non_radical_centrist
No bio...
User ID: 1327
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Recently, Andor on Disney+ has been very good, it's a political thriller in the Star Wars universe about a petty criminal getting pulled into the Rebellion. Lots of "Good people doing the wrong things for the right reasons" which is a theme I love.
The Game of Thrones books are another favourite of mine.
Bojack Horseman is probably my favourite show, it's both hilarious and emotional, and consistently good through all 6 seasons.
Elizier Yudowsky's, Scott Alexander's, and qntm's short stories all often make me take a moment to think after reading them.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Dr. Seuss' shorty story The Sneetches, published 1953.
Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches had none upon thars.
Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small.
You might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.
But, because they had stars, all the Star-Belly Sneetches
Would brag, “We’re the best kind of Sneetch on the beaches.”
With their snoots in the air, they would sniff and they’d snort
“We’ll have nothing to do with the Plain-Belly sort!”
And, whenever they met some, when they were out walking,
They’d hike right on past them without even talking.
When the Star-Belly children went out to play ball,
Could a Plain Belly get in the game? Not at all.
You only could play if your bellies had stars
And the Plain-Belly children had none upon thars.
When the Star Belly Sneetches had frankfurter roasts
Or picnics or parties or marshmallow toasts,
They never invited the Plain-Belly Sneetches
They left them out cold, in the dark of the beaches.
They kept them away. Never let them come near.
And that’s how they treated them year after year.
Then ONE day, it seems while the Plain-Belly Sneetches
Were moping and doping alone on the beaches,
Just sitting there wishing their bellies had stars,
A stranger zipped up in the strangest of cars!
“My friends”, he announced in a voice clear and clean,
“My name is Sylvester McMonkey McBean.
And I’ve heard of Your troubles. I’ve heard you’re unhappy.
But I can fix that, I’m the Fix-It-Up Chappie.
I’ve come here to help you.
I have what you need.
And my prices are low. And I work with great speed.
And my work is one hundred per cent guaranteed!”
Then, quickly, Sylvester McMonkey McBean
Put together a very peculiar machine.
And he said, “You want stars like a Star-Belly Sneetch?
My friends, you can have them for three dollars each!”
“Just pay me your money and hop right aboard!”
So they clambered inside. Then the big machine roared.
And it klonked. And it bonked. And it jerked. And it berked.
And it bopped them about. But the thing really worked!
When the Plain-Belly Sneetches popped out, they had stars!
They actually did. They had stars upon thars!
Then they yelled at the ones who had stars at the start,
“We’re still the best Sneetches and they are the worst.
But now, how in the world will we know”, they all frowned,
“If which kind is what, or the other way round?”
Then up came McBean with a very sly wink.
And he said, “Things are not quite as bad as you think.
So you don’t know who’s who. That is perfectly true.
But come with me, friends. Do you know what I’ll do?
I’ll make you, again, the best Sneetches on the beaches.
And all it will cost you is ten dollars eaches.”
“Belly stars are no longer in style”, said McBean.
“What you need is a trip through my Star-Off Machine.
This wondrous contraption will take OFF your stars
so you won’t look like Sneetches that have them on thars.”
And that handy machine working very precisely
Removed all the stars from their tummies quite nicely.
Then, with snoots in the air, they paraded about.
And they opened their beaks and they let out a shout,
“We know who is who! Now there Isn’t a doubt.
The best kind of Sneetches are Sneetches without!”
Then, of course, those with stars got all frightfully mad.
To be wearing a star was frightfully bad.
Then, of course, old Sylvester McMonkey McBean
invited THEM into his Star-Off Machine.
Then, of course from THEN on, as you probably guess,
Things really got into a horrible mess.
All the rest of that day, on those wild screaming beaches,
The Fix-It-Up Chappie kept fixing up Sneetches.
Off again! On again! In again! Out again!
Through the machines they raced round and about again,
Changing their stars every minute or two. They kept paying money.
They kept running through until the Plain nor the Star-Bellies knew
Whether this one was that one or that one was this one. Or which one
Was what one or what one was who.
Then, when every last cent of their money was spent,
The Fix-It-Up Chappie packed up. And he went.
And he laughed as he drove In his car up the beach,
“They never will learn. No. You can’t Teach a Sneetch!”
But McBean was quite wrong. I’m quite happy to say.
