wemptronics
No bio...
User ID: 95
What happened with your post?
Gas, and the fact the writing and ideas are underdeveloped.
I wrote until I ran out of time. I pressed send. If I had hated it, then I would have deleted it. If I liked it more I may have dumped it on you today in improved form, or worked on it further for a future a top-level. Is there any part you consider interesting or worth reading besides the stroke?
I sense there is something in that mass of mush, but I've been wrong before.
The interpersonal exit veto (I won't be dissuaded) has a lower barrier to execute than Move to Canada. Lana's collection of ideas, beliefs, ailments, and suffering in were normalized, grown, and reinforced in she spaces sought out.
I don't think Sentence 1 is stroke-y? It's missing a the. Sorry. Sentence 2 is repulsive, I agree. A form of Sentence 2 was written first, then I added more words, words, words in another pass. That's bad. We don't need those sentences at all. Try now.
AA has also made a video about reasons to be cautiously optimistic about Trump that speaks more positively about some of Trump admin's moves. Both the skepticism and appreciation of some initial steps forward are warranted.
Thanks. He linked to some other videos in the above piece as well. I prefer my dose in wordcel form, but maybe will view some one day.
That statement tells me you simply don't like the dissident right and want it to go away.
I would like for it to spend less time on what it perceives as unfortunate truths that I was reading about a decade ago. So much has changed! Despite the changes many interests, nature of power, and fundamental aspects of our systems have not. There's no new mechanism to work around the Unfortunate Realities. Unless I have the wrong impression, much of what I do read from this sphere explains why you probably can't work around them. "90%" of the nominal followers, along with the leaders they look to, are committed to slop production instead of the advancement of interests.
The whole shebang begins to look more like an art collective than anything else. For Pavini, I have no idea if this is fair. I will try to read more of his links recommended in this thread below. Since you mentioned him, then Kulak for sure is a candidate for the title of artist more than advocate or organizer. He can find success in performing in other venues, because of the ecosystem that Pavini identifies as problematic. Tens of thousands of hobbitses clamoring for more doom posts, more black pills, and more performance. Everyone wants to feed from their own slop trough. That appears to be a major motivation of this lamentation.
Tangential, but if the dissenters must remain independent of the system they criticize to remain credible then must they not participate? Philosophy dudes can correct me, but this seems elementary. Of course not. This would be self-defeating for any serious attempt to advance interests if those interests include practical changes and engagement. One can retain sufficient autonomy inside or beside a system to be credible, so long as those judging him can agree. For conflict theorists, realists, ruffians, outlaws and purists in this milieu this looks like a continual sticking point.
Regarding friendliness: I don't agree this is a fair characterization. It's not the lack of friendliness that triggers me. I am not easily shocked from most writing and definitely not by the dissident's manifesto. My critique was that it is redundant, tired, or even unproductive. My interests don't restrict myself to read only nice, friendly writers. I'm friendly, and I'm boring. Being non-friendly and critical can be authentic. It's not a prerequisite to honesty though. It's a style, choice, or result of feelings, not a measure of authenticity. Of Kulak's writing that I have appreciated (I have read and appreciated plenty of it, though less in past couple years) not much of it can be called friendly. Cocytarchy was fun, although a novel sort of topic. Some of his critical, unfriendly writing appears inauthentic to me. That's the rub.
I may be wrong to pump out 6 paragraphs to cry about an essay from an author I'm not near familiar enough to pattern match. But I recognize what appear to be thousands of hobbitses learning to pattern-match aesthetics to truth or authenticity. Which creates problems that Pavini, after I've criticized for being Not Entertaining Enough, also recognizes?
I disagree that liberals are constitutionally incapable of grokking the vibes or are exceptional in how they engage with other beliefs. I agree honest dissent is necessary and good. I agree I am more likely to disregard dissent I don't like. I judge this minority viewpoint to expend too much gas spinning its tires in the mud. The pomo intersectional people might call this a privileged assessment given its place in the pyramid.
