@netstack's banner p

netstack

Texas is freedom land

6 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 2022 September 05 17:27:40 UTC

				

User ID: 647

netstack

Texas is freedom land

6 followers   follows 3 users   joined 2022 September 05 17:27:40 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 647

Props to you for sacrificing several minutes of your life to test this theory.

I’ve been desperately trying to find people with whom I can share this. It’s weird enough to make that difficult, but god, I just keep laughing at it.

You can just hear Trump’s voice coming through on his dialogue. Incredible.

Always has been.

The Nazis got to power by forming a coalition with Catholic monarchists. Everyone was invested in fighting the communists, who in turn "openly announced that they would prefer to see the Nazis in power rather than lift a finger to save the republic.”

Strange bedfellows have always been present in politics. I’d argue that the ability to accommodate bizarre coalitions without immediately imploding is what has given liberal democracy such a competitive advantage in history.

Just like in the real Congress.

I want to pick at your vision of history, because I think you are romanticizing both the monastic traditions and their role in a subsistence economy. How many of those monks were voluntary wordcels, vs. second or third sons with no particular aptitude for religion? But I realize this doesn’t address your problem.

Set aside an hour each day. During that period, do not use the Internet. Practice the craft of something you find beautiful. An instrument, a particular painting technique. Whittling. Meditation, even. If it requires reference material, print it out or buy a book so that you can separate yourself from the infosphere. Practice its fundamentals.

No one will pay you for this Art, when they could get something better and cheaper from an expert or a robot. It doesn’t matter. This is about you. The great artists and writers and programmers aren’t opting out of society. They are opting in to something else they value.

Scott: Highlights from the comments on British economic decline.

Britain is suffering a decline in productivity and income which isn’t fully reflected in nominal GDP statistics.

This could be because it’s expressed in a declining pound, rather than in declining nominal wages/profits. I don’t know enough economics to feel like I have good intuitions about declining currency values.

It could also be partly because post-recession economic growth happened more in new employment than in higher wages for the already-employed.

Potential causes are Brexit, a dysfunctional real estate market, and underinvestment in R&D - but low confidence in all of these.

I’m interested particularly as a follow up to my discussion with @FirmWeird. Here we have an economy that struggles, where the citizens recognize it struggles, but the standard indicators look normal. I wanted to see if this would show up in the energy metrics we were discussing, but this data stops too early to say.

I really expect to see its energy per capita tank. Wealth getting swallowed up in housing has to push down energy consumption, at least compared to capital investment. I don’t think the UK has had anything like the shale boom distorting its cost per BTU, either.

I assume you’re talking about the Netflix Escaping Twin Flames, rather than the slightly older Amazon Escaping Twin Flames Universe. Kind of weird that they were produced so closely; I doubt they have much difference in content or messaging.

With that out of the way.

Congratulations! You’ve successfully invoked the Worst Argument in the World, and now I feel obligated to defend the motte’s favorite punching bag. First: I do not think child transition is a good thing. I do not support people or charities endorsing it, implementing it, or making it school policy. Same goes for drag queen story hour, which gives me the same uncomfortable feeling as most Americans. The broader umbrella of “gender-affirming care” is something that I think is oversold, even a fad, but I would not deny it to consenting adults. I understand that you think the whole edifice is literally fake and gay. That’s no excuse for the Worst Argument.

The best of your comparisons between transgender advocacy and Twin Flames is the final ritual/medical practice. I have some objections there, mostly due to selection bias, but let’s call it a good comparison. Sure, pushing someone to undertake surgery is an extremely suspect way to shore up one’s own power.

Everything else gets shakier. Where’s the equivalent to cult control of income? To struggle sessions? Hey, sometimes people get therapy, which is kind of like being convinced to be doing something, which is kind of like what a cult would do. Or worse—sometimes they imitate their friends. Clearly, that must be further evidence of cult behavior.

One of the signature features of cults, one you mention yourself, is control of information. I agree that kids in public schools are relatively controlled. The cult of George Washington has held power for too long, and our kids are indoctrinated that lying about cherry trees is bad. Yes, schools teach things to children. Your legitimate objections to what they’re teaching is not evidence of a cult.

It’s almost a moot point, given that the youngest generation has more access to information than any before. They can go on their smartphones and find traditional gender roles. Why don’t they? How did teachers suddenly gain mythical powers of narrative control for this one subject?

The common thread, here, is that there is more than one explanation for what you’re noticing. Kids do copy their friends and take adults at their word, just as they do for everything else. Adults in positions of power are using this to promote politics or aesthetics, just as they do for everything else. You might have seen such phenomena in a cult documentary, or you might have seen it in a chess club, on a BBS, in a small 1800s town. It’s not unique to cults.

