gaygroyper100pct
No bio...
User ID: 1855
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
The idea of using a hook-up/dating app for finding friends is... bizarre to me, to say the least, but well maybe it happens. I can see how maybe it's a thing in the gay community, but I still find it bizarre.
I am told by straight friends that they do this too. Many women seek social interactions on tinder with the lure of possible sex to rope guys in.
I also know of one very hot but socially awkward straight guy who does this. Step 1: display abs and do hookup. Step 2: friends with benefits. Step 3: some of the friends with benefits become genuine friendships. Or maybe he's just buff nerd bodybuilder with a harem, I can't tell.
Your threat model is wrong. Here's the threat model:
https://www.themotte.org/post/205/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/38246?context=8#context
Given the fact that the majority of purchases will be through the mobile app (i.e. most likely the same device receiving the 2FA code as the one signing in and ordering), it's quite useless, actually. This is on top of the fact that SIM-based 2FA is horrendous for being extremely susceptible to social engineering,
...Or it could be that people were phished to hand over not only their password but also the 2FA code for authentication...
Current attack: an attacker with 10k stolen CCs, 50%+ of which are already reported as stolen, and he's buying burritos to determine which ones are still live. This attacker is running a python script on his laptop and placing orders either with selenium in the browser or an android VM.
Effort: python test_on_chipotle.py todays_batch.csv
Reward: 5k valid CCs.
Your proposed new attack: make 10,000 phone calls to either T-Mobile/actual Chipotle customers, perhaps half of which will be successful in convincing the customer to hand over the OTP.
Effort: 10k cold calls
Reward: 2.5k valid CCs.
Even assuming the 10k cold calls are still worth the effort to the scammer (they probably aren't), chipotle has just cut phony orders in half.
What makes them white and exurban (as opposed to rural)? What would a black exurban (or rural) southern/lower midwestern family of bears look like?
Again - my question is how to make anthropomorphized characters (that fit the constraints of children's media, i.e. nothing complex) non-white? In India this could theoretically be accomplished by exploiting ethnic dress (e.g. Sindhis wear very distinct clothing, at least for special occasions) for characters that actually wear clothes. But as far as I'm aware the US has almost no ethnic dress - the only ones I can think of are either for obscure groups (Amish, American Indians) or racist stereotypes that would be poorly received ("gangsta" clothes, sombreros).
So lets make it very concrete. Here's monkey mechanic. He's a monkey and he likes to help people by fixing their cars (with a monkey wrench). His only non-fixing stuff interest that I've observed is bananas. How do you make Monkey Mechanic non-white? (Or feel free to make other characters non-white, e.g. the giraffe who keeps hitting his head on the roof of his car.)
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
Here's a very trivial and absolutely unclear case: literate programming.
Consider the style of Jupyter notebook in which one produces a document, intended for human consumption (i.e. full of explanatory markdown cells) but which also has executable code cells.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
Probably deservedly so, but then also projecting some of that hatred onto contemporary Muslims who don't really deserve any of it.
Mughals - warlords who steal lots of stuff to buy luxury items.
Contemporary Indian Muslims - owner-operators of bakeries and non-veg restaurants.
Lets actually roll with your example:
Does a story of a man repeatedly abusing and eventually murdering their young child move the needle for how you'll trust, hire, or promote other men?
Apparently it has, for professions where this is relevant. 89% of childcare workers are women and about 85% of elementary school teachers are. So it does appear that we, as a society, have decided that it's too risky to let men work around children.
https://www.zippia.com/child-daycare-worker-jobs/demographics/
This story discusses that the suspicion you describe is rampant.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/men-teach-elementary-school/story?id=18784172
I would be curious to see your studies which claim 1-5% of men do sexual crime. A quick google search suggests that about 1.5% of America has ever been in jail and about 1/10 of violent crime is rape. Assuming another 1.5% of America got away with a crime, all criminals are men, and everyone in jail is a violent criminal, that gets us a ballpark of (1.5% + 1.5%) x (10% of crime is rape) / (50% of america is men) = 0.6% of American men did a sex crime.
https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2020.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States
I don't know the specifics of how large Brinton's group is nor do I know the estimated number of sexual crimes they commit. But I think you're giving the OP quite a pass to use assumptions about a group that they probably couldn't name as justifications for discrimination.
