iprayiam3
29d ago
It's just left-wing and not right-wing.
The immediate admission that you don't know BC's posting history, demonstrates that you're offbase with that categorization.
BC, and Alexander Turok, have both in recent days been defended against bans as 'left wing' being punished. But neither is remotely a leftwing poster.
iprayiam3
29d ago
I do not see how it is possible to read this and go anything other than "Shame on you" at ... the American populace for acquiescing to this. ... This is not the behaviour I would expect of a mature world power like the USA...
Why is it concern of American citizens to live up to the 'expected behaviors' of a 3rd world immigrant to the UK, who is absolutely giddy at the idea of population replacement and takes ample opportunity to say so? You've cashed that card in here too much to try to pull 'shame on you, be better' arguments at anti-immigration anything.
That aside, ok, this story taken at face value sounds awful, and whoever said he had died, should face criminal consequences. Going beyond the scope of the story itself, what is the so what, I'm supposed to be morally shamed into?
...Therefore accept all immigration uncritically, become a 'US is an economic zone globalist', and get on board the program of population replacement? Again this is what you've generally argued for over several years at least across the pond, so if this isn't your main point, you can see how it seems suspicious?
If the alternative moral is, look how bad and sloppy this is!, yes! I agree! It's horrible that we've come to this situation, but it's obviously a consequence of that bad actions of the other side that's created the mess, and the obstructionism against cleaning it up. This is the song and dance that keeps playing out:
The one side that doesn't agree with cleaning up the mess, wants to continue creating it, and obstructing the cleanup, but then use the difficulty of cleaning around this as an argument that the cleanup is being done wrong. It's diningenuous. Grab a broom, admit you're part of the mess, or shut up. Standing in the corner criticizing is seen for what it is at this point.
This is the exact same playbook that played out across any conservative issue on any topic. 'Creating a Dialogue' became a trope when it came to the final LGBT push against religious holdouts. The same side encouraging and creating the dissonance uses the dissonance as an insincere argument of process objection, when its really an object level disagreement. It's sabatage, and the US population is tired of it, especially from foreign globalists.
iprayiam3
29d ago
Ditto to Rescuers down under. Aladdan 2 and Toy Story 2 are “watchable”. Everything else is slop.
iprayiam3
30d ago
Sun Fresh market isn't government run and never was...the store owner bailed out, but the city, not wanting to see their strip mall project go bust, gave a nonprofit millions in cash to keep the store afloat.
Yeah I'm not seeing what you're getting at here. Sure, no specific scheme is going to be exactly like the other, but no 'gov owned, staffed by gov employees' grocery store is going to happen, this is the closest thing to it that you will get in America. I think you're splitting hairs.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Our (very weak, if it even exists at all) Affirmative Action policy for left-wing trolling is, shall we say, not up to the task of tolerating this any longer.
To be clear Turok is not a left winger. Hes a hananianite libertarian who is butthurt that they couldn’t co-opt the right from the conservatives.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Yes, this is liberalism in the era of post-detraditionalization, and it's where I find myself sharply offboard with the classical liberals of both the left and right, and have theoretical sympathy for the progressives for whom 'wokeness' was a project to rebuild social scaffolding.
As you point out in this thread, the thing about 'liberalism' and this atomic individualism, is that it's good for you (the individual who can 'win' in it), so people have a vested in escaping some kind of constraint, will advocate for it. And this isnt' bad per se. At least not in the way communism is bad. But unrestrained, you get the tragedy of the commons.
The thing is that the commons are protected or at lead hidden when you're knocking down superfluity, non-loadbearing parts of social infrastruture, and then load bearing ones that can temporarily shift weight to other pillars. ANd for several decades, liberalism in a traditionalized world was doing just this. Finding ways to peak above the pack for an advantage, or loose a restraint for everyone.
But here we are where the fat has been long since trimmed, and we're left hypermaxxing individually. So where previously, we had social expectations that kept people largely on broad tracks toward success as a society, those have been whittled away.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
That which can be destroyed by the truth should be.
I'm going to agree with @MonkeyWithAMachinegun, on pushback here but for a different reason; not for the sake of preserving known untruths, but for avoiding type 1 errors. Overzelous knocking down of 'perceived untruths' can produce a lot of collateral damage;
There's a Chesterton's fence argument here imo, more than a 'value of the myth' argument.
