SSCReader
7d ago
Generally only if you do it in a way which contravenes another law. To demonstrate, If you stand outside a convicted rapists house and yell over and over Bob Smith is a rapist for days on end you might be charged with harrassment. The truth value of your statement isn't what the law is taking issue with. They agree with you hes a rapist, but how, when and how often you say it is the issue.
The trans part isn't really the issue, its just the UK in general is less bothered about restrictions of free speech than the US, especially when it comes to maintaining the peace (charitably put, not rocking the boat if less so) so our harrassment and other speech statutes are fairly broad.
As an anecdote I was back home recently and at a public event a man was (as my mum put it) carrying on about the Good Friday Agreement. He wasn't being threatening, but the police rolled up and hauled him away anyway, with the assistance and full support of the public. Were his free speech rights abrogated? Probably. But it made the event a lot more enjoyable.
SSCReader
9d ago
Is something actually changing?
The UK Supreme Court ruling and the NHS roll back of gender identity treatment are concrete changes.
"NHS England no longer routinely prescribes puberty blockers for people under 18 and has halted access to them outside of specific clinical trials, following a review by Dr. Hilary Cass, due to a lack of evidence for their safety and efficacy in this age group"
"In an “interim update” on how the ruling should be interpreted, the Equality and Human Rights Commission said on Friday that in workplaces and services open to the public, such as hospitals or cafes, “trans women (biological men) should not be permitted to use the women’s facilities and trans men (biological women) should not be permitted to use the men’s facilities.”"
The current position is basically that trans-women are not women with all that entails for sports, bathrooms and laws, but also don't be a dick about it, because that is not the done thing and they're still a protected group.
SSCReader
9d ago
Just to point out in the kind of similar Rivera case (3 teen girls kill a Bolivian man in London, also filmed on mobile phone, also on CCTV), the CCTV and video taken by the girls has still not been released (barring a couple of heavily blurred stills) months later even after the trial, nor has the identity of the girls been released. There too the girls claimed the man was harassing them, but witnesses contradicted them and all three pled guilty to manslaughter.
Your chances of getting information from the police on an active investigation as a private citizen are essentially zero. If there is a trial that is the best bet of information being released. Possible CCTV footage might be released here as the clear images of the girls were already released (not by the police), so the cat is out of the bag there. But even so the girls are still being blurred out by the BBC and the like, so even if we get some CCTV stills released they will likely be mostly useless for working out what happened.
Unless it's leaked just be aware even if they have really clear footage it may never be seen publicly no matter which way the situation developed. FOISA requests for anything that may count as evidence in a criminal case are almost always denied. But you could try via
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/new/police_scotland
It does have a note that: Requests to Safety Cameras Scotland should also be made to Police Scotland.
which might be applicable.
You can see requests for information about CCTV have been made previously to Police Scotland (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/communication_between_police_sco_2#incoming-3134038 and https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/information_on_police_scotland_v#incoming-3102254) but often questions are refused to be answered due to the Law Enforcement exemptions.
Also note requests through this site are publicly visible.
SSCReader
9d ago
I want to see that video. If it shows anything other than the girls approaching the adults and immediately brandishing or initiating assault, the girls are, in my opinion, in the right. The longer we go without seeing the video, the more my priors shift toward the girls being in the right.
Just to point out in other cases the CCTV is often never released. For example the Rivera case where three teen girls killed a Bolivian man in London, was mostly caught on CCTV, but only a few heavily blurred stills were ever released. Interestingly there too the girls claimed the man harassed them, but witnesses contradicted that and all three girls pled guilty to manslaughter.
So I am not sure CCTV not being released should change your priors much one way or the other.
Also it was in Scotland not England. Which doesn't really change the point about the cameras but might save you some harsh words from some of my more nationalistic brethren.
Di you live in the UK? Because that certainly doesn't seem like a description of the situation. Not least necause you are eliding a very important consideration. Class. Britain does indeed enforce behavioral rules on underclass/lower class groups.
Case in point I am back home right now and a guy was yelling at a family event. No threats, just effing and blinding as my mum put it, and the cops just rolled up and dragged him off after being called.
Community norms require and often get community involvement. A Karen is just someone trying to enforce norms others don't agree with. Someone helping enforce popular norms is a good citizen.
SSCReader
18d ago
If you search Amazon UK or other UK tool sites you will see things labelled as hand axes, not as commonly as hatchets maybe but the term is in use. I had a Rolson hand axe in my shed for a number of years for example.