Consider an experiment one might run:
-
Allow gattsuru to select a person he considers central in this group.
-
Put that person, along with 9 randomly selected other people of the same gender and race into a lineup.
-
Me, an internet rando who believes he understands gattsuru's point, has to pick the person from (1) out of the lineup from (2).
With what odds do you think I'll get it wrong?
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
As I have brought up in the quoted post, a logically straightforward workaround is to have blocking only prevent new replies in the future; the existence of a reply can override the blocking feature,
This really doesn't solve the problem I described at all. The conversation I'd like to have:
Party A: "blah blah lies"
Party B: "A is lying "
Party C: "B, can you clarify that a bit? I'm uncertain about X."
Party B: "Clarifying statement"
You've now prevented this from happening.
And then, trollish behavior should be treated accordingly, no matter what form it takes, and someone blocking anyone who disagrees with them is surely leaving evidence in e.g. the number of blocked users.
This is only accessible to someone with programmatic access to the DB and the time to run a statistical analysis to identify such things.
Let's see the cost-benefit analysis here.
The only cost I see is that when you bail on a conversation, others are allowed to continue it which might make you feel (self-)excluded. That seems like a negligible cost in my view.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
I'll disagree with most of the replies.
My general observation is that for people of ordinary ability/motivation, boot camp attendees seem to be more likely to get jobs. I am not entirely sure why but I think it's because "boot camp -> entry level" is now a recognized entry pathway and therefore you don't pattern match as "weird". Plus many employers have a plan to allocate N interviews to particular boot camps (perhaps including yours), you may get one of those slots, there is no equivalent plan for weirdos who learned from the internet.
Also you should absolutely attempt to navigate the DEI stuff while hiding your power level. It's a compliance ritual of the modern workplace and it's often hard to avoid, so getting practice with it in a safer environment is useful. This is something I very much wish I had when I came to the US. Instead, I awkwardly tried to understand WTF people were talking about based on what I knew. "So it's like reservations, what is the quota?" Guess how well that went (and it's probably worse now).
I have no recommendations of particular boot camps beyond Bloom School (formerly Lambda) and I've only been to PDX once.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
No one is bound by anything and no one claims they are. The claim is that the employees, current and former, become an influence network where it is in the interest of the participants to prioritize their reputation within the network over their fiduciary duties.
Moreover, this stuff is generally handled via implicit escalation. "Ok I'll crack down on the beheading videos and build a connection with people still on the inside." "Ok, I guess advocating for beheading is pretty similar." ... "Advocating for Trump is basically the same as the previous step."
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
India has been having famines since at least as far back as Sanskrit existed. It's in the Purana. There were plenty of famines under the Mughals and other empires too, e.g. this one:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deccan_famine_of_1630%E2%80%931632
In any case, I am merely disputing the claim that the British were not invested in the long term success of India. They clearly were, and on long timescales. I wish my region had rulers with the effectiveness and foresight of the EIC instead of our current NIMBY with globohomo characteristics.
I am not claiming to have clear econometric proof that the British were better than other empires which might plausibly have ruled India. (Though I am fairly convinced that the Mughals were terrible.) Perhaps India would have been better off had the Marathas or the Bengalis driven the British out and taken over, or perhaps not. I don't know.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
You seem to be trying to compute probabilities by counting occurrences within a reference class, and then forgetting to divide by the size of the reference class. That's odd.
(# of sandy hook and synagogue shooters) / (# of white men) = small
(this one guy) / (# of transvestite puppy play wtf this guy is) = much bigger
There's a very legit purpose here. No one is stealing burritos, but quite possibly Chipotle is seeing lots of CC fraud.
Suppose you have a bunch of stolen CCs, about 75% of which have already been reported stolen, and you plan to buy a bunch of x-boxes from Walmart with them. If you pickup an order placed online with card reported as stolen, you face the risk of Walmart calling the cops who walk out to the online order pickup parking and arrest you.
So what you do is before buying the x-box you want to test the credit card by making a low value/low suspicion purchase that you don't face the risk of arrest for. A burrito from a national chain (which you never pick up) works nicely.
This is a huge pain for chipotle. They pay penalties on the shady purchases and have the fraudulent transactions eventually clawed back (messing with cashflow). Also uneaten burritos aren't free to produce.
