iprayiam3
1yr ago
Consider how "incel" went from a morally neutral descriptor to a moral condemnation
I can't consider it because I've never seen it except in these scenarios where i'm assured it's true by its detractors. I especially haven't seen this in real life.
romantically unsuccessful men are about as low on the totem of sympathy as you can get.
Again, Ive never seen this. Get better friends people. Romantically unsuccessful men are to the contrary some of the most sympathetically talked about people I know. Even where it's not sympathetic and just pathetic, that's not the same as immoral.
Doing it on the meta level is pretty funny, I have to admit. 10/10
If you're contorting my comment into moral repudiation of someone for specifically being poorly undatable, I think we've found the disconnect.
This looks like nothing more than a victimhood mentality looking for a bully.
Even if it were somehow morally (I'm not) maligning the OP it's not for being single or unlucky in love.
If a Jewish guy stands up in a movie theater and shouts, 'AntiSemites are trying to silence me!!", His point isn't proven when people shush him.
Similarly, if you come in and say, 'how come I'm morally maligned for being undatable!", I'm not proving your point by repudiating that claim.
iprayiam3
1yr ago
I've never heard anyone suggest that it was a moral failing. That sounds like a completely made up strawman to victim oneself against.
Obviously the reverse causality makes sense: bad people should be less datable. But i e never even heard anyone suggest this should is an is as it's plainly not real.
Where are you getting this moral failing narrative from? You need to justify the premise, because it sounds like extrapolated wallowing or self-loathing.
iprayiam3
5mo ago
In the meantime it would be nice if people would avoid poking this obvious sore spot. I'd be fine letting you get away with doing it once. But you are doing it twice as a top level post.
Twice? This implies that the below top post (which I stressed was unrelated) is poking a sore spot, rather than earnestly calling for the BLR return. You can look at my Reddit history to see I’ve been calling for its return since immediately after its retirement. There’s nothing wrong with using the recent AI developments to recontextualize such a call. thus you’ve over counted my ‘poking’ by 50% and by your own justification should have let it slide.
I’d like my ban stricken from the record
iprayiam3
1yr ago
This is fantastic, compelling conversation. Not tedius at all. Tell me more.
iprayiam3
1yr ago
I get it... It's sad because she didn't give him any grandchildren, right?
iprayiam3
1mo ago
No I know. Of course that’s the biggest part of it. My overall point is I’m seeing uncertainty expressed in AI uncertainty, whether that’s just a rebundling of tariff etc uncertainty or not, my fear is that it is contributing to increased general uncertainty, which will be additive economic results trending from that uncertainty
iprayiam3
1mo ago
He dated a chick for eight years before meeting her sister? That’s less believable than the no sex thing, unless the ‘dating’ was on the internet or something
iprayiam3
6mo ago
As things stand, your kids are already getting home in the dark, so that’s not a good argument to oppose any changes to the DST status quo
It's not an argument as a soldier, it's a stupid mistake of math on my part. Shifting both the time and the school day an hour wouldn't change the fact that my kids don't get home in the dark, you are right.
But the broader point stands: pushing both the school day and the time and my work an hour, undermine the argument for DST all year long. as it effectively negates it. My arguments are:
- DST in the winter means a great deal of the morning happens in the dark (school being the most relevant).
- This is unsatisfactory imo
- A solution which advances the start time of these things, effectively undermines DST all year argument.
- Therefore you are left with no DST year long or a variable schedule at different parts of the year which is just DST in effect.
- Thus the argument needs to either be for standard year round (for which the objections are the 4:30 sunrise) or for everyone negotiating their own schedule shift preferences in the winter, which has it's own drawbacks against centralized coordination.
Personally, I find the idea of standard time year round much more palletable
iprayiam3
11mo ago
It is gross to criticize another’s motives when you don’t know.
If you think I was saying that you are concern trolling, I'm not. I'm referring to several online R personalities on Twitter and such. If you're calling my calling that out gross, then what can I say, you're heaping woke-scolding on top of your side's concern trolling.
iprayiam3
1yr ago
This is a good idea if you're regularly interacting with (or married to) someone into somethign you're not. But it's overkill if OP just wants more general conversational grease.
Moreover, unless he's willing to become a sportsfan all the way, keeping up on the latest talking points will be a tedius waste of time. And he'll still end up bored and anxious of being discovered a fraud in sports talk. Honestly if you want to make good sports small talk with someone, it's probably better to know nothing about sports than to pretend you care. Consider this opener.
"You know I haven't really kept up with college basketball in a few years. Which schools are doing well these days?"