Also used in Dungeons and Dragons and other RPGs which might be where more online non-Brits see it.
SSCReader
21d ago
Then you missed quite a bit. The plan was most of the resistance evacuate on cloaked ships to Crait, where they can hide in a secret base, while a skeleton crew on the main ships leads the First Order on a wild goose chase. If the cloaked transports were undetected that was a reasonably solid escape plan. Because the First Order would have no reason to search Crait because they would have destroyed all the main ships and thus believed the Resistance destroyed.
I'm not saying its a great movie but the plan was slightly more well thought out than a one in a million shot.
SSCReader
22d ago
Except that wasn't the plan. The plan was escaping on cloaked ships while the First Order chased the larger ones. But because Poe sanctioned Rose and Finn's mission who brought back a slicer who betrayed that plan to the First Order, plan A was shot. Hyperspace ramming was the hail mary.
SSCReader
1mo ago
And they're likely the ones who'll end up walking into a house to find the body unexpectedly if they do just commit suicide.
Thats a problem with suicide generally, not the Swiss system specifically. The Swiss system at least means some kids will be informed in advance who wouldn't otherwise be.
You have to compare it with "standard" suicide and in almost all of those relatives are going to have to unexpectedly deal with remains. Excepting those where the suicidal person tries to disappear themselves. But that of course leaves family members with other issues instead.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Oh i'm not a mod ao I'm commenting on its truth/probability vis a vis the sources you quoted only. Personally i wouldn't consider you've done enough to show female answers would be obviously more incorrect.
You perhaps need to hedge a little more. Obviously is a very certain and consensus building word so your evidence should be equally convincing, i think. Probably or likely would give you more leeway.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Just to point out though none of that supports your claim that their reply would be obviously less correct on quora. That's the claim that you need to buttress. Do you see why?
Because someone answering a particular quora question is self-selecting. First to be on quora in the first place and second to answer that particular question.
It could be 8 out 10 women have worse general knowledge, but that given the selection pressures men and women's answers on quora are equally correct because only the 2 out of 10 women post there, and so on and so forth.
You can't evidence a specific claim like this with general statistics. Consider: Men generally have less knowledge of fashion than women. Positing this is overall true for a moment, it doesn't mean that men answering fashion questions on a website will statistically answer worse than the women, because it is highly likely those men are very unusual, otherwise they wouldn't be answering questions on fashion in the first place. They are very likely to have greater fashion knowledge than the average man. Whether they have more knowledge than the average woman on the website we could only determine by analyzing answers on the platform itself.
So you still haven't actually evidenced the women on quora would be obviously less correct in general. You may have evidenced that if you pick a random woman and ask her a general knowledge question she will on average do worse than a random man. But that wasn't your claim.
To evidence a claim about quora you will have to analyze data from quora (or something similar perhaps), or find a way to unconfound the general data to account for selection effects on quora. Which in itself probably requires you to analyze a lot of data about quora.
Or to put it another way, the fact 8 out of 10 men know little about the goings on on Love Island, doesn't tell you much about the level of knowledge a man who CHOOSES to answer a question on Love Island has. Because interest in the topic is a factor in both level of knowledge and wanting to answer the question.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Associated with middle class striving, so probably skewed Protestant back in the day. My grandmother did keep the toaster in a cupboard. My mum doesn't.
SSCReader
1mo ago
So if anyone has brilliant ideas about US visa applications, creative leave arrangements, or general life optimization, I'm all ears.
I'd start by reaching out to Inkhaven. If they had this open internationally, they should already have considered visa issues. Hopefully a whole bunch of influential rationalists should already have considered how they could do this. If you're not getting paid I would think a tourist visa would do. It's essentially a writing holiday. But if you are getting paid for for your blog posts that makes it considerably more complicated I should think. There are visas for artist residencies, so I wouldn't be too concerned about the writing thing being weird as being the problem, but those generally would require the sponsor (Lightcone presumably in this case) to be engaging with being an official sponsor through the US government. Also the timing is likely tight for November. J-1 or B-1 Visas might be a possibility depending on the exact details. Unfortunately India is not part of the Visa Waiver program or you might have been ok with just an ESTA as you can travel for 90 days for business.
"You may be eligible for a B-1 visa if you will be participating in business activities of a commercial or professional nature in the United States, including, but not limited to:
Consulting with business associates Traveling for a scientific, educational, professional or business convention, or a conference on specific dates Settling an estate Negotiating a contract Participating in short-term training"
SSCReader
1mo ago
In the cupboard as opposed to out on the counter. Popularized by Derry Girls where a Catholic girls school and a Protestant Boys school are attempting to find commonalities.
