead ended up being weekly meetings or dedicated fast-response systems, but also the NRA-backed bill being described in far more maximalist terms than even the already-aggressive read by the newspaper he linked.
The article specifically notes that Twitter did not comply with a majority of the government's unofficial requests.
And Masnick is a two-faced prick, so while it claims that, instead it points to this comparison of official requests -- primarily legal demands like subpeonas and court orders, for mere double-digit (and often low double-digit) number removal requests. Aka, it tells us nothing about unofficial requests to take down accounts, which (again in contrast to Masnick's claims) ended up being thousands of accounts passed by spreadsheet and face-to-face meetings, not just a slightly more polished version of the Report Button you or I could use.
Masnick does not know the relative proportion of those unofficial requests that resulted in a removal. We don't have statistics, and given the heavy influence Baker had at the building they may not exist anymore. The selections Taibbi brought give 60%-85%, but Taibbi doesn't claim to have done a meaningful statistical analysis; he just provides a single e-mail that would break Twitter's transparency report for that time block. If Masnick had planted his flag on the possibility of consistent pushback, I'd not have highlighted that as severely or been as critical of him generally (although I wouldn't be surprised were his 'consistent' pushback to include one-offs that still resulted in account bans).
But he instead makes ludicrously strong claims with clearly wrong backing, and only ever one way.
Have you been on Twitter? Why would I think that? I'm sorry that advertisers and Twitter users don't share your ratings of what things are bad but their opinions are the ones that matter for Twitter's continued viability as a business.
I think you're vastly overestimating the popularity of guillotine twitter or of journalists, or of the relative proportion of the site's users or advertising targets those two groups or their sympathizers make up.
It's important that if you're going to allege the government pressured Twitter about the laptop story and that was the cause of their suppression people are going to want, like, evidence. So far none has been forthcoming. The best I've seen is some general warnings to Twitter about possible disinformation regarding Joe/Hunter from Russia.
Well, no. Even before the Twitter Files, Yoel Fucking Roth declared that :
Since 2018, I have had regular meetings with the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, and industry peers regarding election security.
During these weekly meetings, the federal law enforcement agencies communicated that they expected "hack-and-leak operations" by state actors might occur in the period shortly before the 2020 presidential election, likely in October. I was told in these meetings that the intelligence community expected that individuals associated with political campaigns would be subject to hacking attacks and that material obtained through those hacking attacks would likely be disseminated over social media platforms, including Twitter. These expectations of hack-and-leak operations were discussed throughout 2020. I also learned in these meetings that there were rumors that a hack-and-leak operation would involve Hunter Biden.
That is law enforcement specifically mentioning a hack-and-leak operation involving Hunter Biden in October of 2020, which is a good deal less general than "possible disinformation regarding Joe/Hunter from Russia".
((We've since learned that a 'totally private institution' funded in part by the State Department ran an exercise I'd call impressively prescient -- were it not for the FBI having already taken possession of Hunter Biden's laptop and corresponding documents months before the exercise was run.))
There's no clear "you must censor this or go to jail" e-mail, fair. There is 'just' all of this very precise concern about this particular topic, sent while the FBI and DHS were making claims about intransigent social media groups being allied with foreign governments, and while many politicians were talking up CDA230 modifications for those who didn't cooperate.
But Klobuchar wasn't sending the letter, so it's not really jawboning, it's just still a small coordinated groupthink with shared ideological capture.
I think the ADL's problem with Musk becomes much more obvious phrased as "He made frivolous threats they had committed torts against him."
Again, the ADL started calling Twitter's advertisers about Musk publicly (as in through newspapers) in November of last year, Musk claims that they did so privately the week he closed on the company and had called him saying they would do so if he did not continue certain parts of the Trust and Safety paradigm before that. Unless he or they have a time machine, the ADL's problem can not have started this week.
gattsuru
9mo ago
My objection's more at the bar between individual and group considerations.
As a metaphor, at the level of a species, "harvest crops" or "pumping water" played a fundamental role in the daily survival of literally every human on the planet. But most people don't do that often, and some don't do it ever in their entire lives. Sure, they'd be physically capable, for the most part -- but even the gayest guy or most gold star lesbian can find a turkey baster even if they couldn't lie back and think of England, and before that we had the invention of fingers.