You'll get the sportsfan talking! and you don't have to pretend you know or follow anything. Plus, a little understood phenomenon - you now have the conversation's steering wheel, while the other one gets to talk and like you for getting to talk. Once you start trying to demonstrate your own knowledge or insert your own talk tracks, you actually lose control.
Instead, you can take the converstaion where you want it to by asking questions. Like history? Interject with historical questions. Like strategy and theory, ask a question about that. "So how does a good team get good..." Like the culture war, ask about that. "You think ratings have changed since ESPN has gotten woke?"
Want to get off sports? Let them give you a little schpeel, they'll like you for letting them talk. Then play a game with yourself to see how many questions takes you to X. Say, X is crypto. Sports... Sports Betting... Gambling... Crypto.
Unless, like in your scenario, the topic is regularly the center of the activity, there's no reason to pretend to like it or to learn about it just to make small talk. It will actually backfire (without a genuine interest) because you'll be bored AND worried about demonstrating your boring knowledge.
iprayiam3
1yr ago
To be clear, the spinelessness (perhaps the wrong word) I speak of is strictly that he's too tempted by the upside of Trump losing on lawfare that he dances around outright condemnation of what's happening and won't put any skin into fighting with 'Trump' against this.
Like in a recent interview responding to Vivek pledging to remove himself from Colorados ballot, he made a comment to the effect of ' hey I'm going to compete on every ballot I can, whether or not Trump makes it on. That's the name of the game'
This is effectively admitting to 'playing' the rigged game. Ron appearing on a ballot that Trump doesn't is literally the name of the Democrats' game. It's not the name of the fair primaries game.
I loathe Trump, but Ron's refusal to do more to stand in solidarity against the Democrat bullshit reveals him as a flake, if his Ukraine flip-flop hadn't already.
I would still vote Ron over Trump all day on abortion conviction alone and for every other reason. But I'm now backing Vivek. (Not that it matters anyway.)
iprayiam3
1yr ago
That's all fair. I can accept that this shouldn't have been a top level.
iprayiam3
1yr ago
I'm sorry, is this a different take on our initial exchange? I thought we already shared our mutual points fair enough.
iprayiam3
1yr ago
So in my initial reading of your post, I missed that an in-law confronted your father. I though it was a member of your own family. That is pretty wild to say the least, and an unhelpful approach to any conversation of weight. You have all my sympathies there.
At the same time, if you're response to the others who disagree with your behavior is Deal With It, expect to be returned the same when seeking sympathy that others are behaving ways you don't agree with.
iprayiam3
2yr ago
Natural law has nothing to do with christianity...only became part of catholic doctrine in the 13th century when Aquinas brought it in
In other words, it doesn't have nothing to do with it.
and never got baked into the other branches of christianity like it somehow did with catholicism.
Which is why I explicitly said that was an advantage of Catholicism over Protestantism, in this sense.
iprayiam3
1mo ago
Again, the analogy might not be a very good one, but we’re getting hung up on technical comparisons. My analogy was supposed to focus on the social ritual nature of where dividing lines are that focus on discrete moats around the methodology, rather than comparisons of outcome quality.
iprayiam3
2mo ago
it's ok to generalize when giving general advice. generalization isn't a synonym for absolutes.
iprayiam3
5mo ago
I do agree that it’s not how it’s conventionally used, but I think it’s better. Slop as a quality of writing commentary is slop of the gaps as LLMs improve. But the fundamental issue with nobody cares about your prompt engineering will remain
iprayiam3
5mo ago
Sure, my point is that in my corner of the world, I’m already seeing signs of breakdown. The bubble is extremely fragile because it’s self consuming. I am stuck being asked to sign contracts and make decisions on software that I have no confidence will remain viable or a front runner by the time we get fully implemented.
The rate of change is already too fast and unpredictable to make business decisions on anymore. The landscape’s moving faster than sales cycles.
Unrelated to any other post of mine, I would like to submit a suggestion that this forum consider a Bear/Lynx repository, where folk could post various links, thoughts, and essays about these two mighty predators. These could be concrete or metaphorical.
While some may worry that this would not be ‘culture warry’ enough, I am quite confident it would prove otherwise.
To demonstrate, I have posted a CharGPT prompt below, unedited with 3 ideas.
Environmentalism vs. Development – A repository focused on bears and lynxes could serve as a symbol of conservation efforts clashing with economic interests.
Symbolism in Political Ideology – Both bears and lynxes could be used as political metaphors.
Climate Change and Animal Habitats – Discussions about shifting bear and lynx populations due to climate change could produce some debates over environmental policy and whether concerns about species loss are exaggerated or valid
More options
Context Copy link