omw_68
4hr ago
Sure, but they were segregationists; it wasn't about crime.
Come to think of it, what was the point of separating blacks and whites? It's easy to think of Southern segregationists as moustache-twirling villains who wanted little beyond stigmatizing blacks and keeping them down, but perhaps there was an actual practical reason for this type of segregation?
omw_68
4hr ago
Weren't a lot of the civil disobedience cases (or at least the high-profile ones) directly related to their goals, rather than interfering with federal officers? e.g. staging a sit-in at a restaurant counter, where they absolutely would (theoretically) purchase and eat a meal like anyone else should the proprietor serve them, rather than by (say) forming a cordon and blocking anyone from eating there.
I don't know, but I think the basic idea of civil disobedience is to publicly and openly violate a law which law you believe to be unjust.
So that if you block a highway as a form of protest, it's arguably not really civil disobedience. You aren't saying that there shouldn't be laws against blocking highways. Rather, you are just engaging in what I have called "Terrorism Lite." i.e. you are violating the law in order to in inconvenience and harm other people, but doing so short of direct violent attacks on human beings.
omw_68
6hr ago
A lot of people unironically believe that Rosa Parks was just some random nice lady who was too tired to change seats on the bus that day
FWIW I didn't learn until well into adulthood that Rosa Parks was a setup. Which is kind of a shame, because it would have been interesting to learn that civil rights activists wanted to mount a legal challenge to bus segregation; that they found a sympathetic plaintiff; and they planned the whole incident.
I don't see that this would undermine the curriculum, but apparently the ideologues who put together our class materials wanted to deify Rosa Parks and the civil rights leadership to the maximum extent feasible.
omw_68
8hr ago
It’s worth noting that twitterati who have crunched thé numbers found, unsurprisingly, that high income men prefer women with high education while having little preference on income.
Yeah, I was thinking basically the same thing. The concept of "waitress" conflates two separate issues: (1) the woman's income and career prospects; and (2) the woman's socio-economic class.
If the waitress' father is a physician and her brother is an engineer, that's one thing. If her father is a steel-worker and her brother is a trucker, that's something else entirely.
And in regular life, I see this kind of pattern show up pretty regularly: Thus husband is a highly successful doctor, banker, attorney, etc. while the wife is a part-time university professor; a government attorney working 9-5; etc. i.e. someone from the same class but not a high-powered girl-boss.
omw_68
1d ago
Would your legal chances really be that much better if you start asking lawyers about dismembering your murder victims and disposing of evidence?
Generally speaking, yes. Suppose the authorities subpoenaed the phone records of a murder suspect and found that shortly after the murder had been committed, the suspect called an attorney and and a few lengthy phone calls. If these calls had been made at roughly the same time that the suspect was on television begging for help finding his missing family member, then obviously it would look suspicious, but what can the authorities do? If they call the attorney, it's very likely the attorney will decline to be interviewed. Even if the DA's office approves a subpoena, it's pretty likely that attorney will move to quash the subpoena and the motion will be granted. Knowing that this avenue of investigation is unlikely to be productive, it's doubtful that the authorities would even pursue it.
That being said, I think most attorneys would not be very helpful if they got the sense they were being used to help plan a crime. Or even if you asked questions about hypotheticals involving dismembered family members.
omw_68
1d ago
Seems like this judge might have just invented a multi-billion dollar market in legal LLMs run by your lawyer and covered under attorney-client privilege. Have your lawyer spin up an LLM in a box that’s specifically between you and your lawyer. At least, if my lawyer sends me an email that’s covered so there must be some workaround equivalent.
Yeah, my instinct is that would work. Instead of querying the LLM directly, the client sends the query to a lawyer who runs the query himself and sends the result back with a disclaimer that the output looks reasonable but he hasn't reviewed in detail -- something that he is happy to do for an extra fee. Just my instinct here, but I think that if (1) the lawyer did not get greedy and fully automate the process; and (2) actually reviewed each LLM response to make sure it wasn't off-the-wall, then you would have a good argument that the privilege applies.
