MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
No bio...
User ID: 1783
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
I mean for little girls, I remember reading Beverly Clearly’s Ramona books as a kid, Babysitters Club, Sweet Valley High. Those aren’t woke and would probably be interesting to a girl.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
It’s not just social media, but regular media, education and control mechanisms like the ability for you to be fired for saying something online, or convincing others to shun friends and even family who say things that the regime doesn’t like. Americans are saturated in propaganda and unless you’re paying attention you probably don’t even notice it.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
If the degree is so watered down anyone can get one, what good is it?
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
3d ago
I’m beginning to suspect that screens are a hyper stimulus you can have “relationships”, but they’re only the good parts and you don’t have to work at them, you don’t have to make time for them, you don’t even need to put on pants. Games are much more stimulating than doing the actual thing, they give more rewards and with less effort than real life
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
This 1000 times is why I despise social media. Nobody is getting real conversation on social media because it’s curated to funnel your mind down a path leading to the pre-approved opinion. I mean propaganda is so pervasive in the modern west that I think we’re as bad or worse in terms of propaganda and psychological manipulation than the worst totalitarian regimes of the last century. Stalin put out propaganda, sure, but it wasn’t nearly as pervasive as what we have. He had radio, newspapers, and posters. He couldn’t steer private conversations, he couldn’t delete crime-think from social consciousness. He could chill things by arresting obvious and loud dissenters, but that is much more limited than what social media does via AI and deletion. Our propaganda machine hides and people are lead to believe that they are having neutral conversations.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
Reddit is a completely curated experience for the most part, and so it’s never going to be a vanguard for new ideas. It probably stopped being that in the early 2000 before the normies showed up. Now it’s mostly low effort and tryhard shlock that most people have heard some version of before. The memes are not original, in fact they’re basically the same stuff that would have been posted there 20 years ago with names updated. The AITAH and similar talk forums are basically barely realistic fanfic level crap that doesn’t even bring up interesting discussions— and the user is never the asshole because Reddit doesn’t think any relationship is worth working through the slightest problem for. Like if she burned your dinner, you should dump her immediately, if not sooner, and be sure to ruin something she loves on the way out the door.
Avant Garde stuff does not come from places curated to mainstream tastes. TBH I’d look at 8chan or something for that kind of future opinion shaping.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
I mean the gamification scheme works mostly by overstimulation of the part of your brain that gets a ping from being successful. You get a dopamine high from achievement which is how your brain evolved to get unpleasant or difficult tasks done. That doesn’t mean you enjoy the game or got anything valuable from it, it means that the game used sounds and visual displays to trigger the dopamine that comes from accomplishing a task, but in a much more stimulating way. I’d put it this way — if games didn’t have those gamification elements in them, would you still enjoy them? I used to like Skyrim and it was always somewhat a thrill when you saw a hidden door open or quest completed or level up messages appeared. But what if none of that happened? How much fun is it really to solve random puzzles without the reward attached? No loot, no completion, no NPCs blowing sunshine up your ass, just turn the statues around to solve the puzzle with nothing to reward you? Just thwack the bandits for no pats on the head, no loot, no hidden rooms to discover? Is that really fun. Or is the fun getting those little bits of dopamine from the feeling of having done those things?
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
I can’t think of an easier way to give away the position of your troops than having a large drone right on top of their location.
