domain:anarchonomicon.com
In my eyes, the international law thing I mentioned feels like blatant belief substitution (I don't think "rationalisation" is quite the right term for the postulated mechanism, where a low-status value is replaced by a higher-status subgoal that serves it) due to how self-serving and selective it is - but it seems to be believed by absolute majorities in countries like Germany without even having a well-defined proximate outgroup rejecting it. Why would it not be plausible that pro-lifers, who are less of a majority and are in a mutual chokehold against an outgroup rejecting this premise, could do the same thing? (Though to begin with, it's not really well-defined where the boundary between rationalising and normal belief formation even lies.)
The boomers didn't just shaft the whole next generations coming up, they implemented tons of policies meant to rebalance the racial makeup of the party. Because they weren't going to give up their positions the only way for this to work out is to aggressively discriminate against white up and comers. So they mercilessly culled them and made it clear that they wanted the next generation of the democratic party to be anything but straight white men.
Glad we agree the underlying issue is that you don't want anyone in Louisiana to have access to abortion pills and I do. The governor of NY agrees with me, thus she is not extraditing the doctor, as is her right.
I think trust your instincts. If it feels culty, it is culty. If it doesn't seem dangerous, though, and you feel you're not too susceptible to peer pressure / brainwashing, it might be worthwhile to participate so you have more credibility when you try to get your friend out.
Coincidentally I'll be in SLC tonight. Happy to come pick you up on the off chance you need to make a quick exit.
When I graduated in 2006 my starting pay as a programmer for the company I interned with was $65,000. I moved out, paid $1200 in rent to live 5 minutes from the office, and had more money than I thought I could ever spend. I was super confident, wading into code bases and fixing difficult to find memory leaks, or converting a small C++ code base for an ArcGIS extension into C# because that's what they converted the SDK to primarily support going forward.
How did you get to this point? If you don't mind I'd love to know
- How inherently interested you are/were in programming
- How many hours a day you put into effective study
- Whether you think the job market is still good and worth putting that time in
I'm at a dead end in my CS career and have been contemplating going back to school to actually become a good programmer. I'm smart enough but find programming itself quite boring. Not sure I have the work ethic. Having a good idea of how much work it would take would be really helpful to me.
There are no legal tricks to protect your assets, unless you put everything in a trust that you have absolutely no control over several years ahead of the conduct that led to the lawsuit. And there better not be any evidence that you actually control the money. Aside from that, there is no reason to default on a lawsuit. Even in credit card collection cases where you'd think there would be zero case I tell people to file the necessary paperwork and show up for the court date to avoid a default. Why? Because there's a 50/50 chance the creditor's attorney doesn't show up. When I was doing bankruptcy a few years ago I'd get calls from people who were getting sued but had no other debts, and I'd represent them for fun. One credit card company was using a small law firm in Harrisburg to essentially collect default judgments. I knew they weren't going to pay for someone to come to Pittsburgh for a $4,000 debt. Even if the firm is local, the attorney is often unprepared. I've gotten out of a few cases because the Plaintiff couldn't produce the original signed credit agreement. This can be a serious problem when the plaintiff is a collection agency that doesn't actually have the original agreement and would have to jump through a lot of hoops to get it. And then there's the fact that a bank representative needs to appear as a witness, again a serious problem if the plaintiff is a collection agency who can't testify to any relevant facts about the agreement or about the bank's recordkeeping procedures. And then there was the case where the lady from the credit union had everything and showed up without a lawyer, not realizing that companies can't appear pro se. The point is that even in hopeless cases, there are defenses that can be made and can be successful.
In this case, he filed an answer shortly after the default judgment was entered, and courts will usually give you a little leeway.
I think working as an embedded systems C programmer actually signals a lot more competence even if the salary isn't impressive. The embedded space is notoriously low pay since the economics around that are for the manufacturing industry rather than pure software industry which tends to be able to spend a lot more for software development.
Busy is not the same as capable of thought. Whales' brains, for example, have much more total cognitive activity than our waking brains, but are less capable of thought.
We have some level of thought while sleeping too--I can remember reasoning some things out in dreams--but dreams/REM are the most mentally active part of sleep, and I'm not sure most of us are smarter than babies even in REM.
pineapples
Lol, I love that this is a thing here now.
That might create people.
If you only drive sober, use your headlights, and follow all laws, you can still get in a wreck. When that happens, should you be held to the same standard as a reckless drunk driver?
Your brain is not deactivated whilst sleeping. It is quite busy.