So I guess there will still be some work for lawyers after the AI revolution beyond courtroom work and formal appearances for corporations.
omw_68
2d ago
No, it never was.
Well, I think it was a factor -- with some nuance. The reality is that women have always been welcome in male-dominated hobby spaces, such as computer gaming; chess; and so on. Provided that those women are genuine enthusiasts.
But what happens -- sometimes -- is that a hobby which was formerly low status; something for basement-dwelling losers, suddenly increases in status and respectability. That's definitely happened with computers. What happened next was that status was a magnet for women who weren't necessarily interested in the hobby itself but rather the status, money, and male attention which would come from getting involved. Thus, the "fake geek girl." When men inevitably (and reasonably) object to these interlopers, it opens the door for grifters like Aneeta Sarkesian to play the role of damsel in distress.
What's especially infuriating about these types is they typically attempt to re-write history. They insist that in the past, women were excluded from these spaces -- a lie which is about as wrong as wrong can be.
omw_68
3d ago
The general argument form you've sketched, apart from the word 'environmental', is the core of a vast range of positions in politics. I agree we should be sceptical of all such arguments but there is simply no avoiding them
Sure, which is why I said "extremely skeptical." Because sometimes the IRS really does call people about tax issues.
or it will be difficult for anyone to raise concerns about things unless they are personally unaffected.
Well at a minimum people should act like they seriously believe their claims. For example, if Greta Thunberg seriously believes that we are on the brink of a climate catastrophe, it's difficult to see why she would invest so much time and energy into the Gaza conflict. To put it simply, how dare she?
My own view on the overpopulation question is that a flatlining population is necessarily good at some level of population/technology/culture, otherwise our species will be courting disaster. Whether we have got close to this point yet is an empirical matter.
Given the rapid changes in technology taking place, it's not an easy question to answer with certitude. Actually, that's not totally true. When someone predicts that the sky is falling, it's usually pretty safe to bet that they are wrong.
Anyway, for me, I would be interested to know what specific policies are being proposed by environmentalists to achieve "flatlining population"? I have a strange feeling that they are remarkably similar to general Leftist policy goals.
omw_68
3d ago
You may be mistaking me for a feminist.
Well it's certainly a classic feminist move -- when some issue relating to men comes up, feminists frequently try to make it about women. And I can't think of any other reason to bring it up.
omw_68
3d ago
If you're poor, don't be a man, the OP said. Fair enough, but their women's situation isn't much better in that regard.
Hard disagree. In terms of life expectancy, if you are poor, you are in fact much better off as a woman than as a man.
I think it's warranted to add context.
Why?
omw_68
3d ago
I don't.
In that case, I don't see the relevance of pointing out that life expectancy of lower class women is poor -- it just needless distracts from the male/female gap. Not everything needs to be about women.
omw_68
3d ago
One question I find myself asking is: should we try to keep expanding the population
Who do you mean by "we"? And what are "we" doing to "keep expanding the population"?
Without these sorts of specifics, it's difficult to even start thinking about costs, benefits, and practicality.
That being said, I think it's worth keeping in mind that there are a lot of bad actors out there who are happy to spin, wildly exaggerate, and outright lie about impending disasters in order to grift or otherwise promote some kind of agenda. Often it's pretty obvious by their actions that these people don't seriously believe in the scare stories the peddle.
So generally speaking, I am extremely skeptical of any argument along these lines:
(1) There is an impending environmental disaster
(5) Therefore, my allies and I should received goodies and/or my out-group should be punished and humiliated.
omw_68
3d ago
You're missing one. Pollution!
Well do you agree that at the moment, ultra-religious groups are demographically exploding notwithstanding any pollution issues?
It seems to me that the most charitable interpretation of your post is that you are making a prediction about the future rather than a statement about the present.
So let me ask you this: In what year do you thing the ultra-orthodox Jewish population in Israel will experience a leveling off and/or decline of fertility due to pollution?
omw_68
3d ago
Firstly, declines in fertility are somewhat due to endocrine disruptors from microplastic pollution we've caused.