A Jewish man is walking through Belfast one night when he gets stopped by two men in balaclavas with Armalites.
One of the men asks in a thick Belfast accent "Prod or Taig?" The Jewish man looks confused. "What?" "Are you a Protestant or are you a Catholic?" the other man asks in an even thicker accent. The Jewish man says "Well, I'm a Jew". The first paramilitary gives a long suffering sigh. "Yes, but are you a Protestant Jew or a Catholic Jew?"
That's the joke.
I have heard a different version which plays off it:
A man is walking home late at night in Belfast. Suddenly he's pulled into a dark alley and feels a knife at his throat! A hoarse voice whispers into his ear, "Are ye Protestant or Catholic?" Thinking quickly, wondering how to answer to save his life, the man has an inspiration. "Neither! I'm Jewish!" he says. "Well now, I'm the luckiest Arab in Belfast, so I am!" says the attacker.
Edit: I see my near namesake beat me to it!
Edit Edit: There is also a version where it's an atheist and the final question is: "Yes but is it the Protestant God or the Catholic God that you don't believe in?"
SSCReader
1mo ago
This is a region where walking into the wrong neighborhood could get you shot.
Well we still have the murals and your chances of being shot have gone way down. Though FYI seeing which colours the kerbs are painted or which flags are on the lampposts is probably easier as there aren't that many murals, you may have to walk a while to work out where you are if relying on murals alone.
You chances of being shot in the wrong region weren't zero, but they weren't massive even at the height of the Troubles. I was on the Falls road (Catholic area) a fair bit even though I was Protestant. Without checking where someone keeps their toaster, or talking to them about schooling you can't tell a Catholic from a Protestant in general just by looking. Hence the old joke about a Jew being stopped by Paramilitaries.
SSCReader
1mo ago
I do not understand why you would have concerns about someone asking an LLM.
Well because an LLM is not a person. It doesn't have ideas or thoughts. It's not an interaction with a person at all. Asking another person to proofread not only gets you another set of eyes it gets you an interaction with an actual living breathing person, and now their messiness gets injected. Having said that I'm not saying the way you are using it at this stage is wrong necessarily. My point is basically about not confusing the destination with the journey.
Imagine if you want to get from A to B and you can 1) Use a teleporter (non 40K style or its another kettle of fish) 2) Get on a train or 3) Walk. 1) Means you don't have a journey at all, you just get from A to B swiftly and efficiently. If that is your goal it is the best option. But if you want to see the countryside, and look at sheep in a field on the way it is of no use at all. It replaces the journey with the destination 100%. The train limits what you experience on your journey but doesn't remove it entirely.
I think part of the charm of TheMotte is the journey, the back and forth, the tangents, the random weirdness that gets injected from messy human thinking. Maybe I'm wrong and the LLM usage you currently have won't reduce the kind of vector space for that kind of energy bouncing off. You may well be right that my concerns are overbaked! Hopefully so, because I would anticipate AI usage is just going to increase and maybe not everyone will resist the pull of having the usage pretty heavily circumscribed as you do.
I'd like us all walking together ideally, romping up and down the hills of discussion and the dales of Red vs Blue tribal responses from our messy little human brains. If we're on a train well that's a little worse form my perspective. And the closer it gets to a bullet train whizzing past the hills at 300mph the less I like it. A meandering steam train is probably ok as well.
I'm more musing than condemning just to be clear. You're an extremely valuable contributor here and I always read your posts with interest, and you have to remember, I am old after all. Shaking my fist at the Cloud and wearing onions on my belt is a time honoured tradition!
SSCReader
1mo ago
I also, simultaneously, feed them into a more powerful reasoning model such as o3 or Gemini 2.5 Pro for the purposes of noting any flaws in reasoning. They are very good at finding reasoning flaws, less so at catching errors in citations. Still worth using.
But isn't that the point of posting here?
"This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases"
If you're testing your reasoning against an LLM first then you're kind of skipping part of the entire point of this space no? We should pointing out flaws in your reasoning. You're making an arguably better individual post/point, at the expense of other readers engagement and back and forth. Every time the LLM points out flaws in your reasoning you are reducing the need for us, your poor only human interlocuters. You're replacing us with robots! You monster! Ahem.