By requiring 2FA you make it costlier for scammers to play this game. (And "costlier" != "impossible". I know you can get a SIM card for $20 at the tmobile store, but now you've just made using a stolen card $20 more expensive and required the scammer to make an extra trip.)
How Elon Musk can unlock the value of twitter, you all live in a bubble edition.
Here's a theme I've been seeing in multiple comment threads here, the theme being the assumption that motte users and the leftist journalists they follow are typical twitter users.
Those are the type of users [10k-ish follower esoteric accounts like popehat] (unlike journo-s) that twitter can't afford to lose. Not sure if network effects will be that strong.
This is based on a totally false idea of what the heck twitter actually is. Go look at the top 10 accounts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-followed_Twitter_accounts
There are 2 celebrity businessmen (one of whom became a celebrity politician), 1 celebrity politician, more celebrities, plus Narendra Modi. If you go further down the list of top twitter accounts and drop stuff that's clearly the result of a well placed "follow me on twitter button" (e.g. @youtube, @pmoindia, @cnn), you discover that twitter is mostly celebrities and sports.
From a logged out incognito account on a US VPN, the top 10 trending topics are currently NFL (6), pro wrestling (1), NBA (1), happy birthday taylor swift (1) and business (1 topic about SBF). Of the UI tabs twitter has chosen to put on the trending page, they are "For You" (celebrities plus some tweets about TV shows, with a little news mixed in), "Trending" (celebrities and sports), "World Cup", "News" (which includes celebrity news), "Sports" and "Entertainment". (India is not much different.)
This even fits the anecdotal stories that have made it into our bubble - after Musk fired the moderators, twitter Japan was suddenly a bunch of anime, j-pop and k-pop.
Here's another hint that you're in a bubble: a significant chunk of the anime that's trending is stuff like "My Dress Up Darling" or "Kaguya-sama: Love Is War -Ultra Romantic" instead of the ninja stuff beloved by western nerds. I'm in a bubble too! I once looked up forums for an anime about cooking with the goal of recreating recipes from the show. What I got was a bunch of discussions about who male protagonist everyman diner chef should have sex with - texas A1 steak girl, high class french food girl and rural japanese cuisine good girl.
So here's how Musk can unlock the true value of twitter.
-
Fire the moderators to save money and let everybody post a bunch of Happy bday taylor swift I :heart emoji: u.
-
Downweight replies that match
n(.*[i1l].*)g+(.*e.*)rso you can only see them after digging through 10+ pages of "I :heart emoji: u Rihanna". -
Stop trying to put leftist cause of the week at the top, and allow twitter to fully exploit for engagement that which it already is: celebs and sports.
-
Allow Apple and Ritz Crackers to place their advertisements between taylor swift birthday wishes (by anyone but Kanye, next year Kanye is probably fine) and discussion of how awesomely Asuka punched the heel of the week on WWE.
-
Don't worry about the journalists leaving. Twitter matters to journalists, but journalists matter very little to twitter. Their excessive influence is actually mostly a historical anachronism - they were early adopters and spread it to the mainstream, but they are no longer very important. Also they can't leave.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
As far as I'm aware, rather than become subjects of the native authorities they instead set up their own and in some cases subjugated the native authorities by force of arms, which modern day immigrants generally don't.
This is, generally speaking, not a particularly accurate description of colonialism as it actually occurred. It postulates some kind of actual "native" authorities, a condition which the world often did not satisfy.
For example, the British displaced the Mughal empire. The Mughal empire was not native, it was founded by an Uzbek warlord who was in tern descended from Gengis Khan. Insofar as this Uzbek warlord became native, he then expanded his empire into other quite distinct regions.
Whether you attribute Mughal rule to Uzbekistan or Agra, it was still foreign to Bengalis by the time it reached Calcutta.
Mughals were displaced by the Maratha empire in some places, and the British in others. Eventually the British replaced the Maratha everywhere.
From the perspective of someone from Delhi or Calcutta, "native rule" is so far in the past that it's silly to consider the British as removing it. (In contrast someone from Poona can claim to have been ruled by natives - the Maratha - until the British displaced them.)
And in some cases - e.g. the princely states - the British never did what is considered "colonization". For example, the British had a longstanding alliance with the Nizams of Hyderabad. But in 1948 the British were forced to exit and allowed the Princely states to decide what they wanted to do. The Nizam of Hyderabad chose independence, and shortly after that it was invaded by India.
