magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
No bio...
User ID: 1103
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
15d ago
I don’t think any of this will actually make currency more useful than ubiquitous payment processors, so I don’t see the need for #3.
...unless you consume things the payment processors don't like.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
16d ago
Well, yes, that's the contractarian view. Certainly, I oppose laws against people behaving cruelly to their own* animals, with a few exceptions for the animals that legitimately are capable of engaging in reciprocity.
*Cruella de Vil is still not okay, as while I don't see the puppies as having inherent value and being ends-in-themselves, they're valuable to the Dearlys/Radcliffes in both economic and sentimental ways, and she conspired to steal and destroy them.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17d ago
More that if someone doesn't have the requisite cognitive wiring to consider children a particularly 'special' class in terms of moral weight (that is, they are genuinely 'innocent' and have a heightened need for protection) it ups the odds, in my eyes, that they have other sociopathic traits that make them an overall undesirable neighbor, whatever their other values. Wouldn't want them around my kids, for sure.
Okay, I'll elaborate.
Like 10 years ago, I was living rurally, and as sometimes happens rurally, a wild mouse snuck into the house and started eating our food (in particular, my Weet-Bix). My aunt put out poison for it, as she'd done many times before. However, I didn't much relish the idea of having to find the corpse by the horrible stench of putrefying mouse. So, when I spotted it one night, I got a pair of tongs, grabbed it (I think it was slowing down from the poison), crushed it to death, and then chucked it in our wood heater to be incinerated. Perfectly logical and justifiable action.
But lots of the urban West has grown up... shall we say, sheltered. They're not up to the job of killing an animal in that kind of personal fashion, even when there's good reason to do it. I grew up sheltered too, but for whatever reason that psychological block didn't take root. Probably something to do with me being high-functioning autistic and/or borderline.
So the instant half the Blue Tribe hears this story, of course, they start doing the Body Snatchers scream. I don't think like them, so I'm not one of them, so I'm dangerous, so I'm to be destroyed or at least contained. Xenophobia. It doesn't matter that there's nothing ethically wrong with what I did (unless you're Ziz, I suppose); the thought process wasn't the same, so the hardware's not the same, so I'm pattern-matched to a serial killer.
I really, really don't want to legitimise the Body Snatchers scream. I know my face looks exceptionally tasty, so I'm not going to vote for the Leopards Eating Faces Party.
(Admittedly, I'm willing to make the "no, being sapient doesn't mean having anything remotely like human morality" argument with regard to AI. Combination of being essential to understanding the danger and the bright line of "not human".)
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17d ago
Can we at least demand the left match Trump's behavior of condemning political violence before dunking on their political opponents?
I will note for the record that the Democratic Party's best equivalents to Trump did, in fact, match his behaviour in the Charlie Kirk instance.
Top-ranking Democrats also expressed their sadness and comdemnation for political violence.
Before the announcement of Kirk's death, former Vice President Kamala Harris wrote on X that she was "deeply disturbed by the shooting in Utah."
"Let me be clear: Political violence has no place in America. I condemn this act, and we all must work together to ensure this does not lead to more violence," Harris posted.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the former House speaker, wrote on X: "The horrific shooting today at Utah Valley University is reprehensible. Political violence has absolutely no place in our nation."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., wrote: "Political violence has no place in America. This shooting is horrifying."
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., posted on social media: "Political violence is NEVER acceptable."
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom posted: “The attack on Charlie Kirk is disgusting, vile and reprehensible. In the United States of America, we must reject political violence in EVERY form.”
So that's their last presidential candidate, their ranking Congressmen, their probable next presidential candidate, and WP says Biden (their last President) condemned it too though I haven't found the source. Oh, and I remember seeing Bernie Sanders condemn it in the stream that got Destiny demonetised.
There are lots of people on "the left" who did not match this behaviour, of course (including the aforementioned Destiny), but the Democratic top brass did. A cynic would, of course, note that the top brass has a very personal motivation to want less political assassinations (i.e. they are very high on the target list and don't want to be assassinated). But, hey, that argument does apply to Trump as well.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17d ago
He said two bullets, not three (and said he'd assign them Gilbert/Gilbert).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17d ago
I added the caveats because, well, you can't do this safely in urban streets, or on a winding cliffside road in heavy fog. It also helps to know how your car actually handles at those speeds; stopping distance for 180 km/h is just a wee bit longer than for 110 km/h, and AIUI you also can't turn as rapidly without skidding. And I mean, I think some cars still exist that generate positive lift?
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17d ago
· Edited 17d ago
I've had friends who enjoyed stretches of road like that in New Mexico, but I don't think any of them exist in Virginia.
Yeah, I guess this is where me being Australian starts to show up as relevant to my intuitions about this, because once you get a couple of hundred kilometres inland in eastern Australia (haven't been to the west) the highways start to look like "straight road for 50 kilometres, dead-flat wheat field for 100m on either side, no trees, mostly no large animals".
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
18d ago
I don't think it's a good idea to chuck people into volcanoes because they didn't have PTSD when you thought it appropriate.
Certainly, a serial killer who targets children, he gets loaded into the trebuchet. But there are multiple ways to the same outcome of "not an unjustified killer of children", and "can do correct ethical reasoning when it matters" works as well as "has an innate aversion".
(I get nervous about this kind of thinking, because I've seen people call for me to get loaded into the metaphorical trebuchet over certain psychological blocks I don't have.)