But describing people as unhealthy because they don't want to harvest crops isn't even wrong, and wrong even beyond the (already obnoxious) tendency to conflate things like lack-of-exercise and the results of lack-of-exercise. Here, the problem isn't lack-of-hetero-fucking or even the lack of individual-results-of-hetero-fucking -- most men historically never reproduced, either! -- but some gauzy results-of-results matter. Society is downstream of individual actions, but "healthy" as measuring individual actions in how they effect humanity is less comparable to annoying advice to reduce bacon consumption and more like annoying advice to vote Properly.
gattsuru
11mo ago
A bit. At the very least, there's a ton of history here crossing 50 years across multiple political allegiances and a lot of 'non-political' regulation well before the Biden or Obama administrations. But not as much as gdanning's response suggests.
gattsuru
1yr ago
So central that the other names and sources fade away?
Spell out your objections; I'm not playing guessing games.
... which ninja02 is pretty specifically and clearly criticizing. Again, there are a lot of problems in the furry fandom. I'm not saying that there aren't!
But if your detector pings for everything, it's not a useful detector. You can't defend "this person is on the pathway to child abuse because they like anime fox girls with honking hooters" by seguing to "this entirely different person that the first guy hates 'came out' as a dog-fucker". Well, I mean, you can, demonstrably, since that seems to be something he’s tried, but it's not very persuasive. If he was focusing or prioritizing his criticisms on the latter cases, I'd not be making this complaint, but as it is he seems more likely to be making random free-association than even attempting to distinguish specific bad actors, and that's not limited to the furries.
(and it's not because of the art you want banned).
Mu?
gattsuru
1yr ago
Yes, GiveWell doesn't send rice but the malaria medicine and vitamins do the same thing.
It's not terribly clear it does, in the same degree or extent; the demographic collapse when countries have child mortality drop isn't perfectly reliable, but neither is it some unlikely possibility.
The solution? Let's just get them to have less kids! Does it not seem crazy to you to that EA basically declares itself the captain of these Africans?
If I thought any GiveWell cause was going to strap Africans to the table and chop their balls off, perhaps. When they're basically looking at providing condoms and LARCs, I'm a little less concerned about whether it would be Better if sub-Saharan African instead 'should' be reinventing premarin or making its own rubber.
Maybe their mortality rate is a bit too high for Western sensibilities, but what do they think?
... having actually spoken with a number of people there, they're not especially predisposed to a lack of running water, to blindness, or to malaria. (Or a wide variety of other issues: a local guide complained at length that he was sick of having to get treated for dysentery, so don't trust that particular bottled water company).
And if they're unable to influence their mortality rate on their own, maybe that's the way it should be?
And if the moon were made of cheese, they'd never be hungry.
There may well be some situation where merely providing optional resources overwhelms internal agency -- indeed, my willingness to put the threshold for direct food aid points to a pretty low bar! -- but I don't think any GiveWell programs here have gotten anywhere close.
gattsuru
1yr ago
I think that's useful to know, but I do remind everyone that a hacking group burned an ImageMagick zero-day on FurAffinity once. There's an upper limit to how far Rule of Induction brings you, here.
gattsuru
9d ago
You would have to argue that regarding the obvious and clear special concerns of a student-led protest movement
Are you going to spell them out, or just make vague motions about the horror or someone taking video of a public protest, or of someone in a stupid hat smirking at them?
Well, Meinecke did not engage with any counter-protesters and had his own location where he was protesting.
You want to try that, again?
Protestors surrounded Meinecke after about an hour. One protestor seized Meinecke’s Bible. Meinecke retrieved another Bible from his bag and continued reading aloud. Another protestor grabbed hold of—and ripped pages from—the new Bible. The altercation soon escalated. As protestors, some of whom Seattle police characterized in their written reports as Antifa, encroached, Meinecke took hold of an orange-and-white traffic sawhorse. Five protestors, some clad in all black and wearing body armor, picked up Meinecke and the sawhorse, moved him across the street, and dropped him on the pavement. One law enforcement officer who observed this interaction reported that “‘Antifa’ members . . . began to fight/assault” Meinecke.