I think the axiom as stated tautologically, creates zelousness without clear reasoning;
If you see something that you beleive can be destroyed by truth, but cannot discern any benefit to destroying it, or harm by leaving it, maybe consider leaving it be.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Not to dig in, but I can't let the hyperbole slide. A night of interrupted sleep on a national holiday, is not a threat to 'a person's livelihood'.
So whether livelihood is more important than a celebration (and it is), is an irrelevant point here.
Celebrating July 4th is a more important social tool than ensuring total sleep quality on a single night of the year.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
stopping at a reasonable hour (say 10-11 pm) so as not to disturb those trying to sleep. 10pm?! This gets you less than an hour of darkness where I live.
On July 4th itself, we should at least induldge till 2:00am., with maybe till midnight on the day before, through the next closest weekend.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
It has everything to do with your post; it is a counterthesis to the quoted question.
You're basically complaining that there isn't a reasonable 'win condition' against the scolds scolding him, and I am extrapolating on that.
An old fat lady, may have been relatively better percieved, because it could have engendered some 'love is love' sentimentatily.
But mostly, the idea of a rich guy disrupting marriages with children and taking other people's women (whether that's literally another man's wife, or a more figurative, crowding the market of young hot chicks for single guys) ends up producing an aversion response in a large fraction of people.
But modernity can't out and say that, so the complaints about Bezos's are being laundered through secondary issues.
Does that clear up the response, or were you just itching to sneer at a percieved suggestion that adultery is bad and couldn't be bothered to post it anywhere relevant?
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Right which is why she can’t criticize it on that front. So the present moral distaste is transferred onto something else
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Does he have to marry an old fat lady?
No he has to stay married to his wife and the mother of his children
iprayiam3
1mo ago
I don’t disagree with this and that the just so undermines credibility of the point. On the other hand, I do think Bezos deserves to be criticized whoever he marries. He started an affair and broke up two marriages with children.
I think part of the issue is that modernity has removed the vocabulary to cricicize the object level misbehavior so they displace their ‘something is wrong’ to a secondary element
iprayiam3
1mo ago
My wife has recently given me a little gentle ribbing about my softer than usual belly. We were at the beach last week, and she turned to me and said, "Yeah, seeing all these shirtless men makes, me realize how in shape you actually are."
Point being I agree.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
IMO this comment is way too uncharitable...I'd hesitate to call it laziness.
To clear this up, I didn't call it laziness, I just listed that as a possible pragmatic blocker. My point is that it's trivially solvable in technical sense. It's really really easy to think of ways to evaluate students or have them practice learning in scenarios that AI cheating could be mitigated. It's not remotely unsolveable in that sense. But there are, to your point structural and indivdual reasons that make implementing such a solution harder.
I have sympathy for these defenses, but not infinity. If it's something any homeschool parent could solve without any innovation, then the school system needs to be able to react to in order to remain a legitimate concept. We can't just 'oh well...' cheating at scale. It needs to be treated as existential to schooling, if it's really this widespread.
There is no legitimate reason an institution of learning, can remain remotely earnest about it's mission as a concept, and still allow graded, asynchronously written reports.
Now of course many of the blockers to reacting to this are an outgrowth of similar challenges schools have faced for decades: The conflicted, in-tension-with-self mission of schooling in general. as described in the excellent book, Somone Has to Fail. Schools simultaneously trying to be a system of equality and meritocracy will fail at both.
But AI has stopped the buck passing; like so many other things, AI is a forcing funciton of exponential scale. I think if the can gets kicked any further, ever single semester, every single assignment, the entire idea of schooling massively delegitimizes itself.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Cheating with AI in school is trivially solvable on an object level. It’s just that the bureaucracy and or faculty don’t want to.
Whether that’s due to laziness, head in sand, politics, profit, or some sense of “inequity”, or any other misaligned incentive is up for debate.
I assume the inequity part is a decent amount of it. If you start actually forcing measurable accountability, it will take away other subjective safety nets.
This will effect pass rates and almost certainly have some disparate impact.
But the point is that anybody with even a little bit of intelligence could think up a plan to counter AI cheating for any given course or learning objective.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
A few walked out in disgust in favor of Hananianism, others embraced rightoid brainworms.
Stop trying to make fetch happen.
I think most people are missing it, but this whole shaggy dog is just to bury another love letter to Hannania.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
"What is with him" is that he genuinely believes that his God, through scripture, has commanded him to support Israel, and there are many in the upper echelons of the US government who genuinely and wholeheartedly believe the same thing.