I think this is disproven by the example of Israel, where there is an ultra-religious population and more secular groups. The ultra-religious are growing in number far faster than the more secular groups. It's difficult to see how this discrepancy could be the result of micro-plastics. Especially when there is a much more obvious explanation: Among the ultra-religious, there is a strong cultural belief that one should marry young and have a large family.
Secondly, there seems to be a deeper link between modernity and fertility that most want to admit. We may see high fertility as you say, but it won't be in the world we currently live in culturally, socially, or technologically.
I am not sure what your point is here. If you are saying that future technological changes may affect current trends, then I would have to agree with you. That's why I included the caveat "barring some game-changing technology or disaster" in my post.
Finally, as many on this forum are loathe to admit, we have actually outrun the carrying capacity of this planet. There won't be another fertility explosion in this culture because the planet literally will not support it for much longer.
I strongly disagree with this. If this claim were remotely true, then one would expect to see mass deaths due to some resource shortage. Which may eventually happen, but it's not happening now.
omw_68
3d ago
But wasn't the entire population fitting into these categories in the last 200,000 years?
I'm not sure it's 200,000 years, but I would agree that (1) for people who have no choice but to work in agriculture, there's a lot of incentive to have large families; and (2) for a long time, most of humanity worked in agriculture.
But what happens if you no longer have to work in agriculture? My impression is that for most groups, after a couple generations it starts looking more and more attractive to have a smaller family. Unless you are an ultra-orthodox Jew, an FLDS Mormon, etc. In those groups, large families are preferred even without the incentive structure of agriculture.
omw_68
3d ago
I think it's worth pointing out that the life expectancy of underclass women is also generally rather bad, as their diet is terrible, they often abuse substances, and the tasks they normally do everyday either involve standing in one place for longer periods or bowing and lifting relatively heavy objects, which is also terrible for your health.
That may be, but do you disagree that as one looks at higher and higher socio-economic classes, the life-expectancy boost is significantly bigger for men than it is for women?
omw_68
4d ago
Yes, general knowledge can contribute to a rejection of the null hypothesis.
I am very skeptical that someone can do original research; observe that their research results do not require a rejection of the null hypothesis; and reject the null hypothesis anyway based on their general knowledge.
I challenge you to identify two scientific studies, published in reputable journals where this has happened and accepted for publication. (To be clear, I am not referring to meta-analysis, which I know is a thing.)
omw_68
4d ago
Isn't this just the effects of billionaires not being in the bottom quintile of men, who are more likely to die young? It's not some biological law that all men die younger than women do. If you're not a coal miner, drug dealer, fighter, suicidal... (these are usually men, admittedly for reasons rooted in biology) then you'll have a long lifespan.
I would think that's a factor, but I would guess there is another issue in play: The question of when in life the person becomes a billionaire. So for a trivial example, if you look at people who become billionaires at age 85, you can bet that their average age at death is at least 85.
I think it's pretty well known that extremely wealthy women are much more likely to have inherited their money than extremely wealthy men. To put it another way, I think it's much more common for male billionaires to be self-made than it is for female billionaires. It seems to me that if this is true, it's going to have an effect on when in life the person becomes a billionaire, as well as on other aspects of the person's life. These things, in turn, are arguably likely to affect the age of the billionaire at time of death.
Edit: That being said, I recall reading research indicating that among the upper class, the life expectancy difference between men and women is much smaller than in the general population. I imagine this is due to the sorts of lifestyle difference you point out. In other words, it doesn't seem that being rich is bad for women so much as it's good for men.
omw_68
4d ago
I remember how universal things like the Super Bowl, New Year's Eve Ball Drop, State of the Union Address, certain movies (Titanic), and even big T.V. show events (Friends finale) were. It didn't matter if they were high art or "actually good" or not, it was that they acted as a sort of social-cultural barometric calibration. If you weren't talking about Britney Spear's 2001 Superbowl half time show at the water cooler (or in homeroom at school) the next day, you were an out of touch loser. You could shit on it, that was fine, but strolling in and going "Did you see that the Mongolian congress had a meeting while sitting on horses?" was a hanging offense.