Claim: the majority of California, or even area, firefighters aren't recruited through organizations such as this one. Which is most likely an ineffectual, tax skimming grift via state grants. It could also be a genuine, if misguided, attempt to scoop bodies for the Marin County Fire Department as it claims.
I wouldn't implement it. If they have a dearth in recruitment and need bodies they should either open parallel grifty grant programs for anyone likely to be qualified, or make one big one and take whoever qualifies as they apply.
I'd be open to the idea that, like the military, we see firefighter recruitment issues that may be worsened by poor propaganda or DEI preference. Which I don't consider a top 3 factor, but do consider a top 10 one. I would not require much evidence to update this way. Even a credible enough looking firefighting forum post could do it for me. I won't update off of Libsoftiktok bait though.
Given events, how does an Israel act upon and within Gaza if its goal is its security and not stealing land?
"WH" is a personal nickname I have for what can broadly be described as the Deep State. It stands for "Werm Hat."
Okay, that part is a lie. This could not be possible. The WH today could have possibly have strong armed Twitter so long as they had a time machine. Not a good or accurate sentence, yeah.
Yes, because much like the question of whether the Houthis would obey a ceasefire we already have proof that this is the case.
In January of 2025? After the high intensity part of this spat in Gaza was long over. Israel pulled the bulk of its troops out many months prior. Conflicts end. I don't think the US made Israel do anything it didn't want to do in signing a ceasefire in 2025. * Just checking my work January 16th cease fire by al-Houthi. January 17 missiles fired. February 10th the same occurred, 6 days later still engaging US aircraft and vessels. Is there a period where Houthis have actually worked to respect a cease fire I'm missing?
It's unlikely the US could have achieved this in January of 2024 with the same amount (or lack thereof) of pressure. Neither did the US apply any sort of great pressure to achieve it in January of 2025. Israel was very motivated to fight a high intensity conflict. The Houthis were very motivated to cause problems for them. The US was motivated to prevent the Gazan conflict from spilling out into a broader conflict it would be engaged, which is why the US is reacting with most of its strikes in January 2025 onwards, and not January 2024.
If you're saying that US strikes in March 2025 make less sense than they would in March 2024 then yes, I agree. Israel cease fire, problem solved-- or not. Houthi's pulling a lever they shouldn't touch is still not solved. Nobody wants them pulling the lever again. They haven't agreed to this. Israel hasn't agreed to never invade its neighbors or respond to its neighbor's aggression either.
The US did not create any great feats of diplomacy here. Continue selling some armaments to Israel, help their air defense, and hope things didn't get worse. The US neither dissuaded Israeli action, nor dissuaded Houthi action. When it seemed less risky -- or a new administration came in less averse to escalatory risks -- it acted in a belated fashion. Trump decided Something Had to be Done and as is clear I agree. Something should have been done. There should be an understanding. Don't hold ships hostage. Here's your bombs. Sorry they're late.
Why should Americans care about Italo-Egyptian shipping any more than Israel invading its neighbors?
Knowing your merchant ships won't be boarded by pirates is good for every civilized nation. Not invading neighbors is good, too. I consider the not attacking merchant ships more good for more people and more achievable than I do about Israeli responding to their attack in a Forever War. There's lots of consensus that piracy is bad and the Houthis have been naughty.
For there to even be a "global order" to defend you actually need to defend it consistently
Consistently enough for myself to consider it preferential to the alternative. Which is why I advocate for dropping bombs on pirates.
otherwise it's just "might makes right" with extra steps
I have no illusion as to failures in consistency. This is a reality of the world we live in when it comes to conflict. If you're upset the world doesn't make complete sense, is fully justified, and orderly then I am sorry. I wish it was. I also wish nation states were like principled rationalists in their humility and honesty. If you would advocate for the US to go in and bring Houthi pirates to the Hague I'd say that sounds dangerous and costly, but orderly. I wouldn't blame you. If you'd say you believe might makes right is the purest and only way to have a world that makes sense, then I guess you'd advocate for America harshly punishing those that make themselves her enemy.
