@justmotteingaround's banner p

justmotteingaround


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 December 21 06:05:47 UTC

				

User ID: 2002

justmotteingaround


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 December 21 06:05:47 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 2002

A bunch of intelligence officials including the Obama's SecDef and the Director of the NSA sign an open letter declaring the laptop story to be a Russian disinformation

"We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement

As much as I'd like to be skeptical of the IC, its hard to square these two claims.

he didn't become a billionaire in Baltimore on a public servant's salary

I think you're off by a factor of ~100. Googling puts his net worth at 2.5M in 2016; 17M in 2020. Given he has made his tax returns public for decades, it seems implausible he could hide 98% of his wealth.

While we don't exactly have the son saying that, I can concede that Bobilinkis testimony that Joe Biden receives 10% of the China deal is true, yet still don't see how this accounts the missing $980,000,000 you claim he's worth.

I share most of the same skepticisms, but I disagree that they worded things carefully. The limits of their knowledge was stated clearly and prominently. Informative press would have highlighted this, but we privilege a free press over an accountable press for obvious reasons.

I would prefer that he's just a hypocrite tbh

I thought he was being pretty clear that he is just a hypocrite? He tweeted about his banning Kanye, as well as the flight tracker guy (who he specifically said he wouldn't ban). A suspicious amount of accounts which merely mock him have been banned.

should be worried about to the point that I should be replacing my Teflon cooking pans?

I went down this rabbit hole previously. It's probably not a huge concern. However, I went carbon steel a few years ago back, and I find them far superior for taste and durability. Previously I bought the best teflon pans I could find, but they only lasted a couple of years at best before they began to fall apart (I cook a lot). The carbon steel pans had a small learning curve with regard to seasoning, cooking, and maintenance, but now its habit. The seasoning no longer requires any special care. I have a few De Buyer mineral b pro's with factory seasoning, and added more season at home. I cook the vast majority of my stuff in the 32cm fry pan. It'll live for decades if not centuries. Most people find it comically heavy, but it doesn't bother me.

I lived in India for a year and became obsessed with the food, which is comparatively bland in the States. So, I learned to cook it myself. Indian food is all about the spice - heat as well as flavor. The key is good recipes and quality spices (which I eventually bought in bulk or at import stores because supermarket price/quality/quantity ratio's are expensive. Fresh Indian food is totally different form the restaurant stuff. My Lamb Rogan Josh is well liked by my fellow western friends (the key is large cubes of lamb imo).

My guess is that you're probably right; they might add more chili to heat up dishes for an Indian sounding names. I know they do this in Thai take out places. But it'll pale in comparison to making it at home (which will indeed smell for a few days).

Edit. My post is showing an erroneous strikethrough and I don't know why.

Interesting. My has been a huge crowd pleaser for people who don't necessarily like indian food. I'd say they're being polite, but they request it at subsequent dinner parties. I buy lamb leg; on or off the bone. I spend a lot of time cutting it into 3cm cubes (they are smaller when cooked). I use a razor sharp knife to remove as much excess fat and tendons as possible (anything I think will get chewy, lamb is rich enough). I do batches of 2-3kg's (6-8 people with leftovers I want) and I use approx 10-15% more of the primary spices (coriander, and, moreso, cumin). I get fairly fresh and quality spices from an indian import shop near me. Not essential, but its like 1/4 the price of the good stuff at the supermarket (look for saturated colors and uniform consistency. Some coriander looks like they put the seeds and stems in a coffee grinder).

I swear I had an Alton Brown recipe the first few times I made it, but I can't find it on the internet anymore. Ive used this one more recently:

https://www.recipetineats.com/rogan-josh/ (per 750g)

Oil or butter instead of ghee is fine IME

Tsp of cinnamon instead of a stick is fine

Cardamom is essential for lamb rogan josh, but I add 1tbs ground instead of pods when needed.

I go half-dose on the paprika, but that's my preference (I find the cardamom gives it a deep, rich flavor, whereas paprika is more bitter).

I don't bother with the fennel powder.

Sometimes I forget the garam masala.

I 1.5x-2x the onions.

I add cayenne or fresh red chilis for heat (which will intensify while cooking, but I like heat).

The Alton Brown recipe called for leaving it overnight in the fridge and re-heating. The flavors do intensify. Plus also helps get one dish out of the way.

I almost always serve with a minty raita (crucial), store-bought nan, jeera rice, this lentil stew (not the quinoa part, just the lentil curry and I never bothered with the coconut flakes), and maybe an okra masala. Its a feast.

