you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
No bio...
User ID: 92
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
7mo ago
We can be the place where high effort discussion happens or we can be the place where we talk about how we deserve blowjobs. I've never seen an Internet community capable of accommodating both.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
7mo ago
Jesus telling you to love your neighbor and saying rich men won’t enter heaven isn’t at all similar to Marxism?
the detente is over and was over when the state closed churches and masses for COVID
Covid policy ended an individual family's "détente" over Christianity? Letting national politics (and they're barely even related specifically to Christianity!) shape your personal relationships with your family seems hopelessly mind-killed.
My mom isn't a fan of Big Tech but I don't give her the silent treatment whenever the EU hands out another fine.
Saying anything along the lines of "The corporation wants/cares/etc about $foo" is always going to run into trouble. Individual people continuously fail to have coherent desires. Companies (at least, companies with 10+ people) are always going to be worse.
Here's what seems like a pretty sensible framing to me:
I'd be surprised if Bob Iger (or Mark Zuckerberg, or Sundar Pichai, etc.) were "true believers" in identity politics -- if nothing else, consider what Wikipedia has to say:
Iger has described himself as a political centrist, while he has publicly identified with the Democratic Party.
...
In 2016, Iger switched his party registration from Democratic to independent.[1]
(For full disclosure, Wikipedia also mentions
Iger considered running for president as a Democrat in the 2020 election, however ultimately decided against running.
though I don't think that's a good signal of whether he's woke).
At the same time this doesn't say very much about what their companies will or won't do. I'm sure there are woke decisions that get made to maximize revenue. Similarly there are woke decisions that get made because some random person in middle or upper management is a true believer and nobody wants to be "that guy" who says "no, we're not going to make the next main character a woman/black/etc.".
I still don't think it's meaningful to say Disney "really cares", since I'm still skeptical that the CEO and/or most of the employees care. At the same time I'm sure some percentage of employees are genuinely woke, including some of the leadership.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
14d ago
Why allow “Antifa” their own zone in Portland? Because when they are doing that they are doing nothing serious.
These sort of reverse arguments are easy to generate (e.g. "welfare is actually bad for the recipients because they become dependent on it", "affirmative action is bad for Black people because people assume they're diversity hires", etc), so barring any actual evidence, it's hard to take any specific example seriously.
America’s weak point is clearly potential civic disunity which could result in balkanization along racial, religious, or cultural lines.
Similarly, it seems extremely weird to argue that elevating racial groups in discourse is supposed to prevent civic disunity along racial lines. When there is a clear direct relationship in one direction and an alleged indirect relationship in the other, I take the direct relationship far more seriously.
Of course it helps the government are subsidizing migrants to the tune of $350 per day, or $127,750 per year per migrant which would launch them almost into the top 10% of earners in the United States.
I recommend you go to prison in New York City. They make 4 times as much per day.
Comparing government spending and personal income is not meaningful at all. The government's ability to burn money without increasing social welfare is legendary, so unless you want to argue that the government is actually giving $350 of value to each migrant per day, it's dishonest to pretend like that's $350/day of subsidy.
It seems like a non sequitur to try to tie a BBC documentary to this. The burden of knowing what you’re doing is an order of magnitude higher for state actually using it to execute people than it is for some guy making a documentary.
So when an execution that was expected to result in loss of consciousness in seconds actually takes minutes (that’s probably worth mentioning in your comment), it seems completely kosher to criticize the institution that just put somebody to death in a terrible way — a BBC documentary from 10 years ago is not a valid shield.
If someone holding their breath transforms your humane execution method into something that results in minutes of suffering, that’s a black mark on the method and people are allowed to criticize you for not knowing or not caring.
But yes, I agree if this happened in California the response would probably be different.
This would be fine if he had anything to back it up, but his only "evidence" is complaining that there are no Chinese Feynmans... but there aren't any Feynmans in the 21st century.
Incidentally, by my count 7 of the last 50 Nobel laureates in Physics and 3 out of 16 Fields Medal winners were Asian.
