UwU
23hr ago
As I mentioned in my previous comment, I was looking for actual specifics of this supposed intellectual dishonesty rather than a vague gesture to the start of a humungous thread, which I did skim over and did not come to the same conclusion as you.
UwU
1d ago
I meant they should be more specific as in actual quotes and articulate convincingly how MKC is supposedly intellectually dishonest and trolling rather than simply linking to a particular thread. I get that vagueness is easier to defend, but just by briefly reading over the thread, it seems like he's being dogpiled for adopting a different framing than what is consistent with the Overton window here.
On Reddit, people with right-wing (or even moderate!) opinions often get dogpiled and shouted down and get called intellectually dishonest (and therefore eligible to be banned) even if they are earnest in their beliefs, because they find the left-wing framing, evidence, or arguments unconvincing. I hope this place is still somewhere everyone can speak their mind and disagree, and not right-wing Reddit.
UwU
1d ago
I’m not saying it doesn’t happen, but it would be great for accusers of MKC to post receipts along with their accusations. Right now it just seems like people are ganging up on him for no good reason.
UwU
15d ago
Meanwhile Ukrainian losses are high while Russian confirmed losses are unusually low.
It seems like you snuck this in so you can compare unconfirmed Ukrainian losses against confirmed Russian losses?
UwU
24d ago
Getting your dog fixed doesn't stop them from humping. My female dog, even after being spayed, was still super into humping stuff.
UwU
1mo ago
It would be very odd that a white woman was obsessively in love with an Indian male in the first place. Add that it’s a high status white woman.
Elizabeth Holmes
UwU
1mo ago
That is also not the gotcha you think it is. China today is vastly different from when it was undergoing a communist revolution. China, when it was killing tens of millions, didn’t have a fertility problem.
UwU
1mo ago
I don't really see what this is supposed to prove one way or the other. You are still stuck in the timescale framing of the most fervent AI bros. Opus 4.6 came out in February, 2 months ago. So what if Opus 4.7 is not a revolutionary upgrade? If AI were truly stagnant, we won't really find out until someone posts in 2028 that Opus 6.7 is only a marginal upgrade over Opus 4.7.
UwU
1mo ago
However devoid of rigor you think the H-1B selection process was, the Canadian immigration system in the past decade was even more so. At least for H-1B, new approvals are capped at 85k max a year, and you need to have a job for which the median salary is over six figures. For Canada, it was infamously relaxed enough to let in millions of Indian students with nothing but an offer letter to a school.
Even if this is true, there's a few implications to it. One is that no one should even try to compete for immigrants, because they're all going to go to the top country anyway, and then ones you will get, will only cause economic stagnation. Another is that even for America this would probably mean mass deportations are a good idea, as you can just keep the absolute best performence, and get rid of everyone else.
I never said we needed to compete for immigrants -- just to let the talented and skilled ones in. I don't see evidence that skilled immigration causes economic stagnation. There are many immigrants or second generation immigrants here that contributed a lot to our economy. I already think it's a good idea to deport illegals, and economic immigrants who no longer meet the bar. H-1B already has a provision for this. If you are no longer employed at a job that sponsors the H-1B, you're gone.
You could say the question was rhetorical (because I already know the answer to it), but in no way is it sarcastic. It means exactly what it's straightforward, literal interpretation would imply.
So when you described the influx of millions of Indians to Canada as "talented", you were being earnest and not mocking? That's not a word that I would have used to describe them and I would not count them as skilled immigrants. If you were being earnest then I would like you to substantiate your "opposite" claim -- that the Canadian global competitive edge decreased because of the greater immigration, not that it merely didn't increase because of it.
UwU
1mo ago
If you actually disagree with what I posted specifically, please articulate it better instead of posting sarcastic snark so I don't have guess what you mean. But from what I can infer, I reject your premise because it's unrelated to what I was arguing.
- The vast majority of the indian immigrant influx to Canada during the early 2020s went in on study permits and not an H-1B analog that's a lot more rigorous
- The US didn't curb skilled immigration during that time, so at best they were getting second-rate talent even if they had rigorous screening
UwU
1mo ago
"If the US stop skilled immigration then the skilled immigrants will go elsewhere" is a less exciting claim than "the US has magical dirt"
UwU
1mo ago
If the Democratic party in fact succeeded in using the legislature to stop the war, then I'm sure they would have been scapegoated. Which indeed would have made it a bad political maneuver. However, since they didn't, and they couldn't because they lacked the votes in both chambers of congress, it made it a great political maneuver. They managed to publicly disavow the war while forcing their opponents own it and its consequences in their entirety.
UwU
1mo ago
If we stop the brain drain, global talent will eventually cluster elsewhere. Over time, the capital and infrastructure will follow the talent, and the US dirt will become just regular dirt again.
Could it be that the most motivated and skilled Indians are all leaving to first world countries, with the US being the most coveted destination? If we ban Indian immigration to the US, it would still be a poor policy choice if it makes Indians in Toronto, Sydney and London more competitive against us on the global market, even if it doesn't meaningfully change the competitiveness of Indians in Bangalore.