I do not think you are advocating either of these. It sounds like you do not consider Israeli actions justifiable, so the US should either stop them or not stop Houthis or not care about global shipping and stay home. I think you should care a little bit about the security of global shipping, but I understand. It is possible for the US to not be engaged in this conflict. The Suez being crippled is a bigger deal for Europeans as Vice President Vance pointed out. I don't fret too much about it. With time we can grow used to a less functional world without American policing. Patience.
and in this case American airpower alone lacks the might to stop the Houthis.
Sending tomahawks to crush a hut is a waste of money. Which is why the US should actually find painful targets that make sense to hit. Maybe they don't exist. I don't know. Low to mid-level agents might be one action. Weapons manufacturing sounds like another common one. If this is not possible, then still send the tomahawks to the hut. Not an infinite number. Maybe less than we have, but do something. I'm not privy to those decisions, but I imagine the US intelligence has gathered a list of suitable targets.
-
I believe the three introductory paragraphs contextualize the content well enough. This is a a blog post that is reviewing a book which focuses on a specific kind of perspective on government housing policy.
-
& 3. I am not equipped to provide analysis that provides value beyond that which is provided by the content contained therein. I could write more. I could explain why it's interesting to me. Doing this might convince mods a sufficient effort threshold was achieved, but it might not be so valuable as a reader.
I have not read the book. I have read a blog post about the book. I could further summarize the blog post and continue to point at interesting things inside it. The post becomes a justification of my interest. Not what I actually find interesting. Which is the content of the post not my reaction to it.
If it's too Bare Link-y, that's fine. Maybe another time.
If you can't Drawl The Y'all without feeling like a self-conscious phony it's going to hamper the affect and remove the joy of y'alling.* That's a predicament. I wouldn't think you would have to Drawl the Y'all to find a natural tone, but I'm not anyone but me.
If you find yourself talking with real salt of the earth rednecks, then I'll recommend you moderate your y'alling so you don't appear like or feel like a phony. They generally won't find "you guys" problematic in the ways urbane, middle class professionals might."
"You all" sounds like a compromise. In an environment where the Appropriated Y'all is dominant for less than authentic reasons I can see the measured use of a good you all. I like "folks" as well, but it can appear as unnatural and forced as a self-conscious y'all-- being employed by the same types for the same reasons.
That's why I say no shame, consideration, or fear. If it's gonna be appropriated by urbane, middle class professionals for weird cultural sensitivities you may as well y'all away, y'all freely, and y'all without remorse. Y'all around the world.
If anyone calls me out over it I plan to play extremely dumb -- but nobody ever does.
Lol. If it happens at least write about it here so our ancestors can one day read about how off the rails we went.
EDIT: You do not say it like an antebellum Southern gentleman if that's what you're asking. Although it'd probably be pretty awesome if you did do that-- in a non-professional setting.
Initially I intended to highlight "cultural bangers" as a comparison to Falling Down's more humble release, but when I actually looked at the year I just ended up highlighting movies I liked, remembered fondly, or considered significant. Excluding the you-can't-handle-the-truthers (not gonna rewatch to see if I actually would like it as an adult) and Dennis the Menace (nostalgic but not a cultural banger); Into the Line of Fire which I haven't seen in 15+ years, but recall as a solid thriller. The Fugitive I watched a few years ago and it definitely holds up.
If I look at a list of a year like 2022's box office I need to scroll past the top 30 to make a new, equally meaningless highlighted list. The Northman was cool-- down at #55. I imagine I would enjoy Everything Everywhere, but haven't gotten around to watching it. Nor RRR, which I've been told to see, though I am no Bollywood fan.
So, you and your snobbery can eat a big spoon of Free Willy along with your Falling Down takes, bucko.
Only three certainties in life: death, taxes, and WW2 counterfactual discussions with Well, I'm A Bit of a History Buff's on internet forums
My understanding is not that Germany was some sort of backwards pre-industrial nation. Germany was a technological innovator in many fields. It was a steel producing giant with a highly industrialized economy. German economy had some unique, and other not so unique, financial issues following WW1 but I don't know quite as much about that.