Undeterred, Meinecke walked back to his original location by the federal building and resumed reading and held up a sign. While people gathered on the street, however, some approached Meinecke, knocked him down, and took one of his shoes.
gattsuru
1mo ago
Yeah, I could see the echoes. The 'hot stuff' and disco ball gags take it to self-parody, in the same way that Mike doing a snow angel in woodshop dust or finding a random screw with his kidneys would, but the failed tabletop spin at the end probably feels similar if you're not familiar with/target of the relevant conventions.
gattsuru
2mo ago
More feminist fantasy in the Mercedes Lackey or Tamora Pierce sense: a large proportion of characters and especially viewpoint characters are female, women's issues pop up in ways that are uncommon in mainstream fiction (even 'mainstream' cultivation fiction), the viewpoint characters are much more self-driven than in typical works for the genre, so on. There's some of the Girl Power! stuff going on, but it's more cultivator-on-cultivator pranking or sabotage than preachy aesop.
gattsuru
3mo ago
The Supreme Court in its role as an appeals court would not decide this question; it's a question for a trial court. As an appeals court it can only say that the legal theory the court used to decide Trump committed insurrection is wrong, or that factual findings it made were baseless or wrongly admitted (e.g. admitting January 6 hearing testimony).
While extraordinarily unlikely, it's at least procedurally possible for SCOTUS to provide dicta far broader than a ruling itself, such as defining Section 3 insurrection specifically or requiring specific types and grades of behavior that isn't present here. People can (and probably will!) still defy that! cfe my Bruen rants. But it's an option that makes those things defiance.
And even the trial court can only look at the case put before it; nothing the Colorado courts do precludes a Federal trial for insurrection in DC.
That's fairer, and while the timeline for an insurrection trial is wildly implausible, there's nothing preventing people from taking some other federal conviction and (even implausibly) reading it as a Section 3-disqualifying behavior.
Anything that leaves it muddy will have to be resolved one way or another by the election, unless Trump dies.
I wish I was that optimistic: this weapon doesn't get put away just because the highest-profile target disappears, and it doesn't stop on November 6th or even January of next year.
There's a level of theft that I think is immediately disqualifying from this level of a federal job, but I'm skeptical this is it. From a quick look at MN state law, this is technically chargeable as a felony, but it's an incredibly bad fit for it and really should get plead down just because the value estimates are going to be janky.
Lying to investigators is the more serious problem. I'm not a fan of the increasing drive to treat every lie to investigators as a chargeable offense itself, but even the lower levels of security investigation are specifically looking for evidence of past dishonesty, and while this probably reflects overclassification, a lot of nuclear reprocessing stuff is classified. Maybe could see some excuse if a work and travel was going to leave them that sleep-deprived, and the law enforcement questioning was done so soon after that they were still sleep-deprived, but I'm not buying it. There's always some room for 'interpretation' on the edges, and I'd expect the Biden admin is going to be willing to put some thumbs on the scales for that evaluation, though.
I'm... skeptical about the fetishist arguments. It'd be a hilarious
excuseexplanation for the awful fashion sense, but gay lingerie fetishism -- even the sort that emphasizes taking -- doesn't really work like that, and the twitter thread is about as far from a dispassionate analysis as possible (eg, the guy's bio links to a 'task force' news page with shocked headers about a Canadian PM's appearance on Ru Paul; his twitter proper is filled with Chinese Cardiology and bad grammar) short of trying to get NPR's take on things. I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt for this argument and act as if the twitterer's being somewhat near honest, but finding out that 100% of severe sexual offenders who steal panties are severe sexual offenders doesn't tell you much about the more general population, as distasteful and creepy as it still is for 'mere' anime-level hijinks. That doesn't make some deeper and vile motivation impossible, but I think there are other more plausible explanations.At the most obvious level, Brinton's public personae can be paraphrased as 'homophobic conversion camp torture made me quirky.' And there's people who can pull that off, and sometimes it's a more appropriate way to handle trauma. But like a lot of approaches that center abuse, it can also turn into a self-fulfilling prophecy, not just in finding homophobia everywhere, but also where the weird behaviors start being done for their own sake, and become increasingly unmoored from the merely strange. You see it more often with people who hid food or money in a very poor home and then turn to kleptomania in an adulthood that's no longer facing the same pressures, but there's both kink and non-kink variants in broader spheres.
More options
Context Copy link