magicalkittycat
No bio...
User ID: 3762
magicalkittycat
12d ago
? Well, you won’t find out about it here, instead you’ll get seventeen people telling you separately about how they couldn’t believe how OLD Biden looked when they met him…Except that time after time we get people telling us not that he looked old, but that he looked older. Meaning, it wasn’t a mistake to vote for Biden in 2020, when everyone with a calendar could tell you how old he would be in 2024; it just happened out of nowhere, and there’s no way you can blame the Democratic Party for it.
Well yeah, Biden was plenty coherent in 2020. He was actively campaigning and participating in debates. He was old, but not mentally gone and reflects more on a general political problem where we keep electing seniors. Trump is 79 now himself, and he'll be even older than Biden when his term is up (and if we count his sometimes stated desire to try for a third term, he'd be like 86).
And it is a general issue, just last year there was a sitting congresswoman found in an assisted living facility! https://abcnews4.com/news/nation-world/texas-congresswoman-who-last-voted-in-july-found-living-in-assisted-living-facility-kay-granger-dallas-fort-worth-republicans-democrats-congress-term-limits
At these ages decline happens fast and you can go from perfectly coherent to a drooling mess (or even just dead, as the Dems keep learning from their seniors dying in office) but I think there's not much to change this as long as olds are the main voters and rich olds are the main money movers in politics.
magicalkittycat
14d ago
In my experience, the fun thing about many people who overconfidently believe total nonsense are also overconfident that they will be proven right in short order (for current events). You'll see!
If anyone believes that there's gonna be definitive proof either way anytime soon, they're most likely wrong about it. It's been more than five years now without any account activity or additional evidence.
Short of this apparently random Mayalasian guy deciding "I'm done being AFK now for five years" or Maxwell saying "Yep that's my account, I don't know why I'm talking about a random Reddit account of mine to reporters but I am for some reason" we arent gonna get closure.
A lack of perfect closure is not proof a theory is incorrect, tons of stuff don't get perfect closure and are up in the air forever.
For all we know we will never get a definitive answer if OJ was a murderer or not, but thinking he did it is still a solid theory.
This seems like a great example of vibes based thinking from both ends.
The change is made because it has some slight vibes of being woke (since the column is called gender) so that's good enough to score an easy win. And it's without much effort, which a lot of them seem to be really lazy and uncaring with this work given how they've messed up multiple times this same way with the Enola Gay or that Army Corp biologist page that included fish gender. I'm not even kidding
Nobody wants to do an in-depth investigation or look through data because that's boring and the only benefit is that you might have to say "sorry boss I looked at it and I didn't find woke" when you can instead go and say "Boss we removed 200k instances of woke"
And then people online are upset without even knowing the details because it has the vibes of being against the Trump admin despite it most likely not being any data deletion and just a change in header.
Pirate Software seems like a great comparison to this for personality. Just fundamentally can not admit to being wrong, making a mistake or being anything less than incredible.
Musk couldn't drop the POE2 lies because that would mean admitting he isn't super talented at everything. PirateSoftware magically solved a puzzle in Animal Well that took the whole community weeks to figure out because admitting he just looked it up would be admitting he isn't super talented at everything.
Nobody in the world would care if Musk just said he had a lvl10 POE2 account he plays on his off time. But no instead he has to be working 14 hours a day while simultaneously making top ranks in multiple different video games and reading 100 books in a year and of course have time for all his other activities like when he was campaigning, and doing parenting, or watching anime, or scrolling Twitter quote tweeting "interesting" at things.
Although the POE2 thing is pretty interesting. Let's say he was genuine and he truly considers paying a Chinese person to play the game for him as him being that good, is it not possible he considers reading a book summary as reading the book or paying someone to do work for him while he scrolls Twitter as working?
magicalkittycat
14d ago
Regardless of the activity of the account, the other mods can't make it post publicly.
Exactly! The only person/people who can is the person behind the account assuming it's not hacked/manipulated by Reddit.
DMs are easily faked, publicly posting is not. Either MaxwellHill was and is inactive, or they don't want to post publicly for some vague unexplained reasons.
Is it not interesting that they're still active but stopped desiring to post articles all the time just a few days before public knowledge of Maxwell getting arrested came out?
