professorgerm
You shall love your crooked neighbor, with your crooked heart
No bio...
User ID: 1157
One of the ChatGPT image-generation things going around Twitter is to ask it to create an image how it feels about you. Goblinodds has a cool one and features more in the replies. So I gave it a shot and the results are... underwhelming. At least it gets the melancholy right but I don't think my shoulders can pull off that mourning dress.
I think it overindexed on characters I previously generated to accompany a writing project and decided that my "self-portrait" needed to look along the same lines. Or since I'm a freeloader I'm not getting the fun, creative version; I notice the settings are more restrictive for the free tier recently.
Anyone else having fun with image generators? Or more generally, doing anything fun and non-programmer with generative llms? I like skimming Zvi's updates but so much of supposed usefulness is for programmers, where do I find the normie's guide to interesting things to do?
Thank you for the thought-provoking post, especially one from a perspective we don't get as much around here.
If that's all it took to order the stork's delivery, I'd take a few hits for the team.
Hm. Not been a huge fan of them in the past, but will take a look.
Definitely a different tone and culture than here or even the schism, and a particular focus that can be frustrating at times. A few other Mottezans have made rounds over the years.
I don't think I'm asking the world and the seven seas.
Indeed.
nearly dead subreddit years later.
"There's a big difference between all dead and mostly dead. Mostly dead is slightly alive."
I think every tribe cares a lot more about their own side being hurt and the degree to which they object to violence done to the other side
Up until J6, and even then it's a hazy thing, Blue tribe has been famously more tolerant- supportive, even- of political violence. Left-terrorists get professorships, and that's if they even get called terrorists and not just "fiery but mostly peaceful demonstrators." Right-terrorists get the death penalty, assuming they survive whatever happened at all.
I don't want right-wingers to start getting professorships and scholarships and sinecures for being violent and destructive. All I want is recognition that actually, this is an important and real difference, or a better explanation of why it's not.
(answer: of course, it's just a matter of how fascist)
Hey, I recognize that guy! A little long-winded but I have it on good authority he's roguishly handsome. Could use a haircut though.
Outside of a history book, I find no use in the word. My proposal to ban the word "fascist" instead (or in addition) went over like a lead balloon, and I've been told the imp will continue to get long-term bans rather than permanent in the interest of "not creating a certain kind of martyr." I am admittedly surprised by Imp's commitment to that user name there, rather than alting it up.
The Schism had less commentary on all three assassination attempts combined
Any sort of commentary on political violence in a timely manner will summon erstwhile mod Numbers to put an end to the discussion. His suggestion of when it would have been allowed does not escape notice.
As well, what would there be to say? We know how such conversations would go. There's all of, what, 10 active participants in the forum? Even that might be a mild exaggeration. There are things I might learn or things I might try to convince, but I think a conversation there on the assassination attempts would bear even less fruit than most.
but they don't care enough to comment on it; does anyone think there's a Blue Tribe locale that's going to be any stronger?
While I don't particularly feel like digging for it, my memory is that /r/BlockedAndReported was better on that front. They did have some "wish he hadn't missed" types but considerably more seemingly sincere "left-wing political violence is a serious problem, don't be hypocrites" types. Of course how much that actually changes anything, how they talk with their Blue friends when not in the explicit heretic forum, who knows.
That probably doesn't meet a satisfying standard of improved conversation, but the bar is set so low!
My equity is only up about 100% these days, down from those pandemic peaks, but I still love my 3% mortgage.
I think more Americans of all political stripes think trying to assassinate politicians (even politicians they dislike) is bad, than you are willing to credit.
I think that the relative numbers are less important than this statement suggests at first glance, that the relative status and distribution are underrated concerns by the statement, and that there's a great deal of room for people to consider something "bad" without actually meaningfully wanting to condemn or prevent it, until it's too late and the damage is done.
Luigi and Thomas Crooks are terrible and rare. Luigi stans somewhat less so on both counts. But people that will excuse them- "it's just stupid jokes, they're just young and full of passionate intensity, you've got to understand, kids on campus" those people abound.
So when considering a question like
do you think that actually represents mainstream Blue tribe thinking?
I wouldn't know how to answer, it's too slippery. There is so much room for "but," hedging, selective attention, selective indifference that puzzling it out becomes impossible, and it is in those areas where the most damage is done to the social fabric. The sympathizer's shrug does more damage than the rioter's brick, because there's so many more of the former.
Do I think you or Scott would cheer if Crooks had hit Trump square on? Of course not. You least of all, and I'm sure your tragic post would be heartfelt and eloquent. But I'm not so confident Scott would feel a need to publicly mourn the return of political assassination to the US, and most mainstream Blue pundits would be vastly less bothered. He wouldn't be cold on the table before we'd hear "This is a tragedy, but-." Justifications. Excuses. Vibes? Papers? Redefinition of terms to not apply, so they can only be aimed one way? He was uniquely terrible! A threat to democracy! His rhetoric frightened desperate people!