Was Hyderabad colonized by the British?
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
Their names are "papa bear", "mama bear", "brother bear" and "sister bear". "Berenstain" is the name of the authors, not the bears, but Dr. Seuss (who assisted with the creation of the series) described them as "Berenstain bears" later to distinguish from other bear books after they became popular. I do not understand how you've determined they are Eurasian brown bears (which range from central Europe to Japan) instead of North American brown or grizzly bears (which was my assumption).
One possible way I can interpret this argument: any character, unless explicitly characterized as non-white, is assumed white and anthropomorphic characters of no particular ethnicity are impossible? E.g., baby shark is white (not Korean?!?) since it's a yellow shark of indeterminate gender who sings a 3 word song.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
Bombay, Ceylon, Siam, Persia
You're actually mixing up a lot of different things. Bombay was never renamed - it's transliteration into Latin characters was changed to better reflect it's pronunciation in Indian English. It's always been मुंबई in Marathi and Hindi. (They mostly share an alphabet.)
Florence is simply the original Latin name of a Roman city, and Firenze is what the name of the city drifted to as the local language evolved from Latin to Italian.
Persia was an actual name change; basically the Parsis were (and still are) the dominant ethnic group of the larger region that is now Iran but were originally from a smaller area called Pars. They formed an empire and conquered other ethnic groups/regions (Kurdistan, Balochistan) that - to this day - wish to escape Persian rule (or at least some do). The name change to Iran was meant to be more inclusive. Also, both the official Wikipedia page and most quora questions very carefully forget to mention that shortly after the Shah's 1935 declaration that Persia is "Land of the Aryans", Hitler declared them to be "pure Aryan" in 1936 and forged a close alliance with them.
(Amusing observation: every Persian female I've met in the US purports to be ultra woke socialist leftist, but will revert back to a sneering 1488-style biodeterminist at the idea of Kurdish or Baloch self-determination.)
Siam was also a real renaming - from the Kingdom of Siam to Thailand, the latter of which has the double meaning "Land of the Free" (never colonized) and "Land of the Tai [ethnic group]".
Since you can't fuck a kid without getting into trouble, and you can't have porn of real kids being really fucked without getting in trouble, you're settling for the next best thing.
You can't tie up a non-consenting woman up and have sex with her, so therefore doing the same to a consenting woman who is pretending to be non-consenting is settling for the next best thing (and must be illegal or wrong). Spot the flaw?
It's a bit different for the British Raj in that famines under the Raj were almost always direct consequences of the actions taken by the Raj's government,
"Carts belonging to banjaras (carriers) transporting grain from the more productive regions of Malwa were intercepted and supplies diverted to feed Shah Jahan’s [Mughal Emperor] royal army in Burhanpur, who were fighting territorial wars in the Deccan (southern) provinces." - Peter Mundy, a firsthand observer
Not so different. Here's another, this time caused by a combination of bad years plus Maratha armies devastating all the cropland on their way to Mysore: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doji_bara_famine
That's the story of most famines around the world, at least since the early modern period - bad weather combined with bad policies, e.g. looting grain carts and trampling fields.
As for the Mughals, I didn't say they were less "oppressive" and I'm not sure what you mean by that. I said they were terrible.
They are generally accepted to have average tax rates on the poor of approximately 50%. That's a lot of money going into state coffers and significantly exceeded other empires, including the British. Where did the money go? Traveling as a tourist shows us many opulent palaces and tombs built by the Mughals, and history books also tell us of the opulence of their courts. History books also tell us of their many wars.
Put aside the historical romanticism - that's a story of warlords looting a nation, building very little, and spending the proceeds on luxuries for themselves. And it still wasn't enough - Shah Jahan's fundamental problem was that money spent on luxuries for the rulers was growing faster than the economy, and his empire was so corrupt that he couldn't stop it. Slapping a rainbow flag with a brown stripe on top of this - I mean a "we love hindus too" flag - doesn't change it. (Yes, I'm throwing in a western culture war reference since America is waking up soon.)
The British did not have that problem. Their stated goal, which they do seem to have acted on, was to grow the economy of India faster than the fraction they extracted. Kill the thuggees because the hurt trade. The Nizams of Hyderabad, with whom they were closely aligned, felt similarly. Hyderabad became so rich that India eventually conquered them to capture that wealth.
