philosoraptor
No bio...
User ID: 285
philosoraptor
11mo ago
You never say whether certain criteria are necessary, or sufficient, or both, or neither.
Yes, because that is the question that's at issue! The OP was, I thought, completely clear on this point, then in the direct reply to you she said this explicitly. You even say yourself:
You talk about whether X can be "the criterion" or Y can be "the criterion"
Well, yes. How is it not clear that this is the question she's raising, not one she has a worked out answer to? What else would someone you'd describe that way be trying to do? This honestly seems like basic reading comprehension to me.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
It's not a direct result of that law - it's not like the law required this firing, or anything like that. But do you really doubt that's a significant part of what set the context for this incident?
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Where is the quote from? It's not in the post you're replying to, nor either of the links it contains, nor the OP.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
But I don't recall ever seeing dating advice, even from feminists, suggesting that any woman wants a proposition like "How about being my no-strings-attached fuck buddy?"
Not directly, and certainly not specifically about that topic. But there is quite a bit of "always be honest about what you want" messaging out there that, on the surface, seemingly points in that direction. Which does indeed seem disingenuous, because following that advice will rarely if ever work out well for the kind of guys who need dating advice in the first place. I don't really believe that "shit tests" are something anyone does in a conscious, deliberate way, but advice like that makes it easy to see why some people find it tempting to believe in them.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Yeah, way too many acronyms in that post. What's "SRS"? I think, with the help of your post, I get all the others.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
can’t bring themselves to sudoku themselves
I love this typo. Don't you dare correct it.
What is "the DR3 narrative"? All I find on a quick Google is references to an anime I'm not familiar with.
EDIT: I think I've figured it out... "Democrats 'R' the Real Racists"?
philosoraptor
1mo ago
"Not less than" is doing a lot of work, or at least more than you appear to be giving it credit for. But yes, it is quite a spread.
I also find the phrase "suffer death" amusing, especially in light of @self_made_human 's transhumanist rants on that topic.
philosoraptor
1mo ago
Things took a big dip around the start of the Ukraine war, but to judge by my own (small and Canadian-biased) collection of ETFs, have more than bounced back since. It's possible DF sold low and is now faced with the prospect of buying high.
philosoraptor
1mo ago
I was envisioning a scenario where one person has it and the other says they stole it. But even in a scenario where there isn't a clear current possessor like this, in any such situation I've been even tangentially involved in, laying blame is a distant third on the priority list, behind getting it to the rightful owner and keeping the overall peace.
Frankly you're also overestimating the intelligence and planning of most people who do stuff like stealing backpacks. In my area, frankly, you're more likely to get drug-addled confusion about what's wrong with walking off with someone's backpack and why the fact that they don't own it is even relevant.
philosoraptor
2mo ago
His views are still much more extreme and controversial than are acceptable to pretty much anybody right-of-center.
Did you say "right" when you meant "left"? Or possibly omit a "not" or similar word?
With easily demonstrable skills or testable claims this is relatively rare. But with skills or claims that are hard to test I feel like this is relatively common.
If you've actually read the original Dunning-Kreuger paper, they make this point explicitly, using basketball as an example. The percentage of people who think they could go one-on-one with a top NBA player and end up looking like other than a complete fool is, I would imagine, statistically indistinguishable from zero. And those few exceptions probably really are mostly outliers in basketball ability relative to the general population, even if they aren't as good as they think they are.
philosoraptor
5mo ago
I took the point to be adjacent to the one Scott made - wow, is it really that long ago? - last December about how the media rarely lies. I don't agree with how Scott frames the observation, which I would have phrased in terms of how the ways they lie are relatively subtle - but the observation itself, as distinct from the debate over the best language to characterize it, is solid.
Skilled liars make as few statements that are straightforwardly false in a plain, literal way as they can and still spread whatever narrative they want to spread. One of the many advantages of this is that there's rarely a clear-cut smoking gun someone in the board's position can point to. Instead it's a matter of which facts they emphasize and which they omit, what they juxtapose with what in order to imply connections that may not actually exist, how they manipulate your emotions around aspects of their narrative, how they take advantage of people's trust in them, or at least willingness to give the benefit of the doubt, in situations that really are ambiguous.