Yeah, it used to be that television sets had 2 dials - the upper dial with 3-5 main channels; and the lower dial which was a sort of ghetto of alternative programming. With a setup like that it's easy to see how there were a lot of programs watched by (seemingly) nearly everyone.
omw_68
4d ago
What is certain that the exponential growth that began in early 1700's (due to potato, maize and wise leadership of European and Manchu statesmen of the time) is finally over. The line leveled up and will start going down.
Barring some game-changing technology or disaster, it is nearly certain that the trend will reverse again and the population will explode. Right now is analogous to when you add the anti-biotic to the petri dish and select for bacteria which are immune. Because it's reasonable to expect that some small segment of the population, due to some combination of genetics and culture, will (1) think it's a great idea to have lots of children; and (2) think it's a great idea to pass (1) and (2) on to said children. And in fact I think we are already seeing this in ultra-religious communities.
omw_68
5d ago
I was thinking recently that I’m proud of what I’ve done in my short career, but that smart-ish people in their mid/late twenties to perhaps mid/late forties are in the worst position with regards to the impact of AI on our personal identities. Those much older than us have lived and experienced full careers at a time when their work was useful and important, when they had value.
FWIW a similar thought occurred to me 25 years ago -- that I might be among the last generations of people to experience the highs and lows of starting and building a business.
That being said, I think it's worth noting that feelings/predictions along the lines of "my generation is screwed" or "the current generation is screwed" tend to be very common. My generation was told there would be no way we could afford to buy a house; that social security would run out before we could collect any; that the American economy would decline and we'd all have to learn Japanese; that the smart thing to do was go to grad school and become a college professor; etc.
So based on experience, I will predict that your generation will be worse off in some ways; better off in some ways; and that there will be a lot of surprises.
Yes, that would be the null hypothesis.
Scientific Study Finds No Significant Difference in Height Between Men and Women in Newly Discovered Tribe
and in human beings in general
This is a bit confusing. In my hypothetical, the study was strictly limited to a small number of members of Tribe Z. Are you saying that it's permissible to use general knowledge and/or data from outside of the study to make a determination regarding the null hypothesis? Are you saying it's required?
omw_68
6d ago
The bayes calc on it would just be a total win for the "he touched the girls" take.
I tend to agree with this. Also, from what I understand about the UK system for criminal prosecution, it seems unlikely that these charges would have been filed against these defendants in the absence of strong evidence of guilt.
omw_68
7d ago
This won’t be particularly substantive but hopefully it’s enough to avoid a mod-slap. Apparently a group of women customers accosted staff at a Minneapolis yoga chain and berated them for not having some sort of ICE signage up (presumably a “No ICE allowed” sign, as if ICE agents will be stopping in to do yoga).
FWIW, the idea that "If you're not part of the solution, then you're part of the problem" is an idea that has been around for a while, at least since the 1960s. And while it holds a certain moral appeal, it's easy to see how it can be abused. In fact, it's very common for totalitarian governments to require average people to show support for the regime.
In all seriousness, psychologically speaking, what on Earth is going on with 50 year-old women right now?
That's an interesting question; in my own life I've definitely noticed that there is pattern of middle-aged women who get caught up in Leftist politics to the point where they are pretty crazy. Actually, my impression is that a lot of young women as well are going this route but it seems to be the middle aged women who are more active and aggressive.
Pure speculation, but I would guess that there are two main reasons. First, women as a group are much more prone to mass hysteria. Social media and smartphones act as a sort of consensus-building machine, with the average person having a lot of opportunity to be steeped in constant propaganda. Second, generally speaking it's really a lot of fun to be a young woman. When you are constantly being catered to by society, invited to do fun things, etc. there's less time to agitate and less feeling of dissatisfaction to blame on the outgroup. That being said, my sense is that young women these days harbor many of the same feelings about the Current Thing.
Sadly, the same is true of terrorism. I mean, it realize on having sympathetic journalists, politicians, etc. to imply that the terrorists have a legitimate grievance, that they were responding to oppression, etc.
More options
Context Copy link