sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
No bio...
User ID: 636
The whole point is to "hate the world"
This sounds more like Gnosticism than Christianity.
The dog has been bred to be docile. It hasn't been bred to find arbitrarily bad living conditions enjoyable. Artificial selection cares little for your quality of life.
I can imagine a 24 hour fitness type situation is not great for this but all of the smaller gyms I went to that focused on some sport (i.e. wl or pl) obviously had a decent amount of community in them.
All this applies equally to the dog.
It doesn't, because the dog has been bred for hundreds of thousands of years for subservience. Not attacking its owner is in its bones. Is that how you view yourself?
I’m obligated to sit at my computer and code for 8 hours per day when working.
You, in fact, are not obligated. You can quit and live off welfare. You can live on the streets. You can find another job. You can, as the kids say, keep yourself safe, if no other options are open to you. You, not somebody else, have the ultimate control over your life. Don't make the foolish argument that, since you aren't free to do literally whatever you want, you are forced to do what you currently do.
Is my life net negative?
Since you have the benefit of making yourself understood, i don't need to speculate and you can just tell me. For animals whose lives are placed in our care, we must speculate.
I see no evidence this dog experiences its life as a net negative.
I do. Sitting in Piker's basement for hours in a corner with no autonomy, stimulus, or even, as far as I can tell, daylight is a profoundly unnatural lifestyle for the dog. The dog is not able to engage in any ordinary dog behaviors (such as, uh, walking two feet) without being shocked. I view that as an obvious case of a net negative existence.
View the dog as a working animal, its job is essentially to perform as an actor contributing to his streams. In exchange it receives food, shelter and so forth. It seems like a fair deal for the dog, I see nothing wrong with this.
I'd probably rather be dead than alive as a prop dog like that. Given that the dog was almost certainly artificially bred rather than a stray, I find it repugnant to create and perpetuate a net negative life like that.
I don't see why the fact that he keeps the animal alive means that it's a fair deal.
I wonder to what extent just decriminalizing minor physical violence would help. Like you look back to the 30s/40s and it seems like a low level of pervasive physical violence was normal. Guys get mad at eachother, fight it out, all is well (unless someone suffers a horrible permanent injury, which did happen).
Mutual combat is legal in Washington. Despite this, it's not exactly a shining city on a hill.
Lifting is good but lacks the social component.
Lifting absolutely has a social component. You hit the gym on a schedule, get to know the other guys, how their lifts are doing, etc. Even an antisocial guy like me found it easy to develop a "group" of guys I expect to see at the gym.
People come here to work. If they're not going to work, there's not much point in being here.
I should be clear that the persecution fantasy here is specifically that young men are at risk of having their IP addresses traced by a visual basic GUI written by The Liberals unless they use a VPN (which they are all doing), hence why I quoted "young men have been using VPNs to protect their identity from liberal attempts to make their life worse for so long."
I don't argue that doing stuff you don't want people to find out about under your real name is inadvisable. It's just that VPNs are neither necessary or sufficient to avoid this situation.
This is posting rather than lurking and on top of that these true brexit geezers used their personal email addresses.
Among the donors were several associated with email addresses traceable to police and other public officials.
If you're donating to the Rittenhouse Foundation under, essentially, your real name, you are wasting money on that VPN subscription.
Alternately, young men have been using VPNs to protect their identity from liberal attempts to make their life worse for so long
Basically nobody does this outside of persecution fantasies.
Most people are lurkers and not posters to begin with. What exactly is the threat model for a lurker reading some chud website like TheMotte dot org? The site gets hacked an every IP that ever visited is released?
The Internet use patterns that 90% of young men want to keep private involve cooming rather than intellectual heresy.
Even posters have more to fear from revealing too many details about themselves voluntarily than from attackers. And no VPN is going to save you there.
Have you read The Baroque Cycle?
You don't see why making it impossible to operate as a small business online is a big deal?
"Maximum lethality and authority" by definition trade off against other things (for example, avoiding war crimes).
An instant classic in the PvC (player versus camera) genre.
You can't be preyed upon with tricky overdraft fees
Most banks will let you overdraw your account.
two weeks three years to kiev sovl
Code review has a paper trail. It's easy to make a paper trail for reviewing your teammate's performance too.
You're not thinking outside the box.
Evidence that you have been asked to judge the work of others, either individually or on a panel
This one's basically a free space. Reviewed coworker's code? Check. Gave your teammate feedback on their performance? Check. Etc.
prīnceps merely means 'first' - the prīnceps senātūs ('first of the senate') originated during the Republic, and later Augustus took the title prīnceps cīvitātis ('first of the citizens') to pretend that he was merely first among equals rather than a king.
The architecture behind her is fucked up too.
Would have been too spicy to make her a white woman with soot on her face, I guess.
Sure, but that was an economic divide, not a divide based on artistic qualities
It is based on artistic qualities because Beethoven got big appealing to the 1%. Taylor Swift got big appealing to the 99%. They are not the same and comparing them is a mistake.
The music being a major point of pop music goes back centuries: For example Mozart and Beethoven were "pop" artist in their time.
The top answer suggests that a much larger fraction of the population has heard e.g. Michael Jackson than Beethoven or Mozart in their time. Beethoven and Mozart were "pop" for the upper crust of society. Has music popular with the 1% gotten worse? I don't know, but certainly mass media has transformed who you have to appeal to in order to have mass success.

Coleman is definitely a "literally who." How about, like, Louisa May Alcott or something?
More options
Context Copy link