Vintage dollhouse does one that’s basically no screens and living like it’s 1940. There are a few that did 1990s and 1980s tech. There was a group of reinactors who did a LARP of the 17th century England, and a couple of odd ones (mostly women) doing the regency era which I think is 18th century. But the common denominator of the experience seems to be exactly that they are much more creative and able to get things done once they basically “detox” of Internet, screens and so on.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=f9mZJ9Z-mfM?si=r5aaEso6h8SdXl79
https://youtube.com/watch?v=z_ZGk-tVIUA?si=ayvCEsgMu4rjA0aZ
https://youtube.com/watch?v=J-uRFPbaKEw?si=UkxQBHSy3g2rP5Yd
These two are women living a 1940s lifestyle. The first two are Vintage dollhouse who does a lot of other reenactment work for 1940s stuff.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
To be honest I don’t have a good answer for that. Obviously they need a country of their own, but I don’t think it can be in the Levant simply because the land area is too small (it’s the size of New Jersey) and the two sides have so little trust and so much homicidal anger that peaceful sharing whether one state or two isn’t going to happen.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
But even so, this is a very small population of any first world economy. What percentage are we talking about? Maybe 10% at the high end of all adults over 25 are unable or unwilling to work. When AGI replaces humans like automobiles replaced horses, it will be 99% who serve no purpose other than pets of one form or another. Our track record when an animal is not useful to us is absolutely horrifying— at best the herd dog becomes a pet and the horse becomes a pet that is used for tricking or pleasure riding, and the population of both of those shrinks by quite a bit. For animals that cannot be domesticated or that humans don’t fins attractive enough to turn into pets, the vast majority end up on the endangered species list. That’s been the record of how humans deal with living things they don’t find useful. I don’t know how rational it is to expect that humans will suddenly start caring about several billion people globally who are only useful as cute little legacy humans that maybe entertain the elites for a time.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
I’ve fallen down a rabbit hole of looking into daily life in the past, and I think a big issue is that modern “always on” culture with instant communication and instant gratification have basically overclocked our brains beyond what that brain was designed to deal with. Our hardware absolutely was not designed to handle the deluge of information and stimulation we have today. And part of that is the inability to cope with the lack of stimulation that allows people to want to do deeper work. Boredom is in fact necessary to get people to do that work, as it removes all stimulation outside of just doing the things if you like.
One thing I’ve found absolutely fascinating about these sorts of “live like it’s X year” experiments is just how surprising and even interesting the “analog” real world is once your brain adjusts to it. People who do this find things fascinating that they never paid attention to before, find themselves able to read books or draw or work on projects, find themselves enjoying their food or really paying attention to music or ambient sounds in the environment. They also sleep better and find themselves less stressed, and are getting more exercise. I think this allows the kinds of actual work that used to happen, especially when you also remove the constant commentary of social media either encouraging or blasting everything and creating performance anxiety and creating inertia.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4d ago
We have some degree of redistribution in most countries today, for people who for noble or ignoble reasons, can't work on the free market. Eventually, that will be everyone.
We have redistribution because we still need humans to do the work. The reason we give the guy working the counter at McDonald’s benefits is not because we care about him. We still need his labor thus it’s to our. Collective Benefit that he be fed and housed. In a future where other than owning an AI run factory, there’s no benefit to keeping humans around, it’s not going to happen. Ask the horses. Once automobiles became good enough and cheap enough to replace horses as personal transportation, we didn’t put all horses on the horse-UBI, we stopped breeding them and the population of horses fell precipitately. Now, the much lower number of horses that remain are mostly kept as pets who occasionally do work. The population might be a tenth and probably a lot less of what it was back when everyone had a horse to ride. I expect the same of humans outside of the elite circles — some form of enforced birth control and unless someone wants a pet human as a personal servant for LARPing Downton Abbey purposes, Theres just no need for 90% or more of the human population.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
It is an imposition of government power to prevent an employer from firing an employee for their private speech, but not an authoritarian one. It is also an imposition of government power to prevent an employer from firing an employee for being the wrong race, and yet most of us would agree that is appropriate. It is worth it for the government to intervene and restrict freedoms if those restrictions create more freedoms as a result. In this case protecting the ability of people to speak and not be mindslaves to the megacorps (and the activists who cherry pick people to bring to their attention).
From my point of view it’s actually one thing I’d want the government to protect people from, simply because it’s been used — in some cases by the government itself— as a way to back door punish crime-think. It’s for all intents and purposes illegal to say things against homosexuality. Your boss is practically obligated to fire you for saying it, because if he doesn’t, it constitutes a “hostile workplace” that he can be sued for allowing to exist. And the law gives no out for a person to be left alone, because the mere presence of someone who has in any context engaged in crime-think online is creating that hostile work environment. And thus Internet scolds can root out anyone who posts crime think online and make them virtually unemployable, which in modern society makes their lives miserable. The government has learned to censor by using the private sector as its enforcement mechanism thus avoiding breaking the first amendment itself. Facebook or Twitter censors your online presence, not the government. Your boss fires you rather than tge government arresting you. It is still censorship, and most people unless they’re ideological, learn very quickly what sorts of opinions they must never say aloud.