If the LLM's at any point are able to completely correct your argument then why post it here at all? We 're supposed to argue to understand, so if the LLM gets you to understanding then literally the reason for the existence of this forum vanishes. It's just a blog post at best.
It's like turning up for sex half way to climax from a vibrating fleshlight then getting off quickly with your partner. If your goal is just having a baby (getting a perfect argument) then it's certainly more efficient. But it kind of takes away something from the whole experience of back and forth (so to speak) with your partner I would suggest.
Now it's not as bad as just ejaculating in a cup and doing it with a turkey baster, start to finish, but it's still a little less...(self_made_)human?
Not saying it should be banned (even if it could be reliably) but I'd probably want to be careful as to how much my argument is refined by AI. A perfectly argued and buttressed position would probably not get much discussion engagement because what is there to say? You may be far from that point right now, but maybe just keep it in mind.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Likewise! And I appreciate you always trying to take the heat out of things, it's not easy. I've rewritten and deleted my own share of posts on things that are hot button topics for me, so I know it's not necessarily easy!
SSCReader
1mo ago
Why should teachers be deprioritized for whiteness when they're going to be in high-risk environments, and spreading it to black kids who will then spread it to their higher-risk families?
This is a reasonable point! And indeed if you read Schmidt's paper his final recommendation is healthcare workers and essential workers who are likely to be exposed to and spread the disease to multiple people. While he discusses race as an impact his final recommendation doesn't actually suggest making the distribution race based directly at all.
Now part of that is because retail, grocery store workers and the like skew minority in the US in any case, but his final position in his paper does indeed seem to be there is no need to discriminate on race. I don't know whether the article only asked him about the race part or only used his answer for that part, but his papers recommendation does not suggest discriminating on race for vaccine distribution in the end.
Now having said that his recommendation turns out to be wrong anyway. There are 2 main vaccine pandemic responses 1) Vaccinate the most vulnerable (this directly reduces deaths) 2) Vaccinate the most likely people to spread the disease, workers who come into contact with many people. The 2nd saves lives indirectly by restricting spread even though you are primarily vaccinating people who individually are not at much risk of the disease.
However it has to be with a vaccine that is effective enough and taken up enough to get to herd immunity levels. Without that option 1) is generally your best shot. But Schmidt was making that recommendation before the vaccines were created so presumably we can't hold him responsible for the fact the vaccines were not as effective as option 2) requires, he didn't know that at the time.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Sure, the disparities were not that wide (as far as I know). But do note the article is from before there was a vaccine at all, as they were discussing how it should be allocated when they had them, so reasonably early on.
Having said that if you actually read the paper and not the media phrasing even Dr Schmidts final recommendation was fairly anodyne. Prioritize healthcare workers and then essential workers who are likely to spread to multiple people (so a retail worker who has to come into contact with lots of people each day over say a farmer). In the end he didn't actually recommend that it be decided by race at all. Just worker type. He just talked about it being a factor to consider in his paper, which is the bit he was then asked to comment on for the article, or the article only published his quotes on that section perhaps.
The media version of X may not really represent X very well in actuality.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Sure like I say, by the numbers they might be wrong. But presumably that means you accept the principle that if say 25yo black Americans were dying at the same rate as 85yo white people from Covid then it might have been reasonable at the outset to reserve vaccines for white people over 65 and black people over 25, befoe you start expanding it to white people 45 and so on. That if the difference was as stark as age turned out to be, that their argument would have been justified.
Which means i think its hard to call it evil. At least for me. But thats value not fact dependent, so certainly arguable.
SSCReader
1mo ago
Absolutely. And that is a reasonable critique of the position. Especially if you pointed out significant parts of the poor health is behavioural! I'm not saying they are correct, I am saying its a reasonable non evil position to hold. With scarce resources some people are not going to be treated. But note that is also the basic decision we came to with age. Younger people had to wait to get vaccinated. So were we punishing young people for being too healthy? Or is it simply the pragmatic choice to try and equalize death rates between different age groups? We did deprive young people of care they would have got in an age blind society then presumably. Is that ok but race skewing isn't? Or are neither ok?
Like I said in the other thread its not just about race, its also age, and class and job role. Should you vaccinate a farmer or a barista? The farmer is likely to be more important to food security, but a barista is likely to be exposed to and expose many more people. Depending on your goals/priorities you can make a reasonable case for either.
Bernie did a series of well received town halls in Trump Country, and he was literally just in Lenore, West Virgina, population 1300 that went 74% for Trump, I don't think you can rule him out so easily.
More options
Context Copy link