So while I can see how the statement you quote is poor optics, I have no trouble imagining how it could be true.
philosoraptor
6mo ago
Sex positive feminism maintains women should be free to engage in sex, in pornography, in sex work, etc without being shamed or otherwise punished for doing so. That seems to be by far the most prevalent form of modern feminism to me. This is completely separate from whether or not men should be able to take advantage of that freedom to satisfy their own desires.
That seems incoherent to me, or at least to have some obvious and serious internal tensions in practice. What, women should be free to engage in sex work but shouldn't have any customers?
philosoraptor
7mo ago
What does Google have to do with it? How would having multiple viable search engines encourage adding links to sources that, for one thing, don't go through any of them?
philosoraptor
8mo ago
Known bug, I think. Larian says patch 2 is on its way fairly soon and will focus more on bug fixes of this general sort.
Tell Gdanning that, please. Most of his posts lately seem to be nothing but a lot of words to say "I didn't read the post I'm replying to". It's obnoxious and infuriating and hard to believe it could be in good faith and I can't judge anyone too harshly for this kind of reaction. Just because it's superficially more polite (although even that gets borderline at times!) doesn't make it higher quality.
philosoraptor
11mo ago
Is it still the same band? I think they have one original member left, and if it's not Paul Kantner (dead) or Grace Slick (retired), I don't see much point. Same with a lot of these "bands of Theseus" that are still running around with names made famous in that era.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Perhaps not the most insightful comment, but I was always like "Why did the name 'K-Pop' stick when 'Seoul Music' is right there?"
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Well, what I want to know can be rephrased as "what's so special about nudity"? I mean, surely they see themselves without clothes all the time, and lots of other cultures, and not weird fargroup ones but familiar European ones, don't have these hangups according to other posters. It sounds like you're presupposing an answer to that, and indeed an answer you can't even seem to imagine anyone disagreeing with.
I don't really have an answer, beyond that "kids are property" is a nonstarter.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
When you lead with "but studies show..." type arguments, it's at least implied. Later flipping to "but it's an ethical question, it's not about data" as soon as her empirical case starts to look dodgy does feel like a dishonest bait-and-switch, even if that's her real position and thus, from a narrow point of view, more honest.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Bit late, but:
I mostly see people monogamously pairing off. There's a small number of eternal singles, mostly men, but the norm is long(ish)-term serial monogamy. Getting a new partner generally involves the guy sticking his neck out to much greater extent than the girl but the gender balance isn't off by that much. Almost no-one in my social circles has multiple partners on the regular (even the theoretically poly people have mostly broken down into straightforward two-person relationships).
There's certainly nothing I'd be tempted to describe as "women... sharing a top man". Which for that matter, seems largely absent from your description of the state of play, as well; and this is especially true when you fill the ellipsis back in, because I certainly can't think of anything that could plausibly be described as an active preference for this on the part of women, even of the revealed variety. As has been pointed out before, ideas often assumed here, like that and the whole "alpha fucks, beta bucks" notion, IME exist primarily in the minds of incels and MRAs, and hardly at all in real life.
It's possible my crowd and I are older than the people you have in mind, but the pattern doesn't change that much when you go back to our teens and twenties. Far more frequent changes of partner, certainly, and more (but still not all that many) actively poly arrangements, but only one that I would be tempted to describe using anything close to the text I quoted.
philosoraptor
1yr ago
Wait until you see how they carve up Canada, especially Ontario. The center of the country is in Western Canada, not Central Canada. Northern Ontario is well west of Western Ontario, and (at least going by the physical map rather than, say, one that showed population density) is not particularly far north. It's confusing even for us, sometimes.
The second sentence of this post does make sense, but I don't see how it's related to the first sentence. It looks more like an argument for a more robust and technologically sophisticated system for tracking voter registrations. In principle, that need not involve any change in the laws at all.
In practice, it probably would, in the specific case of Florida in 2022, but only because the system has been made intentionally confusing, if not incoherent. Implementing such a system would require creating clear rules a computer can administer, which might not exist to be programmed in without reforms to the law. I would probably be in favour of this, but that's partly because I think clear rules would make voting easier, not harder.
If this took place in 2021, it didn't involve anything recognizable as the AIs people are currently concerned about.
More options
Context Copy link