The German military more heavily relied on horse power due to oil shortages and supply allocation compared to its peers. All nations were limited by fuel to some extent. Germany to such an extent that it structured major parts of its strategy around the acquisition of oil sources and did lots of science to help alleviate fuel concerns. This author has written a dissertation on oil, Germany, and WW2. If Nazi Germany was built on Texas, or modern Saudi Arabia, it would have had lots of more motorized elements and supply. It could have fed its offensive operations for much longer, committed to more of them, and the big picture strategy may have be different.
It would have built a lot more trucks and had less horses. Whether more fuel and trucks wins the war for them is up to whatever fanciful counter-factual you'd like to imagine.
Nope.
I can also get annoyed at the politics and the (especially online) culture.
A recent example: there was a shooting at Salt Lake City's No Kings protest a couple weeks ago. There is a brief video that shows what went down. It sounds like the SLCPD was aware that event volunteers were carrying pistols which resulted in reported "peacekeepers" (volunteer event staff) shooting a man armed with a rifle.
A pair of volunteers, easily identified by high visibility vests, observed this individual dressed in black "seclude" himself, don a mask, take out his AR, and approach the crowd with his rifle at what looks like low ready. The volunteers draw their pistols, aim at him as seen in the video, and allegedly shout at him to stop. The 24 year old panics, runs towards the crowd, and a volunteer fires 3 times. He hits the the suspect once, but then also kills a bystander beyond him. Turns out charges are not yet filed against anyone, although the 24 year old was initially arrested for reckless endangerment or some such thing.
The demonstrator -- reportedly a lefty anarchist John Brown Club adjacent type -- dressed in all black with a mask approaches the crowd by his lonesome. Apparently he was not prepared to be challenged. Despite the politics of the guy, the open carry fetishists guys, or people pretending to be them online were in absolute uproar about the violation of his rights. Of course it's unreasonable to intervene. How dare they! He didn't even fire a shot. These volunteers had no right to stop this guy from demonstrating if that's what he meant to do. They wrongly believed a different intent. They were probably so concerned about a shooting they created one. They fucked up so bad one of them killed an innocent man.
To me, a basic expectation for carrying in a public demonstration, especially doing so alone while obscuring one's identity, requires all sorts of technique, safety, and etiquette. Sling your weapon, signal your intent, and prepare to be challenged. Be a prosocial advocate. The freedom to demonstrate is limited in trivial ways with my expectations, but we get to have mass gatherings with firearms.
There's that absolutist SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED ideology floating around, where any violation of 2A rights is perceived as abhorrent, and thus worthy of maximum outrage.
I find it easy to believe takes like Rov_Scam's below. A trashy individual who can't manage to present himself as a decent, responsible person doesn't get what rights he is entitled to. Pretext for a judge to judge an individual as too irresponsible or dangerous.
Capital A-bsolutists are real, though they are less common among advocates. The absolutist rhetoric is some part cultural signal, part true belief (what is a right?), and part tactical. For the last bit, what benefit is there to giving an inch? 2A groups fight alone for a right, at best, most don't care too much about. The public is fickle and of limited value to the advocate's position. The world and many American jurisdictions set an example that incentivizes and justifies obstinance.
The 2A lobby is arguably more alive than ever, so that also contributes to being annoying. Where and when the lobby fails -- which happens -- many people scream with glee. A great many more shrug.
It's the duty of gun rights advocates to show that any given restriction is unreasonable
Unfortunately, yes. A government reinterprets, ignores, or dismantles a right, and the onus is on the citizenry to challenge it. This should carry additional explanatory power for any stubbornness. It would be nice to not require advocacy at all in a high-trust, high-functioning society. Lots of things would be nice!
Are you going to send a donation to a 2A advocacy group because, upon reflection of the details in this case or another, you perceive them as acting reasonably? As @gattsuru studiously documents for us, every little niggle, every small "in", each precedent and alternative interpretation that can be exploited gets explored fully.
I demand a full accounting of the stage!*
No I had not. "A brain with four legs explodes on a beach" is definitely the surrealist domain of AI, but even the less absurd scenes are impressive. A full production with continuity, it's impressive.