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
18d ago
I will register for the record, as a principled libertarian, that I am not sure whether his driving was, in actual fact, "reckless". It is possible to drive safely at that speed, if you are in an appropriate car, are driving in appropriate conditions, and are an appropriately-skilled driver highly familiar with your car.
Of course, I don't have enough information to judge if this guy was the right person with the right equipment under the right conditions, and if he wasn't then that's indeed pretty reckless.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
19d ago
@Eupraxia's post hit most of the relevant points, but I do also want to clarify that I chose the narrow "white supremacists are generally conflict theorists" very deliberately. The group that's been called "classical liberal HBDers" are mistake theorists, but are not white supremacists despite SJ's histrionic claims otherwise.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
19d ago
Oh, I'm not for a second saying that they can't be beaten. They can be beaten. What I'm saying is that you can't just get around their memes by switching terminology. That is the fool's errand - and is what your post is advocating.
The way to win is to confront them head-on. They're fast, but they're not unstoppable.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
21d ago
The social justice decentralised meme labs work shockingly fast - when they went all-out during COVID, three days was slow. This is a fool's errand; you cannot switch terminology fast enough to outflank them, and you'll look like you've something to hide by trying.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
21d ago
In my view what Scott Alexander calls "conflict theorists" is basically woke ideology.
It was written to refer to Marxists, actually.
SJ is almost definitionally conflict theorist, but white supremacists are generally conflict theorists as well. Your mistake is that you assumed "conflict theory vs. mistake theory" was isomorphic to the two sides of the culture war; it's not.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
23d ago
A judge is on trial for concealing an illegal immigrant, and the state governor opposes it.
He said that the judge was innocent until found guilty and that he respects law enforcement's efforts to hold criminals accountable. He just also took potshots at Trump over unrelated matters.
The new Texas candidate for AG is on news today talking about how ICE invited this attack.
That's not true - not in that video, at least (I have no idea what else he said that day). Let me quote:
And I wanna emphasise too, that nothing, nothing justifies this homicidal attitude towards ICE; nothing justifies pulling a trigger. But I, I do think that we have a problem when we take our law enforcement, and dehumanise them, and turn them into, um, instruments of fear, because law enforcement must have a positive relationship with the community in order to be effective. And when, when we have ICE being directed to behave as they are, I think we undermine public safety.
He was saying that ICE would be less effective by turning up the fear, because it would make people less likely to inform and co-operate with ICE. Factually accurate? Maybe not. Distasteful to divert onto his talking point at this time? Absolutely. But no, he didn't talk "about how ICE invited this attack".
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
24d ago
Sure, just dial up their direct hotline to god whenever they need an update on current political issues, that makes sense...
I mean, yes? If you think God is real, God has the ability to send messages, and God wants certain things of humanity, then it's pretty logical for God to send such messages whenever humans get confused about what he said. Judaism has plenty of prophets doing this, and pagans typically had oracles.
The overly-convenient nature of the Mormons' updates certainly doesn't gel very well with claims that their hotline is plugged into something eternal, but the notion of having a hotline to the divine is really a pretty-logical extension of Actually Believing In Gods.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
25d ago
· Edited 25d ago
which is something like there's this overabundance of book smart people who have extreme problems modeling second order social effects.
I wouldn't really call that "book-smart", just "being a midwit" and/or "suffering from a few wide-ranging misapprehensions that change the apparent calculus".
(The one I'm particularly thinking of here is the assumption that SJ can just Tarkin Doctrine its way to a favourable result, rather than suffering the same problems Tarkin did.)
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
25d ago
Not the entire rest of the Internet, but certainly there are a lot of such places.
I do recall making a "don't shoot SCOTUS justices; the bus will explode if you shoot SCOTUS justices" post on an SJ forum when Dobbs got leaked and somebody tried to kill Kavanaugh (I'm not sure, but I suspect I refrained until then for "don't stuff peas up your nose" reasons).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
26d ago
The only thing Australians generally still do in Imperial is human height measurement.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
27d ago
· Edited 26d ago
This is a common intuition gap between the general public and the legal system. Most people walk around in blissful ignorance about how common things like sex crimes, domestic violence, or driving with substance abuse are. If we dragnetted everyone guilty of these and prosecuted them to the extent that John Q Public thinks reasonable, it would cripple society.
Necessarily, the police exercise discretion in who to throw the book at. This state-of-affairs doesn't mix well with moral panics about racism, but that's another topic.
It doesn't mix well with a lot of things; when prosecutions are massively underdetermined by the law, they're being determined by something else, which leaves a gaping hole for corruption and political repression.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
27d ago
I was having AGP fantasies before I had ever even been on the internet.
I likewise can't blame internet porn, although I strictly speaking had been on the Internet prior.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
27d ago
The head of a school is a principal. A principle is an underlying idea.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
27d ago
Bisexual men are far more common than fully-gay men, so there is a substitution effect.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
27d ago
I'm not sure "prime steer" and "heterosexual dating market" belong in the same sentence, considering a steer is definitionally castrated.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
27d ago
Yes, anti-draft pamphlets handed out by the Socialist Party of America (motto: "Workers of the World, Unite!").
I think the one with Scott is referring to the fact that in some of his leaked private correspondence he once said "HBD is probably partially correct or at least very non-provably not-correct". Her wording is stretched to the point of being false, though; "scientist" means "one who does science", not "one who believes science".
More options
Context Copy link