With quality spices, large cubes of lamb, and a watchful eye, the lamb has never failed to impress. It can stick towards the end. The saltiness won't be obvious until the very end for some weird reason. If needed, salt can be added late, or when served. I tend to get the saltiness just under my perfect amount of salt while its cooling. I just tate/stir/repeat until its just under salted for me. The stock has salt, so additional salt may not be needed. I cook in one or two large braising pans, on very low heat. Nonstick is perhaps preferable, but either way it will require monitoring, and gentle stirring. My goal is to have every cube be the best cube: large, and tender enough to chew without teeth. I think this dish would be unprofitable in a restaurant. You lose ~15% of the lamb in the trimming process, and use slightly more high quality spices. But its incredible.

Both light red and light white wine are fine. So is cold beer.

Pre-dinner cocktails? A Long Vodka:

1 oz. Simple syrup of fresh lemon juice and honey (might need to heat the juice and honey to get honey to dissolve). To taste. Should be fairly sweet. 1-2 lemons per cocktail. The pre-squeezed stuff in the plastic lemon sucks ass; stuff in a bottle is okay.

3oz vodka form the freezer

3 oz seltzer

Dashes of angostura bitter.

Stir and serve in a high-ball or larger.

If you do some or all whenever, let me know how it worked out!

I've done all of the above several times for my Indian night, and can now autopilot enough of it to do it day-of but it def takes time (hence doing just the lamb the night before can be a good idea).

There are good reason to criticize family court. Divorce rape is a thing in need of wild reform. However, I think even modest proposals to abolish family court and usher in the return of some 19th century norms takes it a bit too far. Making only women responsible for the consequences of pregnancy (while rolling back abortion rights) is exactly the kind thing which might convince me that maybe a patriarchy does exist, and then I'd look silly so I'm against it on those grounds alone. As proposed, I really wouldn't want be a woman in that society.

Sweden has at least been talking about letting fathers abort responsibility up until 18 weeks; an incremental change in the right direction.

It's been happening since at least Casey, with Dobbs being a major sea-change. Since Roe they've been consistently rolled back. Rolling them back further has buy-in with a significant portion of lawmakers. I'm befuddled by your comment as this all seems fairly obvious.

While I don't expect the public to follow the plot, both incidents do have quantitative and qualitative differences, though I suspect this will become less true as time goes on. As far as I know, Team Biden found about 12 documents and handed them over within 24 hours, whereas Team Trump had around 300 and dragged his feet for months.

Anyone crying "where is the raid" is either trying to score political points in bad faith (which is fine if that's the game), or is not thinking too hard.

the President is deflecting and denying rather than crying “witch hunt”

He appears to be front-running it, if anything. Now that the story is (finally) out, he said

[The people who found the documents] did what they should have done. They immediately called the [National Archives] … turned them over to the Archives, and I was briefed about this discovery and surprised to learn that there were any government records that were taken there to that office," the president added. "But I don't know what's in the documents. My lawyers have not suggested I ask what documents they were

with total police abolition, lighter sentences, less bail, decriminalising hard drugs, violent criminals out on the streets by lunchtime, rioting, arson, looting, violent takeover of city streets and public areas and anti-white ideology

Good news: Most of these positions have effectively zero public support, with the possible exception of bail reform.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/10/26/growing-share-of-americans-say-they-want-more-spending-on-police-in-their-area/

This poll was done at the height of the Floyd riots.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/reuters-ipsos-civil-unrest-george-floyd-2020-06-02

Four in five Americans (82%) report that peaceful protests are an appropriate response to the killing of an unarmed man by police, while 22% say that violence and unrest is an appropriate response.

A similar number of Americans (79%) say that the property damage caused by some demonstrators undermines the original intent of the protest’s call for justice in George Floyd’s death.

Republicans (83%) and Democrats (77%) agree that property damage ultimately undermines the cause of the demonstrators.

I'm sure exceptions to the rule exist, but we should deal in probabilities and stive for accurate piors. The president ran on being against the death penalty, and was elected. In my examples, I'm talking about sub 20% popular support. I don't know what it was in France.

This conflates national and federal polities. And at the Federal level, you have the Koch and Federalist cartels to undermine the public for conservatives, balancing things out. The US is a divided nation, but its between 60/40 and 50/50. Nevertheless, what flies in California won't pass muster in Alabama.

Which is most still do and

At the height of the violence, support for "reasonable" violence peaked at 22%. Without looking I'd be willing to bet fewer than 10% of congressmen endorsed violence at that time. Would also bet that the majority decried it when asked.

Claims that majorities genuinely want, will want, or recently wanted riots, violence, arson, looting, and violent criminals released by lunchtime does not comport with the data. Its an irrational belief in total contradiction to the lives claim they want.

hell, all of education

Yeah. Something like 90+% are liberals, which is super unhealthy. I imagine its not that different in Hollywood.