All of those mainstream Blues would say, in a vacuum, that Political Assassinations Are Bad. But it would turn out this one is less bad, that we don't need to Have A Conversation about it, that it's unique and not a symptom of deeper rot. Nationwide rioters are just an idea. Wear a buffalo head into the Capitol, those guys are thugs and terrorists.
And likewise, to the right! Nationwide rioters are thugs and terrorists, Buffalo Guy was just committing mild trespass. If it had been Biden, no doubt Reds would be... well, having lots of fishing accidents, but also vaguely sympathizing, if they think they wouldn't be depersoned for it. I am not trying to cast one side without sin, here.
Only meandering along that the sympathizers should not be underestimated while we're making to not overestimate the actual advocates.
There's one of those on a bollard at the local McDonald's and I always wonder about the thought process behind it.
I also thought everyone knew we have secret ballots but maybe with the increase in mail-in voting they forgot.
…and it does follow that we should probably treat gain-of-function research as if it had caused COVID, because "we can't ever know for certain if it caused COVID, but the two hypotheses are neck-to-neck" is bad enough if we're talking about future caution.
That's a fair conclusion, but not really Scott's conclusion, and I have to wonder what the underlying motivation is to be so committed that lab leak is wrong when there's more interesting topics to discuss around COVID.
Flu is almost always symptomatically indistinguishable from COVID
My theory is that it was much more widespread in the US than anyone admitted because testing was constrained early on, and a lot of first-wave cases got called flu with no further diagnostics.
Man, I work full-time and then I parent all the rest of the time except for maybe about two hours after getting my daughter to sleep. If Scott's numbers are correct, then I put in more parenting time than his stay-at-home wife. Which isn't to say that I'm the better man; far from it, my life is a mess. But seriously. They're doing something very wrong if the two of them can't hack it without hiring an entire fireteam of helpers.
Amen to that. Your schedule sounds much like my own and it makes his sound completely absurd.
Wait is Chili's not considered a full-service restaurant?
Chili's was the first restaurant I encountered that replaced ordering with a tablet at the table, and that was back in... 2012ish? There was still waitstaff to deliver the food and drinks, but they didn't do the ordering process and there was less attention overall.
It's closer to full service than Chipotle or Five Guys, but I wouldn't call it full-service in the old way either. Chili's is also directly competing with McDonald's now so that's interesting.
It hoovers up people self-selected for being ambitious and hardworking from other countries, thereby strengthening our nation
Largely untrue for recent and particular groups to Denmark and The Netherlands.
Ehh, I kinda get it, Episcopalians don't want to talk about anything icky and theological like "sin," that might imply they actually believe in something numinous, but almost anything would be better than, to paraphrase, saying that in the interest of racial justice they'd rather shut down than help refugees who happen to be white.
by doing the only thing that they can do to hurt this administration: talk about it
The Episcopal ministry is doing a really good of looking incredibly racist, which helps the administration.
CWS's response strikes the right balance of protesting while not sounding like caricatures of racist progressives.
This belief is a grave sin, and we refuse to be complicit in it.
Then why don't they say that? Instead, they say that in the interests of "racial justice," they refuse to help white Afrikaners. An old story about logs and cinders comes to mind.
The problem with steelmanning is that it so often involves replacing the real but stupid or evil with a fictional synthetic. Imagining a good argument for one's opponent is useful practice! Unfortunately, it does not mean that "the opponent" is actually the noble soul one imagines them to be.
Maybe you'd argue they should give monogamy the old college try so they can make an informed decision on which suits them better
Given the predominant cultural messaging, it can be safely assumed that even among the Bay Areans they did give monogamy the old college try.
Scott, by his account, has a good marriage, a tightly knit community and a pair of twins. He still finds poly a net-positive to his life.
Difficult to separate? He has all of those because of poly, and being extremely high status (within a limited scale) he's going to have way above average success for a poly male (if he so desires). Not exactly someone I'm going to turn to as a replicable example.
@TheDag as well- Eons ago I commented on the phenomenon of a non-zero number of poly EAs claiming also to be asexual, and I continue to wonder the extent to which this is the Bay Arean egregore poisoning a population for a phenomenon that would otherwise be known as "having close friends," since for some noticeable fraction the addition of sex to the calculation does not play a major role.
I blame social media as well for putting the final nail in the meaning of "friend," but like marriage it was already down the slope of not meaning much.
- Prev
- Next
Surely Coca-cola and McDonald's have been doing a better job for decades with less risk of cultural backlash? Or does it need to be specifically government-funded imperial initiatives that count?
More options
Context Copy link