And if you travel to Bombay as a tourist you see this. There is no British palace, but there is a a British train station. It's nice and you don't need to be royalty to use it.
I don't see much evidence the Marathas thought things through at that level - there is certainly no Maratha equivalent of John Stewart Mill writing essays for them - but at the same time their culture did not seem as corrupt as the Mughals.
gaygroyper100pct
1yr ago
This seems to be a new definition of colonialism: colonialism is not determined by any actions or properties of the colonizers, but instead by the actions of their descendants?
In any case, the idea of "Indian culture" is meaningless in the 1526-1760 period. The Marathas and the Mughals today fall under the "Indian" umbrella, but at the time most of their empires were foreign subjugation by a distant ruler - it's just that prior to 1948, "foreign" might include Aurangabad or Poona.
It is far from clear to me that the Mughals were better than the British (or worse). Nearly all the research is too politicized to be trustworthy; leftist academics tend to support the pro-Mughal/anti-Britain position and western sources tend to defer to them. By "leftist" I of course mean what English language Indian newspapers describe as "left", i.e. generally aligned with Congress party and opposed to "right wing" Hindu nationalism.
I've seen some esoteric and well disguised academic work suggesting they were dramatically more extractive than others (most notably "Taxation under the Mughals") and the visual artifacts that remain are consistent with this - just compare the opulence of Mughal tombs to those of Maratha or Bengali palaces. The beauty of Taj Mahal and Bibi Ka Maqbara are the product of taxes paid by lacs of poor peasants.
In contrast, think about British artifacts that persist. The biggest of these are Bombay (about 20% of India's GDP) and EIR/some other companies (today known as Indian Railways). In terms of specific structures they are quite visible today - e.g. an iconic train station which tourists refer to as "Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus", various universities, bridges and museums.
At least based on what I can see, the British certainly seemed to have invested more into building India up than the Mughals did. I visited the Taj once in my life. I've taken trains built by the British more times than I can count.
If we're comparing the tyranny of the two empires,
We aren't, we're disputing the definition of "colonialism".
To be fair, positive effects of the British Empire are probably more noticeable now due to the fact that it was much more recent.
Not that much more recent. The British arrived in India about 80 years after the Mughals, 1610 or so. They built factories.
By 1781 they were building schools cause literacy was profitable. In 1837 the postal service was founded. By 1855 India had a telegraph system. The Mughal empire ended in 1857. All throughout this time they were creating new lines of business, for both domestic and foreign consumption - e.g. widespread chai cultivation.
What did the Mughals do during the time period of overlap? Keep in mind that they were far richer and more numerous than the British, particularly early on.
Of course engagement is up - it's the world cup and American football time! The top of my "For You" page from a logged out browser in India is #fifaworldcup, ronaldo, #sachintendulkar, golden boot, france 4-2, money money money and greatest of all time. The non-football related topics are #sachintendulkar (a cricketer) and money money money.
A logged out page in America has 8/10 on top being NFL, the last two being "Happy Hannukah" and "Twitter CEO". The top of the page is literally Patriots vs Raiders scores.
I will take the opportunity to re-up a comment I left recently, explaining how Musk can make twitter profitable again: https://www.themotte.org/post/229/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/42105?context=8#context
tl;dr; sports + celebrities. No one cares about paul graham or taylor lorenz, lots of people care about Brady, Belichick and Dicker the Kicker. If you don't know who they are, that's your bubble. The only non-NFL humans that twitter America seems to care about are Tom Cruise, Elon Musk, Lionel Messi and (way down the list) Christina Aguilera.
You are restricting their conversations with anyone else. Here's a pattern I've seen quite frequently:
Party A: "schools with poor kids are underfunded that's why NAMs do badly in school."
Party B: "False <link to data on funding levels by family income/percentage NAM>"
Party A then blocks B, possibly after making some argument why they are right.
In the reddit implementation it prevents me - party C - from engaging with B in the current conversation. Perhaps I want to know more about his data source or reasoning, but I can't do that except by starting a new thread.
But the real weaponization comes from repeat interactions. A few days later in a different thread:
Party A: "schools with poor kids are underfunded that's why NAMs do badly in school."
Me: "that sounds reasonable and no one is refuting it."
I suspect this is a pattern that at least one person was using this on reddit, though I have no way to prove it.
More options
Context Copy link