That the Sneetches got really quite smart on that day.
The day they decided that Sneetches are Sneetches.
And no kind of Sneetch is the best on the beaches.
That day, all the Sneetches forgot about stars and whether
They had one, or not, upon thars.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Do you have absolutely no empathy for someone in west Africa dying of malaria? If it cost you a mere penny to save their life, would you do it? EA is trying to save lives in the most cost effective way possible, and last I checked the most effective way to save lives was buying bed nets to prevent malaria.
If there was already an abundance of bed nets and it'd cost millions to save a single more life even in the most efficient way possible, where as they could open a local art museum that served thousands for just $10k, they'd probably start donating to local art. But right now art is already pretty well funded, and people dying of malaria are relatively underfunded. Although EA has certainly done a lot to change that and I think they have more money than they know how to spend. You could probably post an essay to their website about why donating to local art is the most moral thing to do if you can write out a clear argument for it.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
I used to, and I sometimes still do if I'm feeling very bored/desperate. But out of probably around ~20 girls I've flirted with online on dating apps and other sources, if they ghost once, never once will they actually show up to a date, even if they still express interest and say "Yeah I'd like to go on a date sometime soon!".
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Well in this case the real price is ~10k, and the US government reasonably decides that the marginal utility of spending more on foreign aid to save more lives isn't worth it at that point. But folks at EA disagree; they will donate at that level of price to lives saved. My point was more that the OP seemed to call EA "evil" but I expect that it's not really such a deep fundamental difference of values as it is his value of foreign lives is significantly lower but not 0. If it was literally 0 he would not spend even a penny to save a foreigner, but I expect that's not true.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
OP said "Why not helping your community, focusing on art, infrastructure and knowledge, instead of giving money to global moral enterprises?" I took that to mean he took issue with bed nets and not just sports teams.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
That's a reasonable point, but then you just disagree with EA on their calculations, not their premises. That's something different than what OP was calling evil I think.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
If I felt a non zero unit of empathy for every dying child in this world I'd be emotionally crippled by the weight of the world's suffering.
I don't think it's that hard to feel different amounts of non-zero empathy for different people proportional to how close they are to you. To save the life of your child? Spend up to 50% of your wealth. A parent? 10%. A close friend? 0.1%. A foreigner? 0.01%. Made up numbers that would be different for everyone of course, but I think that's the general premise most people actively live life by. I can't imagine if there was a charity that could legitimately save an African life for a penny, maybe because there's some immediate crisis that needs every cent it can get immediately and the big actors can't respond fast enough, and you knew all this for certain, you wouldn't donate. And drawing the line somewhere between a penny and $10k to save a life is reasonable. But people are just drawing their lines at different points, and there's nothing wrong with that.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
The most important thing to remember is that not all women are the same. Much like how not all men are the same. A guy who is extremely attractive to one women could be repulsive to another.
That said, vast majority of women are attracted to physically attractive men. E.g strong jawline, muscles, height. There are exceptions but generally women are attracted to stereotypically attractive men even if they say they're not. Maybe they just don't have a good grasp of just how tall tall actually is or how bulky a muscled guy is, I don't know, but being conventionally attractive is huge.
The rest is very variable. Sense of humour, good conversation, "good vibes", an exciting sense of danger, the details all vary woman to woman.
The one very consistent thing that women are attracted to is physical appearance. If you want to have sex, or even just an easier time making both male and female friends, go to the gym.
I recommend https://putanumonit.com/ too he has some good blogs that I think will click with you.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
I think the question at the heart of Scott's essay is would the experts really choose the same "best" wine every time? Say you had 10 high quality wines, 9 worth $200 and 1 an acclaimed award winning $10k bottle. The wine experts would all be able to tell all the wines are good wines, that none are cheap trash, but would they actually be able to pick out the $10k bottle? Not even necessarily enjoy it more, the price of the 10k is for its uniqueness not its quality according to other commenters, but even identify it. If the answer is yes, then wine is not fake. If the answer is no, then wine is kinda fake.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
iPhones are far from pure signaling items, they give a lot of real utility too. Personally I think Android's are better on a practical level, but it's something you could have a real debate about, it's not cut and dry.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Sure, but you didn't have people buying Apple products because Apple was signaling how much they loved gay people. People were buying Apple products because they liked what they were buying.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
I’ve heard it said we shouldn’t worry about fertility because eventually those with pro-fertile genes will even things out.