It's worth noting that this is roughly inline with Asian representation at Harvard today (14%) and most Nobel laureates were born before 1950 -- research labs weren't really accessible to a billion Asians then. So not sure how meaningful those numbers are in either direction.
(Side note: interestingly, Fields Medal winners cannot be older than 40).
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
5mo ago
I consider the correct target for penalization/responsible for externalities to be the gay men who lied about having the disease (as in they were confident about it, not just at risk) and spread it to others. I mean, that's not just for gay men, anyone who non-consensually and knowingly infects anyone with anything deserves punishment.
I get where you’re coming from, but imo you’re mostly going to encourage people to not get tested. I think you’d have to punish people for spreading it unknowingly, which actually has the reverse effect (people will (hopefully) want to get tested regularly).
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
10mo ago
Clearly this is not a smart man, as AI is vastly more significant than even either of the above.
Without justification this is just booing. You can disagree with someone without saying they aren't smart.
That is a standard that nobody meets. People regularly favor others based on aspects that aren't strictly job relevant.
This conflates "Not being a hive mind ceaselessly optimizing for profit" with "making a multi-million dollar decision with your dick" which seems like a pretty lossy equivalence ("yeah he killed 15 men, but come on -- everyone commits some kind of crime").
The claim is "If a person who is given money to make a movie uses some of that money to have sex and make the movie worse, this is worse than hiring a prostitute with his own money". Do you disagree with that claim?
Besides, what if the director was using it as a tie-breaker between two equally competent actresses?
"It's just a tie breaker" has been said about affirmative action in software engineering for decades and it's always struck me how only somebody who has never actually done software engineering could believe it -- go ask some startup founders if they've ever had to choose between two equally good candidates. Maybe this philosophy is sensible for other kinds of work (e.g. low-skill jobs, or jobs where interview question give you no signal about employee quality), but not software engineering.
I'm inclined to believe that actors are at least less fungible as software engineers -- it seems like a no-brainer that casting can (and does) make or break a movie.
My best guess is Christianity/traditionalism are popular arguments here, mainly because they act as a foil for progressivism -- the benefits of radically different systems put the costs of progressivism into sharper relief.
I suspect the vast majority of our community would have been against white nationalism/Christianity/traditionalism before the 1960s, and would be against it today if it actually regressed to that point. I think they'd change their tune quite quickly once millions of Mexicans were living in tents across the border, or teachers were telling their kids they have to believe in God or they'll go to hell, or their daughters weren't allowed to go to college.
Whether they don't bring this up because those scenarios are so unlikely they're not worth mentioning, or because it ruins their catharsis while railing against leftists, is probably more a narrative question than a factual one, but I really doubt the readers here were pro-Christian when Christians were more influential and (e.g.) trying to stop Evolution from being taught in schools.
In that sense, it's probably more true to say that this forum hates ideologies that are currently messing with their lives (Progressivism is seen as the primary culprit today), rather than that it hates Progressivism or likes Christianity specifically.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
4mo ago
I'll repost my comment from two years ago. None of this is meant to be a bible. This is one approach
In the midwest I got a disproportionate amount of attention on Tinder (vs other apps). In the Bay my tinder match rate is lower but my Hinge match rate is higher (despite identical pictures). Moral of the story: the best app for you depends on different factors, including location; try every app at least once per locale.
In the midwest my match rate on tinder was awful when I used bad photos and great when I used better photos. My current photos are: a picture of me on a ski trip, a picture of me shirtless (tripod), a (bad-quality) picture of me in New Zealand, a picture of me reading (tripod), a (bad quality) picture of me hiking, and a picture of me playing the piano (tripod)
Some random tidbits I've picked up from a few months of online dating:
-
A surprising number of people (including women) think it's bad for me to have the ski-trip picture because you can't see my face. It's important to have some pictures where your face is clear, but absolutely not required for all of them.