I take your point if applied to sci fi suspended animation or something very unlike sleep.
Yeah, but finding that ideal (or a pretty good one with whom you form an emotional bond or simply have some hot experiences) sexual partner is a pretty key part of the human experience. Continuing to look even while failing is too!
JournaList was a thing. They repeat the same message and social media showed how creepy it was. The above post reads as cope.
If you follow the upvote/downvote patterns you’ll notice that a fair chunk of the motte’s lurkers are pretty stereotypical internet right-wingers these days, of the type who are likely to read “I’m a trans woman” and instantly downvote. And/or the type who are wont to react with instant negativity to anyone saying that “the straight man dating world/heterosexual relations aren’t that bad, actually”. Sad but true.
Edit: plus some good old-fashioned identity elements. The straight men lurking the motte presumably didn’t take kindly to a queer person talking about them from outside their Lived Experience.
Not that I'm not guilty of this myself - it is still genuinely difficult (sic) for me to believe in my heart that right-wingers really think fetuses are people being murdered
Im surprised by this. There are lots of pro-life people. How many of them would have to be just rationalising before the number of genuine believers reaches lizardman levels? It seems pretty clear that theres a line of thought there thats compelling to a significant number of people (though I sometimes feel it should be the left that its compelling to)
Like, one, America is an actual nation. Number two, the concept of having a passport and citizenship mean something. Being an American means something. Therefore, number three, different laws apply to foreigners, illegal immigrants, than to the native population. Number four, if people who are not native to America start burning things down, then you not only have to take action, you have to deport those people immediately. Number five, if foreign politicians like the President of Mexico starts cheering on, you know, effectively a kind of invasion into your country, you don't side with them, you side against them.
This is an extremely good breakdown! I mean yeah the total disregard for the law and the idea of a nation is just... insane. I don't understand it. I guess there's a justification that moral law is higher than secular law, which I agree with but like... you can't just ignore it as a politician.
EDIT: My other favorite quote from this video:
Of course you arrest the people in face masks! You don't just allow ninjas to roam around in the street!
No, they'd just go to different people.
I would bet dollars to donuts that no SC justice is actually below average IQ, even among lawyers or judges. Maybe appellate courts, but I don’t think the bar is actually that high.
Partisan, yes. Political, obviously. But those are not always correlated against intelligence.
This is true if we're talking about a smart, tech-aware dictator. But your original post wasn't talking about people who expect a smart tech-driven dictatorship. It was talking about people who expect Trump to go President Joker and round up all his enemies in unmarked vans. I think the recent protestors' behavior follows a rational strategy within that framework - whose likelihood relative to "Trump continues to be more bark than bite" or "Trump becomes a smart dictator" is, of course, questionable, but that, again, wasn't the question.
The Romans had huge amounts of superstitions and traditions related to declaring war, and making peace. Numa Pompilius, who first held the title Pontifex Maximus which has gone in unbroken succession to our current Pope Leo, introduced the tradition of the Temple of Janus to the Roman populace in order to tame their warlike urges.
Hasn't the succession been broken a few times? Like with the antipopes and such?
But yes agree with the broader point. It speaks to the entire idea of chaos growing and the flood coming to consume us as we chip away at meaning and reality. Truth becomes impossible to pin down - are we at war? or are we in peace?
Their belief is that the wicked actions of women are corrupting them, and they're consistent on this. Of course a lifestyle that embraces infanticide is also self-destructive and corrosive to society more broadly.
why not?
Because that's ridiculous if not disconcerting.
You're defining "potential" very oddly here. Babies have the potential for sapience in the sense that, if things run their natural course, they will soon become sapient. There is no reference to probabilities or odds here--a baby in a very dangerous environment, with a 90% chance of getting killed before they turn 1, still has just as much "potential" for sapience as a safer baby. Similarly, someone under anesthesia has the same personhood no matter the caliber of the doctor operating on them.
A "late term" abortion is "aborting" a fetus that would otherwise survive outside the womb. That's a premie baby and this is baby murder. Accepting that it is baby murder, there'd better be a damned good reason such as the kid was going to die anyways and also kill the mom. Something better than the dad committed suicide.
Well, I have had some limited ability with it. Changing my Discord password to something I can't remember or access at work can help, as Discord is my biggest leech, but the problem is that I can waste time in a lot of different ways. Wikipedia, Google Maps, many things I would have to block that I think would probably not be great to block. I just need to find it within myself to focus, but some days, it's hard.
More options
Context Copy link