Okay. In the past I swear there's been a few bare link longform blog submissions to the front page. Even if we exclude Scott submissions as some special one-time exception. Maybe they do get got and I see them before the gotting.
Sounds good to me!
To be clear I am not a representative in any way and I don't need anything. It'd be fun to read updated data, count witches, and the other fun stuff.
I'll alert Mom with a ping so she can decide if the tentative plan is acceptable.
@Amadan I see you have a recent post so I'll ping in the hopes you can pass the idea on to the team?
I'd have to go back and listen, but I didn't understand it as a "we won't talk until" precondition. He was laying out that for negotiations to be worth anything, for anything like a ceasefire to be entertained, then meaningful security guarantees must be met. Might be saying the same thing. I came away thinking he would consider (or said he would) conceding territory for something like NATO presence. He didn't say that directly, but that was my impression.
He contextualized it with the Budapest Memorandum. So he spoke at some length about the kind of "assurances" that would not be acceptable for any form of peace to occur. Maybe he's spoken like this for awhile, but that signal alone: a suggestion lines could be frozen and and concede territory was a new thing for me to hear from him.
If his aim is to get Trump involved and on board, then seen as willing to negotiate is a precondition for that to happen. We'll see.
The Banshees of Inisherin Top Gun Maverick
I clearly didn't read the list. I saw both of these and enjoyed them both. Top Gun was, ironically, a breath of fresh air in its formula. That was the normie take and I agree with it.
I enjoyed Banshees. Tragedy, absurdity, and a story told through a dialogue that wasn't convoluted for the sake of complexity. Carried by a pair of actors with a chemistry and history together I appreciate. I also recall it being smartly humored. It kept me entertained and it worked. But, I may well be the cinema equivalent of a midwit, so a slightly different artsy but not-arthouse film might be my kryptonite.
Tár
Is on my list. I'll add Decision to Leave and give Suzume a try. My boomerism typically limits my anime viewings, so my exposure is limited to Miyazaki films (great!)
I hadn't considered that before. If technical or DIY Discord servers exist they should definitely try to save searchable logs for posterity. Already an entire Great Library has been lost with IRC chats.
Thanks, edited.
but I still don't see how we get to a 6 year war, that got as far as it did, if one of the belligerents is an economic, horse and mule drawn, basket case.
You allude a couple times that you don't believe Germany was an "economic, horse and mule drawn, basket case." I believe you are correct. Oil and fuel shortage is one alternative explanation for "why does this technologically advanced nation still uses horses when its peers do not?" It is one of the most straight forward explanations, even.
Maybe it fits better elsewhere, or nowhere at all, but you say you have no interest in history so you're a juicy mark for information you did not ask for.
"We can hypothetically launch more drones at you and actually do harm" after launching a few is not a victory in itself. It looks like they won very public assassinations of their allies and vassal leaders on their home turf. What else did they win?
The problem with launching 3000 drones is that is usually called a war and they don't want that kind of war. Whereas Israel appears to be asking for one or certain they won't get one. Israel did say they'd kill all Hamas leadership, so maybe there's an understanding. That's what proxies are for. Dying so you don't have to.
Hah, thanks for posting. That's an interesting way to go about it. What would be the best way to start with term limits if you're prevented from removing the current lifetime appointees? I think the new appointees should probably be subservient to the OG justices, or even irrelevant, until they the OG's are dead.
Start building an alternative court that handles... something until OG court is down to 5 or so then combine them?
- Prev
- Next
Because minorities can probably adequately haul water to flames for 15/hr too.
You don't have to, but many janitors do happen to be minorities.
In 2021 this Marin County Fire Dept. unit looks pretty white and male. Maybe they need communication operators and support staff. They think they can make quota by getting some girls. I don't know what goes into firefighting. Yes, yes, it could be the woke mind virus and probably is to some degree. I don't think Marin County Fire Dept's program is burning LA at the moment. This was my main objection to the framing in the parent.
Let's not slam down LibsofTikTok slop-bait as if it is authoritative.
More options
Context Copy link