There is a major difference between
"Is X behind Y from a casual evidence viewpoint" and "Will it be concisely proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that X is behind Y"
We all know OJ is most likely a murderer. We all know that Casey Anthony most likely killed her daughter (or did something at least), and there's a pretty high chance Carole Baskin knows what happened to her husband but I would never ever vote on any of those in a betting market that it will be proven in the next few years.
magicalkittycat
15d ago
trust the market: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/7082/ghislaine-maxwell-confirmed-reddit-accout/
I'm not even gonna cover the rest of the nonsense, because this is especially interesting to me
This market resolution is not a question of "is the Reddit account Ghislaine Maxwell", it's a question of "Will it be confirmed Ghislaine Maxwell".
No, short of Ghislaine herself or another moderator admitting it, it's unlikely to get confirmed to be her account. That doesn't mean it's not her account, it just means "haha you don't have 100% definitive proof"
This is the best argument you've got and it's still literally not even useful. But it is an interesting way to abuse betting market predictions in a conversation.
magicalkittycat
15d ago
Why are they incentivized to lie? If maxwellhill were really Ghislaine, they probably wouldn't know this. So what would have happened to the mods if they had not produced the evidence they have produced so far?
They could easily know that MaxwellHill is Ghislaine, associating with her wouldn't be seen as a big deal until the late 2010s.
it would be impossible for them to produce evidence that the account is still active without making public posts
If the account is active then it can make public posts! That's exactly the point, it's a totally active account that just won't post a public comment or thread for unspecified reasons. But rest assured, it's totally still active and doing mod duties.
magicalkittycat
15d ago
Random British ex-pat who lives in Malaysia and named his account off a resort in the area, never actually says he lives there himself anyway but is instead said by a completely different person on the mod team, shows practically no signs of actually living there in his comment history, and ironically has a comment history supporting the opposite claim where he says that he "visited" the very country he supposedly lives in is possible, but that's extremely odd.
remember though the Malaysian connection is based in part on posts by maxwellhill),
No it's not. It's based off what the other moderator (the same one claiming to have DMs with this totally active account who refuses to post for ... still completely unexplained reasons) said.
magicalkittycat
16d ago
The area was initially named Maxwell Hill after the British Malaya administrator George Maxwell, and was renamed as Bukit Larut in 1979.
Damn he must be really old. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bukit_Larut
And what connection does he have to this random place anyway with a population of 2 in the country he lives in but also visits? Is he a major head of the local tourism committee or run the place? Weird how someone like that would be so interested in US politics and never anything local to them.
Seems more like they just Google around trying to find some alternative explanation, learn that there's a random place in Malaysia that was once called Maxwell Hill 40 years ago and go "hell yeah let's say the account lives in Malaysia" and that's why there's a weird contradiction with it visiting the place they supposedly live in.
This article makes some really terrible arguments
“Maxwell” is not a rare name; howmanyofme.com suggests there are 81,736 Maxwells in the United States. The number worldwide might run into the hundreds of thousands. My father’s middle name is Maxwell.
Not relevant, he's supposed to be Malaysian. How many Malaysian men have the name Maxwell? That they're even trying to use American names and not Malaysian names as an argument is silly, does the author themselves not even believe the "actually they're just a random Maylasian guy!" defense?
It’s hard to see why attending a party would mean you can’t post on Reddit for 24 hours.
Yep the posting correlating with "party times" was actually bad evidence, in part because anyone with a brain knows that scrolling social media on their phone is something plenty do at parties and public events anyway.
So one good actual point that doesn't disprove anything, just dismantles a not particularly strong claim.
But you can’t focus on this similarity and ignore the ways their interests differ. /u/maxwellhill mostly posted about US politics, from the vapid center-left “Orange Man Bad!” perspective that constitutes Reddit’s background radation. (click to enlarge).
The Malaysian man never cared about Malaysia, just US politics. Odd.
Ghislaine Maxwell is on record – literally – as claiming to be Donald Trump’s friend.
Donald Trump didn't even enter politics that much until 2015-2016. He was mostly just a rich celebrity business mogul. And if you know anything about elites, even the literal politicians, they tend to get along surprisingly well anyway. Maybe the writer has no concept of being friends with people of different political beliefs, but it's a common thing.
I’m sorry to tell you this, but /u/maxwellhill did post after the 2nd of July. Just not in public. He continued to perform moderator duties, interact with staff members, and answer private messages. Here’s a conversation between /u/hasharin and /u/maxwellhill that happened on the 9th.
This is exactly the sort of nonsense I'm talking about! If they're perfectly willing to say "Oh my god the account is still active, just look at this private message" then why are they so unwilling to just make a real post?
What kind of person when providing evidence prefers the super easily faked one of a screenshot of an easily edited webpage over hard proof that the account is still active of just making a single post.