But the key piece, the one most conspicuous in its absence, is the leader. Cui bono? Who is the Jeff Divine, the Marshall Applewhite, the Jim Jones? That’s not to say a cult has to have a charismatic leader. It’s just the first thing people think about. The central example, as it were. Hence my accusations of Worst Argument.

You have one interesting piece of evidence: both this cult and these people pushed members towards invasive, extreme surgery. You have a smattering of weak evidence: trans advocates do a bunch of stuff which sort of, if you squint, looks like cult behavior instead of regular social dynamics. And you ignore any missing pieces because you’ve already made up your mind. Trans bad, cultists bad, therefore trans cultists.

And everyone clapped.

How often does any protesting partisan have an actionable plan? At least in the US, chanting slogans is free. You get to show team solidarity without having to work out all the details.

This isn’t unique to Palestine, or to issues involving Muslims, or to elites, or whatever. Your mistake is interpreting this as a specific failing rather than the normal mode of tribal operation.

False dichotomy, no?

There’s no ordinal scale of evil. A convicted murderer is not necessarily a rapist or even a jaywalker. Likewise, believing that Islamic terrorists are willing to commit atrocities in general does not imply that they committed any atrocity in particular.

n = 2, but I read your comment the same way.

What do children have to do with this guy’s creepy hotel fantasies? It sounded like you were looking for an excuse to take shots at people who “can’t understand” that pedophilia is bad. I think everyone involved in this anti-child-trafficking organization understands that. I assume the rest of the Mormons are fully aware, too. So who are you complaining about, if not some straw progressives?

Debunking a conspiracy theory by positing a smaller, less powerful conspiracy? I guess Occam’s razor technically supports the strategy.

I don’t think SAPs work the way you suggest. They’re about hiding the contents from the outsiders, not the inside. (But of course that’s what I’d expect them to say!)

Aliens narratives are part of the normal Brownian motion of news. There’s some fraction of people who are convinced, or signaling their outsider status, or just trolling. They get picked up from the background noise and signal-boosted in proportion to their rhetorical utility. For obvious reasons, calling your enemies credulous or close-minded has perennial appeal. Likewise for painting them as shady, wasteful, paranoid, outdated, et cetera. But you can’t just make fun of the same people all the time and expect it to stick. Not on a national scale. So aliens, like any other gossip, come and go from the public eye.

I can think of a few reasons why the topic has peaked in the last few years. Misinformation is definitely a Current Thing. Dumb conspiracy theories, too. Some of the other credibility battlegrounds, like Christianity or climate change, have been quiet compared to the pre-recession years. Though the latter has flared up a bit lately. We’re also hitting a bit of an uptick in militarism.

Hell, maybe the same nostalgia-bait that gave us Stranger Things has made aliens great again.


I’m fond of a certain “sneer-state-debate” theory where different rhetorical attacks work a bit like “rock-paper-scissors.” If all your opponent can do is throw shade, state a constructive vision, and make him look small. If he’s making sweeping statements on such a vision, debate him to pick it apart. And if he’s nitpicking details, just sneer at the nerd and his obviously-insufficient values.

Aliens are usually in the news for sneering purposes. Look at those idiots, wasting time and money on an obvious hoax. But that sort of sneer has proven really ineffective against the Trump wing of the GOP, because it plays right into the grand narrative of coastal elites sneering at proles. The Chuck Schumer approach, here, pivots to a “debate” attack. If the theory is so truthy, fine, prove it. Make it pay rent. Debate me. In theory, this defuses belief in aliens as a tribal signal, making it boring. In practice, it might just open up the Democrats to counter-sneering. Trump is historically pretty good at that!

All in all, I expect it to be reasonably effective. Assuming no actual aliens, and thus no shocking reveals, I don’t predict aliens will have much salience after the ‘24 election. The cycle will continue.

You’d be surprised how often something like this happens.

Even when it’s a mass, impersonal threat, we can really throw a lot of resources at the problem.

Five bucks says “prothonotary warbler” remains unchanged! Referencing Catholics is still A-OK.

Oh, right. Per the article, it sounds like the AOS was bullied into doing the first one or two, then decided to blanket remove human names.

Trying to do this bird by bird would mean engaging in divisive debates about individual people and the merits of whether or not they should have the honor of having a bird named after them, he realized.

"That just seemed like it would lead to endless arguments," he says, adding that he didn't think the birding community should become the morality police for people who lived two centuries ago.

Some of the quotes read like they were convinced or "convinced" to make the right mouth sounds and fall in line.

mulling over for a while

Yes, you've made it repeatedly and tenaciously clear. Are you expecting a different response than the last few times you came to vent?

My take is that you still have no idea what you're talking about.

See also: responses to the cutesy infographics about how Israelis are killing sooooo many more Palestinians. There is a huge difference, and it has something to do with the Iron Dome.

The pro-Palestine response is that Israel shouldn’t be there. Not in Gaza, not in the West Bank, and perhaps not in the Middle East at all. If they were to pack up and leave Jerusalem to its previous owners, Hamas would have no need to commit mass murders.