Having a bit of protection where private employers cannot fire non public facing employees for personal opinions on private accounts posted on their own time would remove that chilling effect. It makes sense that I could be fired as a company representative for saying something “evil” online. My job is to represent that company. It also makes sense that if I’m posting from official accounts, the employer has a right to control what I post on those accounts or on internal chats/emails. Those represent official communications. Even posting during office hours might fall under use of company time. But if I’m posting to MY personal account on MY personal phone on MY personal time, it’s not his business. And I think it’s only reasonable that protecting the principle of free speech means that I should be able to say what I want to on my own time.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
It is political at least in the sense that such fantasies are the way any such system is marketed to the general public. People don’t buy systems, he’ll, they rarely buy products, instead they buy images of a better future. People don’t like chatbots just because they’re useful (I don’t think they at present are doing anything that a well thought out google search couldn’t do) but because AI represents a fantasy replete with images of a future society without scarcity and where work is obsolete. You imagine yourself a “winner” in this future, so it means a life of luxury and leisure. The reality is probably not so good, as humanity is unlikely to distribute goods to people who do nothing to earn them. We rarely did so, and when we did it tended to be meager goods and cause problems.
The problem with such utopian fiction is that as marketing for a new system, they encourage that system when people believe it, and thus they fight to bring it about. Too late they realize that reality is nothing like the fantasy. The rich white women who overthrew Patriarchy in the 1969s and 1970s imagined themselves in executive suites making easy decisions, they to some extent still think it possible. They never imagined they’d have to do ordinary work and keep house on top of it. They never imagined that having strangers raise the vast majority of children via daycare would cause social problems while eating 3/4 of her paycheck. The greens are in a similar path. They imagine a modern industrial lifestyle with green-branded versions of things they already have. To actually combat climate change and reduce carbon to the degree they think has to be done would require a massive downgrade in lifestyle. You probably won’t own many things, you’ll live in a two bedroom apartment, where you won’t have much in the way of personal possessions and privacy is a luxury. Your food will be very much like what it was in 1900– common foods, only what grows locally, and probably much more expensive than what it is now. Clothing likewise will be much more utilitarian and expensive and you won’t own that many, so they won’t be fashionable or change all that much. You will be limited in travel— you won’t own a personal vehicle, and as far as vacation, you’ll be stuck pretty local maybe camping near your home city, but certainly not internationally unless you’re filthy rich or live within an easy distance from a border. But marketing hides this, until after the work of tearing down the old system and replacing it is done. Once the system is built people wake up from the fantasy only to discover the reality is not remotely what they were sold.
Beware people selling fantasies.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
Maybe I missed something, but Light was not motivated by just a desire for power, and especially at first the idea seems to be that he only wants the Death Note to kill criminals, but really doesn’t go after anyone else unless they’re trying to catch him or he needs to confuse L. It seems a bit more like the Death Note sort of takes over after a while in the sense that power goes to his head. I read Light mostly as a tragic story of huberis in which the power to destroy human life becomes the power to play God and remake everything into your vision of Justice.
L never came off that well in the story for me. It was just a guy who loved the mystery and found the whole thing to be a fascinating game. He had no moral reason to want to stop Light. He just wanted to catch Kira because it was a difficult case to solve.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
5d ago
Given that every negotiation has failed by one side or the other, and the two sides expect defecting by the other side (and thus have every incentive to defect first and seize initiative) there’s no viable way to have a two-state solution of any type. There are two end states on offer
1). Israel controls all the territory and has enough weaponry to protect its borders and citizens.
2). Israel is dissolved and thus the state reverts back to being the Arab state of Palestine.
3). We keep up intermittent wars until one of those two states is reached.
Given this, the best solution is backing one side to break the stalemate and take over, the quicker tge better. Then once one side or the other loses completely enough to accept they won’t be in the Levant anymore, the conflict ends.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
Expecting an enemy not to commit war crimes is normal. Israels behaviour has taught a sizeable portion of goyim what jewish mindset is and that the jewish view on this is fundamentally incompatible with a western mindset. The winning Palestinian strategy is to show the world what a bunch of religious fundamentalists on the west bank are actually like. There is a reason why western civilization despised these people for 2000 years and having them quoting biblical genocides while massacring starving Christians is an excellent way to bring back the west to our historical view of them.