I think there's very little risk humanity will go extinct because of this. Evolution will find some way to keep humans alive. But we could have big problems with declining population before we get there. But I also think we'll probably perfect human cloning before that is an top level issue. For now, some more tax credits for having children and providing government funded day cares are probably fine solutions for the next ~20 years.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Civilized people don't like that and never did. It's not a new tendency.
Civilized people have always had fun hating the outgroup. The outgroup, who may also be civilized, has also always had fun hating the group that hates them.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
I don't completely disagree, I'm sure if Apple had a partnership with Google where they released a new Google Pixel but it had all its logos changed to Apple, it'd sell like hotcakes. But as a reverse thought experiment, if Google released two phones, one that's a normal Pixel, and one that's an iPhone with the Android logo on it, you'd still see a lot of people preferring the iPhone version.
I'm really not one to argue the iPhone advantages, I'm not that into phones and I strongly prefer Android myself in any case, but it should be obvious some people genuinely enjoy the iPhone for itself, not just for signaling purposes.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
The Holocaust killing millions is very well documented. I'm more of a mistake theorist than a conflict theorist, so I wouldn't call people who say the Holocaust killed 5% of what it actually did are necessarily evil, but I would say they're likely mentally ill(like Kanye) and/or have made some very poor decisions in which sources they want to trust.
The question of when information should be censored is not an easy one in my opinion. Especially because we can never really be sure when information is true or not; even in mathematics "proofs" that are widely accepted can be much later shown to be false. So all information, from the planet being round to evolution to covid policy to the holocaust would be kept open to debate in an ideal society. But in an ideal society then also on the easily answerable questions like the planet being round everyone would quickly come to the right answer, and for even trickier questions like covid policy everyone would quickly dismiss the stupid information like that vaccines are being used to implant microchips.
But we do not live in an ideal society, and if you let debate spread unhindered, you'll get a lot of people believing flat out wrong stuff. And that flat out wrong stuff can have harmful effects. For example, in the 14th century, the belief that Jews were related to the spread of the bubonic plague led to massacres of Jewish communities. I think with the benefit of hindsight, most modern people would agree that if they had the magic power to censor the belief that Jews spread the black plague(and there wouldn't be any butterfly effects through the timeline), they would, since that information was very harmful.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
There's a whole bunch of drama about the supposed attractiveness of "size zero" with the implication that beauty standards drive people to be unhealthily underweight, but this data very marginally contradicts that claim.
Going from my personal experience, there are lots of women who are a healthy size and are quite attractive, but are still convinced they need to get skinnier to be attractive. "Beauty standards" isn't just about male preference, lots of models are unhealthily skinny even though that's not what maximally appeals to men.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
That's one theory, and I believe it, but I think the evidence for it is still limited.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Where you draw the line at what is the same species or is not the same species is rather arbitrary. One definition is that two animals are not the same species if they cannot have fertile offspring; but there are lots of animals like that that we happily classify as different species, like lions and tigers. I think the more commonly used definition is that two animals are different species if they do not mate in the wild. And as I understand it, bonobos and chimpanzees very rarely mate in the wild.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
How does your theory fit with House of the Dragon?
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
It's got some interesting plot twists but if you don't like that sort of number-go-up game it's not worth it.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Apparently wolves and coyotes very rarely mate in the wild, so they would be different species.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
Yes, that's my point. You were saying that pearl clutching college grads have taken over and that's part of why The Witcher is bad; but HotD shows that's not strictly true.
non_radical_centrist
1yr ago
I think it is relevant that different races have gaps in how relatively attractive each gender is. E.g black women are the least attractive women and this is the strongest effect, to a lesser degree east Asian and south Asian men are the least attractive men. So a black man would often be "marrying up" by marrying outside of their race, and same for an Asian woman. White men and white women are relatively equal to each other.
This is all averages of course, there are obviously very attractive black women and very attractive asian men. But I think it is a relevant factor.
I find children's media is often easier to enjoy, they're simple fun. But the best works, the ones that make me feel or think very deeply, are media targeted at adults. So I might consume 90% content for children, 10% for adults, but that 10% for adults are disproportionately my favourites.
More options
Context Copy link