You literally have to believe that the moderators are too stupid to realize how ridiculous that is, and trust that none of them would ever lie to cover up their connections to a sex trafficker. It just doesn't make any sense, the entire thing is made even fishier by the hilariously terrible attempt to disprove it.
Here’s a question for believers: do you think Ghislaine cared what the age of consent was?
Yes, pedophiles would prefer to live in a world where they don't have to hide their pedophilia, even if they're rich and powerful and currently getting away with it.
If she is, then large numbers of people (the /r/worldnews mod team, for a start) are lying and/or forging evidence in the most incompetent way possible. It would also require Ghislaine to be both insanely cautious and stupid at the same time, the equivalent of someone locking their front door with three deadbolts and leaving the house keys on the doormat.
"Large numbers of people" but can only name a single group, the Worldnews moderation team who is directly incentivized to lie, is making suspicious and contradictory claims already (like come on again, who "visits" a place they supposedly live?) and refuses to provide hard evidence that should be extremely easy to do if their claims were true and the account was still active, instead preferring easily faked and completely unable to be verified screenshots.
That's only evidence against her doing it mostly as part of an intelligence operation scheme, not evidence against her owning the account.
If some random Maylasian man is apparently capable of spending all day posting random articles for years and years, why couldn't Maxwell also be the type of person to do that? Rich and famous people are not immune to having normal idiosyncrasies like that.
It could have just been a normal account of hers just like it supposedly is a normal account of random Maylasian guy visiting his own country.
There's a shit ton of weird coincidences and connections, including the major evidence of "they suddenly stopped posting very shortly before public knowledge of Maxwell being arrested even came out" that all fall together to point to it being her account, and is disproven in an incredibly simple way that they refuse to do for no good reason, only resorting to an easy to fake roundabout method that doesn't make any good sense to do unless it's for the purpose of faking, and their official explanation contradicts prior comments by the very account in question.
If it wasn't for her getting arrested, would anyone have ever made the connection? Rich powerful people are known for having massive egos and dangling random loose threads for no reason other than their own egotistical enjoyment.
We're dealing with an account that in a very short time period slightly before public knowledge of the arrest decided to go from posting all the time to not posting at all. Why?
And it's not death, the Worldnews moderation team insisted that maxwellhill is still alive and just not posting for ... unexplained reasons.
The mods posted a DM claiming he is active, but why a DM which is super easy to fake and not an actual public post which wouldn't be faked? If maxwellhill doesn't want people to know the account is still active then why do the DM and let fellow mods reveal it, if they don't mind providing proof they're not in prison then why not just post a comment?
They say he's just a random Mayalasian man who lives there too, but he seems to treat Maylasia as a country he just visits normally
Have you ever once talked about the country you live in as something you're "visiting"?
And they have a birthday right around the same time
Maxwell is Dec 25, MaxwellHill is past Dec 21.
So we have an account with a similar name, many similar interests, that just happens to be really busy and stop posting for years right before Maxwell got publically arrested who shares a similar birthday, refers to his home country as a place he visits, doesn't prove his existence for vague and completely irrational reasons.
If it's not Ghislaine Maxwell, it's a person (a long with the rest of the mods) trying really really hard to be as suspicious as possible and likely has insider information about what is happening to her in order to coordinate stopping posts right then. Because again they could just post a comment if the account was actually still active and not have to share easily faked DMs.
magicalkittycat
24d ago
Throwing up a lot of words as a smokescreen doesn't change that Mamdani's claim was well out-of-bounds.
There are people who have called Elon Musk, who is much pastier in skin color an African American before!
The category "Black or African-American" isn't nearly as ambiguous as "Hispanic", and neither extends to people of Indian ethnicity born in Africa. Historical changes in the meaning of the term "white" don't matter either, because none of them would make a person of Indian ethnicity born in Africa "Black or African-American" either.
If every other category we use for ethnicity and race is fuzzy and ambiguous, how is that not relevant?
This argument still doesn't address the elephant in the room, it is patently obvious that the term "African American" for darker skinned people doesn't make sense when a light skinned person whose family has lived for generations in Africa and practices local traditions does not count when they move to the US but a dark skin person whose family has lived in France for generations and has no African cultural identity does.
If there's a major discrepancy between category and reality, what does that suggest? The problem is categories.
The category "African-American" is neither limited to American Descendants of Slavery nor does it include Elon Musk. The Census definition is "A person having origins in any of the Black [sic] racial groups of Africa."