I don't want to go off the deep end speculating on his stated faith, but at first glance, this part felt somewhat post-hoc to me. I don't doubt that his support for Israel is tied to his faith to some degree, but I also doubt that that particular verse is the driver rather than the justification.
It is suspicious to me that he had the verse memorized (and corrected Tucker on the exact wording at one point, to narrow his interpretation even though his quote was not quite right anyway.), and had the 'I learned in Sunday school' framining, but didn't know where in the Bible it was, or provide any additional context outside of the single quoted verse.
It just came off to me like a digestible soundbite to rattle off, rather than the starting point for a developed point of view. I think Tucker sufficiently surfaced this in his pushback, but it didn't come out explicitly.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
Search has continued to deteriorate steadily over the past 15 years and this is just more of the same.
Google wants to retain people who asking AI instead of search, which makes sense from their point of view.
But it’s misaligned with the users incentives. If I open google instead of ChatGPT it’s because I want a search not an AI response, nor an ad.
It’s just a terrible experience all around.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
I’m not talking about Biden or Pelosi or other democrat leaders. There are many many serious Catholics who are anti Trump and also anti abortion. You can I can discuss whether they are mistaken to keep voting democrat but these people exist in large number.
I am saying that if this guy is hypothetically anti Trump pro immigrant healthcare and anti abortion:
-
This describes a ton of serious involved Catholics. You are right that they are much less common in trad circles
-
A reliably large proportion vote democrat. Sure once you start filtering for theological rigidity, they vote more and more a minority vote, but still exist.
-
Voting pattern aside these folks are much more Blue Tribe than Red Tribe.
-
This set of views probably describes the most left wing bishops in the US, including ones who are shakey on sex stuff and ones who are solid.
Again, ther is no evidence this guy is Catholic so I’m just playing pattern matching.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
no idea what denomination this guy is, but in the Catholic world, prolife, pro-immigration, pro-social justice like healthcare for the poor, anti-Trump is not particularly ideosyncratic. Rather it's extremely common, and a relatively consistent worldview. This probably describes the pope himself, and many priest and bishops in the US.
However, I don't this agree that this maps to 'Red-coded'. I think it's the default left-wing half of Catholicism in America, consistenly votes democrate, and is pretty solidly blue tribe, just not woke.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
I know. I am saying then the connection you are making to abundance and the cultural malaise makes less sense. AI (not art specifically or even meaningfully. That was not meant to be causal, just exemplar) will increase the meaning deficit as it removes purpose for a lot of people.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
Ok but this is a wholly generalizable dismissal of the ops observation about material malaise within a society of abundance. It doesn’t mean it’s necessarily that it’s wrong. But I think those who recognize the ops observation should consider AI abundance making it worse.
Sure there will still be transcendent art. Just like now there’s plenty of meaningful and spiritually fulfilling lives and communities within the culture. I myself have the latter in spades.
But it can be both true that the potential for any individual or subgroup remains and can be found, while the broader culture deteriorates and the ratio worsens
That's not what I meant, Im not even that frequent a commenter here these days.
Just defending that the moderation policy isn't really along a left/right divide.
I'd say rather, it's biased against arguments that amount to 'You are moral monster and cannot be tolerated'. This was, at least online, pretty strongly associated with the progressive advance over the last decade, so I thikn reaction against this gets pattern matched to reaction against leftism.
But 3 recent moderation debates have been around:
Alexader Turok: sneering contempt for populist conservatives, from a viewpoint within the general 'right', but a libertarian/EHC perspective.
Burdensome Count: moral outrage against American nationalism from a globalist, EHC perspective, though socially somewhat conservative
Contra Whinning Coil: somebody flaming out because Whinning Coil was allowed to express racist views.
The third was kind of liberal adjacent? But more like centrist disgust at racialist remarks. All three kerfuffles though, were not about left/right, but about reacting to an argument that amounts to 'how dare they!'
To be super clear, I also flamed out of here several years ago, because I too hold some how dare they views. I don't agree with the general philosophical aims of theMotte, and think it is founded in self-destructive tolerance-maxxing. I do not agree with the axiomatic viewpoints that found the philosophy of the motte and it;s moderation.
But I simply defend that it's not left-vs-right.
More options
Context Copy link