-
TAKE LOTS OF PICTURES and only post the best. This is completely normal and not dishonest – women do this all the time. (Side note: I've never been catfished – I'm increasingly convince that most men who claim to have been catfished simply don't appreciate that women strategically select photos – if you can't tell if she's fat... well, there's a reason she isn't making it obvious)
-
If you're going to use a shirtless pic, do it immediately after running or lifting. Again: take many pictures with many different types of lighting.
-
Buy a tripod. It also helps to be confident/mature/social enough to ask a friend take pictures, but a tripod can be more comfortable than asking a friend to take 100 shirtless pictures. Avoid selfies.
-
Every picture should be in a different location. (though I have two pictures in the same building, but you can't tell). Multiple pictures from the same location suggest your pool of "interesting hobbies/events" is small. Yes, your profile is a highlight reel, but you need to leave the impression that there is plenty more you could have chosen from.
-
Don't put your height unless it helps sell you (this is probably around either 5'11" or 6 ft)
-
Dogs are good; cats are mixed (I haven't tried either, but iirc this is from OKCupid)
-
I think many nerds really hate the idea of presenting a false version of themselves, but normal people (including the people you match with) will overwhelmingly not consider posting (e.g.) vacation highlights or flattering angles to be misleading – it's just (unfortunately) part of the game. Part of using OLD apps for me was letting go of my pride – I had spent my whole life never overselling myself and getting by just fine because I was top of my class, etc. That kind of honesty is, unfortunately, not compatible with dating apps. It's worth noting that if you're underselling yourself compared to others, that's also a kind of dishonestly.
-
It may be helpful to know that probably half the reason you're not getting many matches isn't because women are rejecting you, but simply because women don't swipe (in either direction) nearly as much as men. To this end buying super swipes can be helpful (I did this before I re-ramped my profiles). For most people on this sub, $500 on dating apps in exchange for 40 years of happiness is cheap at twice the price.
-
If you think your hair doesn't look attractive, you're probably right (compare my first picture to my other two; I'm no top 2%, but at least I'm not bottom 50%). If you think your clothes don't look attractive, you're probably right. If you think your glasses don't look attractive, you're probably right. Trust your intuition. I'm a nerd interested in Lotr and statistics, who majored in math and CS, and spent my entire time as a student wearing t shirts. I still know unattractive when I see it (on me).
-
A great, customized opening message and an average, canned opener probably aren't that different in terms of response rate. Response rate (after matching) is basically ~50% for me no matter what, so I usually just send canned messages. 2 canned messages are better than 1 custom message.
-
If a woman matched with you and is talking to you, she is interested. You don't need to be suave or even have a decent segue to ask for her number or ask her on a date. Just ask "out of the blue" for either (I usually ask for a date then ask for a number to "work out the details"). I usually do this on the 3rd or 4th message (edit: though I usually sent pretty long messages when I was dating. YMMV, this is one approach that worked for me and is intended as an example more than as a bible).
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
5mo ago
Things were so bad that women who might have wanted to resort to prostitution couldn't because there weren't enough clients with means to pay!
Isn’t this an (odd) interpretation of virtually any supply and demand curve? The only thing stopping me from stripping naked on public TV is that nobody is willing to pay me a billion dollars to do it.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
6mo ago
I just had a horrible “everyone loses” vision of the future where everyone is permitted to conceal carry and kill criminals but they’re required to wear body cameras while in public.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
7mo ago
There is a tremendous amount of luck required for a (non-celebrity) writer to write a best-selling book.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
10mo ago
But to my mind, it was always a creation of media. Had the media not covered the story, it wasn’t much. It was, for the vast majority of people, a glorified flu virus. Had it not come with death-tickers and infection-tickers on the nightly news, breathless coverage of new variants, and endless advice about whether given activities were “safe” to do, people would never have cared in the first place.
Yes and the same is true for many things. From our local vantage point we have a hard time comparing anything that is rare. Car accidents, serial killers, HIV, liver disease -- how many people do you personally know who died from any of these? Just because I don't know anyone who has died in a car accident (let alone anyone close), that doesn't mean campaigns to get people to buckle their seatbelts were just fearmongering.