Not only is this silly in that it declares government to be the final arbiter and definer of race, it doesn't even work out well when governments themselves disagree on these types of definitions.
Check out the status of groups like the Brazilian or Portuguese Americans for instance.
For the Portuguese, whether or not they are officially Hispanic depends in part on the state they live in.
Some states, such as Florida, categorize Portuguese Americans as Hispanic, while others, such as California, do not. In a few places, including Massachusetts, laws and regulations treat them as a disadvantaged group for at least some purposes.
Is ethnicity really a concept that is state defined? Does a person's ethnicity really change if they move from California to Florida?
Brazilians are even more confusing, they aren't officially considered Hispanic or Latino either, and yet it seems more than two-thirds of them define their identity that way
This is more people than some traditional Hispanic groups!
In fact, enough Brazilians identified as Latino in 2020 that they would fall in the middle of rankings of U.S. Hispanic or Latino origin groups by size, if they were officially counted as one. In 2020, Brazil would have been the 14th-largest Latino origin group with 416,000 who identified as Latino, ahead of Nicaragua (395,000) and below Venezuela (619,000).
It even changes constantly in this list of racial prerequisite cases on who is determined white
Syrians, Asian Indians and Arabians are both white and not-white. Mexicans btw in the single case for them are white.
Chinese aren't white, but they do get a pass in Jim Crow Era Mississippi to attend the white only schools and join the White Citizens Council so it seems even that isn't fully clear!
magicalkittycat
24d ago
The alternative is exceedingly simple. "African-American" is commonly understood to mean American Descendants of Slavery, not Elon Musk.
We can not expect every single person to have been exposed to everything and culturally absorbed this in their life, especially when it is so unintuitive. Like that XKCD comic that's pretty famous, there are a lot of people out there who don't have or never experienced "everyone knows" situations.
So if your category is unclear and inconsistent, and other more intuitive interpretations clash with the culturally accepted one, then you are inevitably going to land on a bunch of people who use it "wrong".
You're just "African", and that's how it will be until race/ethnicity-based affirmative action schemes are totally abolished.
So he's an African, and he's an American, but he's not an African American? Certainly you can understand how that at face value looks incredibly stupid right?
Zohran Mamdani, who claimed to be black to get into Columbia and is probably going to face zero consequences for it.
Ironically, this could be called a lie. Per the NYT article
But as a high school senior in 2009, Mr. Mamdani, the Democratic nominee, claimed another label when he applied to Columbia University. Asked to identify his race, he checked a box that he was “Asian” but also “Black or African American,” according to internal data derived from a hack of Columbia University that was shared with The New York Times.
This is a man born in Uganda, and lived in South Africa through his early life.
Whether or not he's African American, and likewise with similar non-black Africa > America immigrants is a difficult question given that he literally is an African who became an American, and it's really hard to even think of an alternate term to call them along the lines of what we would call other groups! Like do we say "African-place Americans" instead to make the distinction clear? I'm not sure what the alternative even is here, we clearly don't have an established alternative.
This is realistically more the fault of terrible and misleading categories that are culturally outdated. It is weird, unintuitive and often nonsensical nowadays that Black people who have been living in South America or Europe for generations are considered "African" but someone literally from Africa isn't. And it makes for an interesting question, why do we call them African until they move then?
And if we want to say "well that's because they were originally African" or something, then it's a rather arbitrary cutoff that originally only applies to the great grandparent or great great grandparent or great great great grandparent (depending on the person's particular heritage) but is also a moving definition that applies to the great(x4).grandparent next and so on and so forth to where you could be great(x20) grandparent heritage now and be African but someone with great(X2) heritage now isn't, and also doesn't include we're all from Africa originally so why is there a cutoff to begin with then? Does that mean a black person in the year 300000 will no longer be considered African anymore because we've hit the time limit on African heritage? It doesn't make things much less confusing or weird.
I think the examples from Caplan are more like
"Ok I can just consider that it's the morals that we disagree with, that they are just people who I find to be monsterous in ethics but just assuming "disagreement = evil" is bad, so I should look at the logic I expect from aligned morals making that argument and see if people are doing that"
Unfortunately the actual examples Caplan gives in his piece are unconvincing and suggest a lack of moral imagination on Caplan's own part. Other people don't appear to feel what Caplan thinks they should feel, so he concludes they're insincere. But maybe Caplan is just wrong about they ought to feel. Maybe he's assuming that they accept facts and moral principles that Caplan himself accepts, and if he looked closer he would realise that they don't.