Also what do you mean by this?

I think echo chambers like themotte have a skewed perception of reality ie lots of doomerism over the intellectually bankrupt ideology that can broadly be described as "wokeism". It's a problem, but polling suggests its near the fringes.

The nation is approximately 50% Democrat; 50% Republican. The commenter I was responding to was hesitant to endorse legislation he agrees with because it is too ideologically aligned with people who want to see more arson, looting, and violent crime. This strikes me as insane, and, at the very least, is contradicted by whatever data we have. Unsurprisingly, only a small minority of people want their neighborhoods burned to the ground while they are hunted by violent criminals.

No, I mean that these positions are as likely to ascent to power as the Mises wing Libertarian party. Sure, some people probably want their neighborhoods looted and burned to the ground. I'm not especially worried about them gaining a consensus.

thus they were far less secure

This doesn't follow from the given. Allegedly they were lost in some locked closed that nobody went in and out of for years. Something like that. The FBI had security footage from Mar al Lago of people going in and out of where the documents were stored.

The fact that team Trump was adversarial to the classification people doesn't make his conduct bad.

It course it makes his conduct worse. I mean, whats worse: unknowingly keeping a work laptop, then giving immediately when found; or, unknowingly keeping a work laptop, and refusing to give it back, and forcing the police to come get it?

The goalposts were

police reform is now inextricably linked in the minds of at least half the populace total police abolition, lighter sentences, less bail, decriminalising hard drugs, violent criminals out on the streets by lunchtime, rioting, arson, looting, violent takeover of city streets and public areas and anti-white ideology

The data indicate that, for most of these things, public support falls a far south 50%. ~85% of Americans want police funding to remain the same or increase. More people want it to increase substantially than to decrease substantially.

Jews and non-Jews will always naturally develop into hostility.

Only if we keep playing the identity politics game. Erroneously ascribing group traits to individuals, or conflating group criticism with bigotry, is the poison pill which melts brains. For example, its possible to criticize aspects of 'black culture' (population level) without impugning individuals. I'm not claiming people will interpret such criticism charitably, but that's because they swallowed the poison pill. It's possible to notice that the Jews are successful without spite for members of that group. It might be expedient to simply join a different tribe (American, the middle class, Democrats, Republicans, Unitarians, (who, coincidentally, may have the highest IQ's)). But this is only because people keep playing identity politics.

Imagine describing to an alien that the official policy of the US is to abolish the police, decrimnalize hard drugs, endorse looting, arson, rioting, the release of violent criminals, and the violent take over of streets. Do you think they would have a accurate picture of policy in the USA?

but claim to have purchased yourself

This breaks the analogy because there is no legal theory where Trump can claim he owned the property, especially after he was no longer president. He didn't create the documents. His office may have, but it was probably created by the IC. Regardless, it's spelled out that he can't keep any of it after he leaves office. Sure, it might be mingled with personal effects which need to be separated, but he is legally required to give back State property. Of course he is allowed to dispute that he is allowed to keep it, but he can't refuse to show why.

how do you convince other people to stop

That's the million dollar question. It don't think it will be easy, fast, and I don't claim that it's necessarily possible. Tribalism is almost certainly a useful evolved trait. Nevertheless, the long view of history makes me optimistic that slow incrementalism can get us to form tribes/tribal identities which lower net human suffering compared to the status quo. Within the US, The Know Nothing party would seem absurd today. So would a war of Quakers vs Catholics, or whatever. Skin color, ethnicity, and religious affiliation are the lowest hanging fruit. The fact that Thomas Sowell and Glenn Lowry are black is the least interesting thing about them, and reveals almost no useful information about their essence.

People can stop out of self interest. The strength and nature of identities can have varying utility. For example, it isn't optimal to violently persecute the Quakers because they're a different tribe, or hold back the Irish because they're more recent immigrants than, say, the English. Being a Yankee vs Red Socks fan isn't likely to produce huge negative externalities for the individual or society, whereas being a Hindu or white nationalist would. If the irrationality of identity politics can't be eliminated because it is innate to some extent, we can chose more optimal levels of identification and tribal delineation.

While I can empathize with discontent caused by anti-Anglo identity politics, the claim that they have been pushed out every powerful position is so factually incorrect it borders on fantasy. Wealth, political power, judicial power, institutional power, and business power is overwhelmingly and disproportionately in the hands of Anglos. This is neither inherently good nor bad, but it can take thick skin to understand. I fail to see anything wrong with aspiring to achieve the highest ideals of the declaration of independence and US constitution.