This is about as reasonable as the people suggesting Palestinians could avoid having their buildings flattened by taking the L and moving to Egypt. That is, it overlooks the strategic difficulty, let alone the ideological reasons to stay and fight it out.

Pop music is not compatible with a national anthem in the same way that a hip-hop artist will never be appointed US poet laureate. It doesn't matter how fitting or incisive the content; the tone is off. An anthem is supposed to symbolize unadulterated national pride! It is ingroup incarnate, and adding bitter irony is missing the whole point. Even the Soviets weren't cynical enough to make their anthem sarcastic.

More importantly, your choice is completely unsuitable for practical reasons. How are you going to schedule a flyover? We're already struggling to recruit fresh-faced farmboys into the military, and you need something that will appeal to the pro gamer in all of them. In all of us.

That's right, there's one obvious choice.

I’m not aware of any logistical justification.

It is as you observe: any additional downloads, distributions, surreptitious thumb-drives involve no additional cost to developer or publisher. But this is true of almost all software. Vendors have been trying to capture that value since for ages.

I actually think this!

Perks of being a white, white-collar, [REDACTED FOR PATHETIC OPSEC] man. I do, in fact, get to benefit from playing by the rules. People all around me do, too. We get to pay our taxes and submit our DMV paperwork and make all these daily, personal sacrifices, and in return, we get to live in a functional society. There, I said it. America isn't perfect, but it is the best in the world.

I'll even go as far as to say I see most Americans as benefiting from following the rules. Even those who loudly insist that they're being oppressed. Whatever group you think I mean by this--flip the polarity, and I mean them too.

Perhaps I shouldn't be surprised that you can't find these people. You've blocked me. If you've built yourself a bubble where everyone is miserable and terrified and kept down by the Man...well, I think you're missing out.

Breaking news: tumblr is stupid. It’s obviously talking about murder. Half the comments (notes? Retweets?) don’t get why this is a bad thing and aren’t even holding the fig leaf. Fuck these guys.

That’s still no excuse to make your own scare quotes. Congratulations, you’ve drawn them as a dumb, baby-talking soyjak. Everyone point and boo at the outgroup.

It gets mentioned occasionally. Here.

Jesus. Do we have any evidence that Mr. Reese was under the influence, perhaps? I’ve spent some time in poor, wrecked Southern schools and never seen anything quite like this.

A lot of my knowledge of Napoleon comes from Wikipedia dives embarked upon during my read of Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell. (For the record, I was disappointed at that version’s slavish adherence to the stations of Napoleonic canon. A magician routing your armies and remapping Belgium ought to have some effect on strategy.) As a result, I’ve surely internalized more of the British narrative than might be strictly accurate.

The man was brilliant, in the sense that he’d internalized hundreds of years of military reasoning. As a result, he could judge capabilities and limitations at a glance. I think that’s a prerequisite for doing anything truly impressive on campaign. People tend to underestimate the fog of war, and before several of Napoleon’s critical battles, armies blundered past each other or failed to communicate. You can see how a refined intuition would be a huge advantage. Combined with his apparently ridiculous charisma, Napoleon was basically positioned to pull off dramatic reversals. Combined with France’s economic and manpower heft, he was also given a lot of slack. Eventually, though, the odds caught up to him.

His life beggars belief. Show up, terrify the Continent, suffer a setback, and repeat. Very impressive, but also only possible when the economic, tactical, and strategic stars aligned.

Okay, that one’s pretty good.

Hock my balls.

If you really believed these men were noble, you would listen when they told you that you were buying in to a lie. Really listen, instead of mining their words for what you already believed.

They may well be some overlap between “necessary” and “dulce et decorum”. Trench warfare ain’t it.

I hadn’t heard of the GDI before (outside of Command and Conquer), so I was curious about its history.

A few choice notes from the 2018 data, per wiki:

  • Kuwait was ranked the coolest most gender-egalitarian country in the world.
  • The highest GDI in the world was that bastion of human rights, Qatar.
  • The US was less egalitarian than Vietnam, Ukraine (prewar!), Brazil, and a dozen other countries.
  • US women were less powerful, relative to men, than those in Eastern Europe, SE Asia, and much of the Caribbean.
  • Outside of failed or near-failed states, scores tended pretty close to 1.

There are clearly some land mines in this metric. Wikipedia is plastered with warnings that

The GDI is particularly criticized for being often mistakenly interpreted as an independent measure of gender gaps when it is not, in fact, intended to be interpreted in that way, because it can only be used in combination with the scores from the Human Development Index, but not on its own.

Unfortunately, to get the component measures, I had to go to this table. On mobile, that means I can’t really do summary stats. I suspect GDI is anti-correlated with the lifespan difference, as countries which have the same male and female lifespan are the ones where everyone fucking dies young.