In large measure the Western response has created this mindset. It did so by casting Israel as always the perpetrator no matter what anyone else did, or how restrained they were in response. Eventually they understood that restraint doesn’t help them at all, and that it quite often emboldens those who attack them. Eventually the threat of UN and international condemnation holds no weight because it’s not like they weren’t going to be condemned anyway, so who cares.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
The counterpoint is that it’s quite easy to use this kind of thing to cost tge opposition money and waste their time defending themselves against these kinds of suits which make them fairly effective in chilling speech. If I can be sued in hopes of finding the information out that means im obliged to pay for a lawyer and waste weeks or months of time trying to defend myself. This would have a chilling effect as if I don’t want to spend millions defending myself I might not run a story on the Hunter Laptop, not because I believe it’s not true, but because defending myself from lawfare is too high a cost for my platform to deal with.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
I think honestly 3 has the best chance of actually working long term. If you have to clear a high bar to even have a case, then there’s no way to abuse it. If you have to prove that the claim was false, the writer knew it was false, and that it caused material harm, it’s a high enough bar that you can’t just sue anyone saying something you don’t like.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
Are there any doctors involved here? I mean there are lots of things that could be causing this and not all of them are her trying to stay slim. Maybe she has a form of sensory issue that makes eating unfamiliar food unpleasant. She might have some sort of digestive issues. She might have a blockage somewhere that makes eating a lot of food unpleasant. If there are mental blocks, she needs a professional of some sort so she can sort out her feelings about her weight.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
6d ago
Personally, I think that it’s an identitarianism form of Marxism. The idea being that those at the top of the hierarchy got their wealth, power, and positions by exploiting those who are not in the dominant group. So in the West, white people, particularly white men, got everything they have from either past theft and exploitation or current theft and exploitation. And thus the belief suggests that the way to solve this injustice is to take from those who have and give it to those who don’t.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
7d ago
I think they were both pretty equal in evil. The reason that Stalin gets a pass is that it makes an absolute mess of the moral certainty that the postwar order created. We were allies with Russia, and im not sure that the Allies would have won without Stalin and his war machine. If the war had remained a one front war, it’s possible that some form of Nazi German Empire would have survived. It was only because Russia was involved that we won, and thus talking about Holodomor and Gulag systems (which were absolutely as evil as any of the German labor camps) becomes a bit of a hagiographic problem. Stalin being known to be equally as ruthless would turn the story sideways. Which is a problem because the postwar mythological narrative of Liberal Western Globalist order is “we defeated the worst thing that had ever existed. Thus we have the moral right to rule over everything.” And furthermore it gives the new order a moral certainty— evil looks like Hitler, evil looks like straight armed salutes, arm bands, and speeches in big stadiums and big red flags.
Now they were obviously both evil and killed millions and committed genocide of people into the millions of people. But I don’t think the way the mythology works in th3 modern world works for a lot of reasons. For one thing, it turned things that used to be considered okay into evil simply because they’d been used to evil ends. Nationalism and patriotism are usually good things, they hold people together to build a country. It works in China. They think being Chinese is good and favor things that benefit China.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
7d ago
I don’t know, im personally of the opinion that there are good and bad ways to achieve any goal and that there are always trade-offs that come with any of it. And for my own personal ideal state, im in favor of tge Scandinavian model where sure you aren’t going to be the biggest baddest economy or a global hegemony, but by and large the bulk of people can get along just fine. I’m not opposed to universal health care of some sort, but I understand it rations care by wait times where the American system rations by money.
I’m generally with at least tge idea that whatever the form a government takes, the most important thing is customer service— getting things done that create a healthy, thriving country full of thriving people. I’m not convinced that the money-maximizing system we’ve built in the USA delivers on that. That doesn’t mean socialism or communism or nationalism or theocracy would do better. I just want a country where the bulk of people can live a reasonable lifestyle, and where a setback isn’t fatal.
I mean if you create a super stimulus, then people will absolutely choose that over real life. There are beetles in Australia who prefer shagging beer bottles to real females. And that happened without humans doing beetle psychology and A/B testing to create the best, most addictive Waifu-bot possible. Humans designing robot waifus would be working overtime to make their version as stimulating of the male mating system as they can.
Just looking at the NEET phenomenon as an example — people choosing to escape living an actual life in favor of internet, TV, and gaming. Is it normal or natural for a person to choose to live an isolated life indoors over going out with friends, accomplishing things, and moving forward in life? But if you make simulated reality good enough some nonzero portion of the population will choose that, and the better the simulacrum, tge more people get sucked in.
I expect robot waifus to eventually be good enough that all but the most successful men who could get supermodels anyway, and the rest will be at home alone wanking into a robot who’s learned exactly how to get him to spend time with it.
More options
Context Copy link