No comment on whether Covid in particular was fearmongering, but "people wouldn't have cared without the media/tickers" proves too much.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
11mo ago
Saying it about your opponent's point feels a lot less egregious.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
1mo ago
No but "your community and all their future generations are condemned to poverty and violence" is decidedly more depressing than "your community was hurt in the past due to no fault of their own, but is slowly building a better life, generation by generation".
Israel announces largest West Bank land seizure since 1993 during Blinken visit
This is particularly jarring after Biden has made more overt moves indicating he'd like to see deescalation, most recently the (failed) UN ceasefire resolution.
Most striking to me, personally, is the overwhelmingly negative sentiment on r/neoliberal.
For those who don't know, /r/neoliberal are very pro-Biden (and anti-Trump), generally pro-free market (and hence anti-anti-capitalist), and (imo) generally see themselves as moderate Democrats. Until today I'd have characterized them as pro-Israel, but this seems like a marked change. A top 1% subreddit changing its political beliefs is pretty rare.
I want to say this foreshadows a change in broader public support, but perhaps I'm a bit late to the party -- Gallup has already shown dropping support for Israel generally:
Fifty-eight percent of Americans, down from 68% last year, have a “very” or “mostly favorable” view of Israel. This is the lowest favorable rating for Israel in over two decades. At the same time, positive opinions of the Palestinian Authority have dropped from 26% to 18%, the lowest since 2015.
(Last sentence is just to give some context: yes support for Israel has dropped, but, it's worth noting, so has support for Palestine)
And, perhaps to be expected, this is most pronounced among young people:
Young adults show the biggest decline in ratings of Israel, dropping from 64% favorable among 18- to 34-year-olds in 2023 to 38%. Middle-aged adults (those aged 35 to 54) show a smaller but still significant drop, from 66% to 55%, while there has been no meaningful change among adults aged 55 and older.
I can't imagine that whatever Israel has gained in the last year is worth the long-term cost of burning its support with the next two generations of Americans.
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
2mo ago
Could you make your comment a little more concrete?
Are you conjecturing the man in this story didn't respect his parents enough, and that that is the fault of liberal policy? Or that his parents didn't teach him self-control, and that is the fault of liberal policy? That this kind of aggravation happened less often in the 1950s because people went to church, and liberal policy is driving people away from Christianity?
Right now the your fourth option is vague, and it is appropriately supported with a vague appeal to some idealized past.
Are 3 minor pieces worth about a queen? Certainly not, what nonsense! TypeDoesNotExist. Pieces don’t have values, all that matters is checkmating your opponent.
But since I’m not the physical embodiment of a trillion trillion trillion GPUs… I’m going to need a way to model the chess game that’s a bit more sophisticated (read: “wrong”). And if you start telling me piece values don’t exist I’m going to call you out for excessive pedantry.
This is how I feel when people complain that free will is incompatible with determinism. Like, yeah, you looked at the quarks and didn’t find any free will particles, sure. But that says nothing about whether I should keep modeling other people (and myself!) as agents with goals, who run some kind of shitty statistical inference, and who respond to incentives.
I’m not the embodiment of a trillion trillion trillion GPUs, so I’m not going to be modeling my barista as a complex set of atoms when I’m ordering my coffee.
The truly maddening thing is that, due to a lack of centralized criminal enforcement data, as well as the ridiculous amount of lag of reported data, it's extremely hard to sanity-check your speculations.
a bunch of cameras which will only punish those who choose to abide by the laws
you-get-an-upvote
Hyperbole is bad
6mo ago
Why should the chair’s name being Jennifer make me piss myself if I have pro-liberty biases?
I had three different HVAC repair men come to look at my furnace and all three gave me completely different diagnoses with very similar prices (~$1300). My aunt has a list of repair men that she has collected over her life (mostly recommended by friends I think) and is adamant that word-of-mouth recommendations are the only feasible way to get a good contractor.
More options
Context Copy link