UwU
2mo ago
Do you disagree with the more general legislative branch framing to specifically call out the democrats as evil? I imagine the "compromised by Israel and the military-industrial complex" descriptor fits the political class in America in general, rather than just the Democrats. Hell, if we had to choose which side is more apt for the descriptor, I'd have chosen the Republicans. Furthermore, I thought the Republican base was supposed to be the ones who despise war with Iran more, as evidenced by the countless media campaigns and memes I've seen during the 2024 election season about Kamala wishing to start a war with Iran if elected, and the no-war president Donald Trump. So if any side is more duplicitous, I'd also say it's the Republicans. And let's not forget that they currently control the house, the senate, the supreme court and the presidency. Yet somehow the continuation of the Iran war is more evidence that the democrats are the dishonest evildoers.
UwU
4mo ago
It's just posts becoming popular and then getting on /r/all or /r/popular which makes even more redditors upvote it.
UwU
4mo ago
let me ask, is this actually your point of view?
It is my point of view.
The NYT poll suggested deportation approval was 50% vs 47% and ICE approval was 63% vs 37%. Furthermore there was a question about ICE tactics which got 61%/26%/11% for gone-too-far/just-right/not-far-enough.
Put together it means that deportations are still popular but ICE tactics are not. There's about 11-13% of the electorate who holds these two opinions simultaneously. It's not everyone, but it is certainly sizable enough to swing elections. This poll was conducted prior to the most recent shooting, so if anything I'd expect even less support for ICE tactics now.
UwU
4mo ago
The only restraining principle is the expense.
Yes and that is the key here isn't it? There's no infinite amount of federal agents available, and there's clearly diminishing returns dependent on the amount of illegal immigrants actually in the city and the number of federal agents present. Add on the current volatile circumstances, I hardly think this is the most efficient strategy if your goal is to maximize deportations. I would expect any good defense to actually address the part that Minneapolis is singled out compared to the other cities, which was the main point of the comment you initially replied to.
Does it matter to this conversation that deportations in the abstract is popular? The whole point is how they are being done. If the administration maintains their current tactics and ICE continues to shoot a US citizen every couple of weeks, would you say it would improve their electoral chances or lessen them?
UwU
4mo ago
This defense is a bit thin since you can use it to justify an uncapped amount of federal agents as long as there's non-zero illegal immigrants in Minneapolis, which applies to basically every American city.
A much more reasonable defense is that they are doing it as a punitive expedition to make Minneapolis an example so other sanctuary cities start to less resistant to federal authority on immigration. However, it is still a punitive expedition. And after these shootings, it has clearly failed, because I don't see how it will be effective at persuading other liberal strongholds to cooperate with ICE rather than digging in their heels and be even more resistant.
Indeed a strange statement. I'm seeing people on social media claim that ICE had already disarmed the victim, holster and all, prior to the shooting, and I'm also seeing people claim that he was pulling his gun and the first few gunshots were from him, which lead to his death. As far as I'm aware there's no good evidence for either of these interpretations. But judging by the fact the government is merely claiming that "he had a weapon", rather than "he fired at the officers", I'm inclined to believe it's a bad shoot and this is damage control.
EDIT: With more evidence coming out it looks like they DID disarm the guy before shooting.
UwU
4mo ago
Yes, the "europoors" care more about their sovereign territory than tariffs or hypothetical pull backs of Ukraine aid.
UwU
4mo ago
They had enough time to say "get out of the (fucking) car" 3 times. When people are insisting that 1 second is an eternity for perfect deliberation when an SUV is accelerating towards you, then that 3+ second gap cannot be considered "suddenly". I wouldn't call it a lie, but it's not an accurate characterisation of events.
But you aren't arguing with people insisting that 1 second is an eternity for perfect deliberation. Neither @magicalkittycat nor I made that claim. Taking that into context, isn't it possible for us to characterize a few seconds as "suddenly" and still be logically consistent? And you did call it a lie, not just inaccurate.
I was also not overselling how much time we could see her. It was literally less than a second we get to see her mouth open after they try to forcefully open the door. She can enjoy LARPing as a plucky rebel when the single ICE officer was filming and circling her vehicle and then get spooked by the escalation when multiple other agents approach and try to grab her door. They are not mutually exclusive.
First of all, thank you for the detailed comment. I appreciate the effort. Consider my priors adjusted.
I agree, though it does seem like he misinterpreted the request as something more general "police arrest victim instead of perp" rather than the more specific request. Later on it might be better to concede on the point before pivoting, but it's on par with online political debates.
That's bad for sure. He got deservingly banned for it.
The way I read it was a back and forth discussion where he got challenged on the impartiality and reproducibility of ChatGPT results, and changed because of it (i.e. he started posting prompts). Some parts of it may be sus but it does not go over my bad faith threshold.
Perhaps, but I'm willing to extend more charity on members in a forum with minority viewpoints. But again, consider my priors adjusted on this one, you may not have convinced me that he exceeded my single-comment-chain bad faith threshold but the cumulative evidence of sus behavior has certainly increased.
I did not say this to you.
More options
Context Copy link