Well that's the question. "Do people disagree because of a different logic or evidence base, or do they disagree because they genuinely just do not care about or actively want to harm other people, which I think is a Monster behavior"
He looks at it and says "huh, this isn't what I would expect if they weren't monsters, this is behavior I expect if they were. Oh god, these people seem like Monsters"
magicalkittycat
1mo ago
Bad analogy.
Caplan points out that they aren't somber about civilian deaths, but instead often cheer it on/laugh about it.
An explanation why that happens isn't a dispute if it is happening.
No, that's just how human psychology works
If he says "X happens", a response of "Yeah that's how people work" is an agreement that X happens, is it not?
Earnestly keeping in mind the pain suffered by the innocent in the prosecution of a just/necessary/Good war is just asking for your enemies to act like puppy-killing utility demons. That's what dehumanization is for, so you can fight and win without being hobbled and cripped (and eventually, raped, murdered and genocided) by your own suicidal empathy.
That can serve as an explanation for why they do it, but it doesn't dispute Caplan's claim whatsoever then, it's in agreement with it! That instead of taking a somber "sad but necessary" view, they appeal to collective guilt and laugh about it.
You frame your comment like a dissent, while the actual substance is the same just under a different framing.
magicalkittycat
1mo ago
The strongest criticisms of Israel involve the parts of it which appear profoundly uninterested in doing so. There are more of these than I would like
That's basically the first example Bryan Caplan gives in missing moods about why he doesn't trust the war hawks defense of civilian death.
What he expects is more like "It's a sad but necessary drawback to the messy reality of war that sometimes peaceful civilians are swept up as collateral" and yet instead often sees stuff more like "Hell yeah let's wipe them out, the only good [nationality] is a dead one!"
Mainstream conservatives and the far-right agree that the welfare state serves to subsidize single motherhood, but only the latter thinks it's a bad thing.
Unless there's evidence that removing Medicaid and welfare would cause parental abandonment to drop and for those parents who currently leave their kids to not be an abusive net negative if they do come back, helping single mothers out doesn't contradict an idea that a healthy two parent household is generally better to strive for.
That's a pretty big assumption IMO, it's hard to see how many shitty fathers who leave their girlfriends when she gets pregnant and basically never contacts them is going to be persuaded too much by anti welfare policies, especially when they already try to dodge child support. And even if it did work, having a drug addict dad who doesn't want to be there is not something I'd have wanted as a child. I had a light version of that (alcoholic father in my mid teens) and I still despised it.
Putting aside any morals, I don't see how you're feasibly going to make a law that allows for people to kill others easily that also doesn't inevitably end up with a bunch of people dying because "I thought they counted as a valid target" becomes an obvious excuse with very little ability to counter, and not to mention it pretty clearly violates the entire principles behind the first amendment if we start killing people over them just existing together in a public space with signs and speech. Even with self-defense/stand your ground laws which are generally easier to work off of, we still see things with murderous people shooting doordash drivers and pulling guns on girl scouts trying to exploit it.
It comes off as "I'm bloodthirsty and I want to justify it, no one will be bothered if I just shoot that guy I find annoying right?"
magicalkittycat
1mo ago
This is the really intractable portion, because killing protestors is probably net pretty good when done by private individuals. Protesting, even the "peaceful" kind is still highly antisocial, at best being a massive waste of time and resources. But usually also significantly interrupting business and people's lives
Killing people also disrupts a lot of lives too, including taking court and police time away from other crimes. It disrupts the employers of both, the family members and friends of both, etc. It increases the fear of violence level of the rest of society. It devalues nearby property by increasing the crime rate.
Murder doesn't just hurt the murder victim.
We're gonna have to see if Trump actually goes through with the lawsuit and what happens over it, but given WSJ and Murdoch decided to go through with the article knowing his plans (they even state in the article that's the comments they got when reaching out to the admin) I'm expecting they might be storing more in the barrel still and baiting.
As a North Carolinian, I saw a similar story play out with Mark Robinson where he claims it's fake, starts a lawsuit and then quietly dropped it after things were no longer relevant. Especially funny cause he kept using the username in question too.
Still whether or not this particular letter is real is mostly a distraction from the Case of the Missing Epstein Files we kept getting promised only to end up not existing and things like the altered video. Probably why this is the first time JD Vance suddenly has some thoughts to share, of course none about the Epstein situation, it's so sad how we just don't talk about it anymore in favor of random drama of the day.
Anyway funniest conclusion will be a real letter but not by Trump or associates, but by Epstein and associates faking it and putting people's signatures on things for some weird fantasy.
More options
Context Copy link