domain:streamable.com
Dean
Flairless
3m ago
I can tell by the lack of responses that this comment didn't really resonate with anyone else either.
Looks at OP vote count of -10 at time of writing.
Looks at response vote count of +28 at same time.
Raises eyebrow
Is this just "Nothing ever happens, stop overreacting" in more words?
No, it is 'words have meanings, and making false accusations don't make them true.'
False accusations can, however, push people towards motivated reasoning sillyness where they confuse justified responses to oppression. Thus leading to more false accusations, and more surprise that unjustified responses lead to justified consequences.
teleoplexy
5m ago
Not the same guy, but
Why do you get out of bed in the morning?
I just do. "Meaning" focuses on me, me, me. It presupposes that if I believe something about the outside world, it will change the inner me, grant me motivation; the outside world would somehow be worth experiencing and interacting with. It puts me at the centre of the universe, but I'm not the main character on this planet. The world will still be there and I will still be there regardless of what I think.
What's true, though, is that your actions create meaning, not your thoughts about the meaning. You do stuff first, then you gain meaning, which is a roundabout way of saying that having connections to the world creates responsibility, which in turn creates meaning. Kids, for example, give you plenty of responsibility. You get up for them regardless of what you think about the meaning. Vice versa, living empty lives devoid of responsibility leads to thoughts about meaning.
Why do you want to build something?
I need something, so I want something, so I do something about it.
- I need more money, so that I can create a better future for my kids, so I started a business.
- I need a bigger house so that I can fit more kids into it. So I need more money, etc...
- People I hired need to have a livelihood, so business needs to succeed, so I work hard to provide for them and for me.
There's no greater meaning to it. I want something, so I do something. If your wants have to be created by a meaning, you haven't been taught to want properly.
oats_son
7m ago
If I had to be honest with you, I never really planned out retirement. I figured I'd probably work until I couldn't work anymore and then die somehow shortly afterwards, and let someone else take the money I had put into whatever funds instead of frittering it away on my own failing health. I always just wanted some way to live in a respectable way and live a relatively normal life, passion be damned, just do whatever you can tolerate.
TitaniumButterfly
10m ago
I'm told that some extremely-conservative states don't even have exceptions for killing two-year olds conceived by rape. In 2025! During Pride Month!
It does sound a bit cultish.
Why are there so many dads in the house? As a dad, I would have some significant concerns about being in a situation where my teenage daughter is living closely with other grown adult men, both for her soul and theirs.
Edit: If it helps, I would categorize myself as somewhat less normie than @George_E_Hale. But he also memorizes Shakespeare sonnets, which is noble and laudable but under no circumstances “normie” in the modern age, so now I’m starting to question his normie bonafides. 😀
phailyoor
11m ago
That screenshot doesn't show any spike from 1 to 5 around midnight. It does show a bump on election night which is also reflected in other markets. This kind of bump is very common, as the market updates based on early results such as exit polls and poll reporting, which can sometimes be in the opposite direction of the final outcome. That doesn't mean that such an update is wrong either, as the prediction is all about chances.
Trumps odds were also inflated vs the polling for a while
There's no requirement for the odds to follow movements in the polls, if there are other factors with predictive value. Nate Silver's model also put Trump's odds above his polling numbers for quite a while as well.
100ProofTollBooth
Dumber than a man, but faster than a dog.
12m ago
If birth control is bad because it prevents the creation of persons, then so is not asking out people on a date. (This is now very contrary to the RCC, which views abstinence as praiseworthy.)
Eh, this is a misrepresentation. The RCC views abstinence outside of marriage as not only praiseworthy but necessary - all sex outside of marriage is sinful. But, regarding "not asking someone out on a date", the whole idea is that God has an individual level plan for everyone to use their gifts - we need not all follow the same path. The point is to actively follow the path God has set before you and to do so faithfully. Perhaps you aren't meant to ask someone out, marry them, and procreate. Perhaps your role is more monkish. If you're playing too much Warhammer, you have to ask yourself if you're being slothful, negligent in your duties, or complacent and self-indulgent. I think you might be right that God isn't pleased with incels - who stew in their imagined slights by imagined women. But he isn't displeased with those who have actively chosen a celibate life (be they clergy or otherwise) - so long as its done with care, intent, and intention.
As an aside, I really do like your deconstruction of birth control as "fractionally as bad as abortion or infanticide."
TitaniumButterfly
12m ago
The homeless with a profusion of free money, food, shelter, goods and services available to them, paid for by my taxes? The ones that I have, on multiple occasions, witnessed throwing away food given to them because it's not what they actually wanted? Those homeless?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
13m ago
Putting the kid up for adoption would also prevent single-motherhood, and my understanding is that the child would have an excellent chance of being adopted more or less immediately.
naraburns
nihil supernum
14m ago
Presumably the reason they're low-IQ is because you disagree with their reasoning
I often disagree with Kagan, but she's clearly not an idiot. Sotomayor and Jackson appear to actually be of noticeably below average intelligence within the profession, and certainly among appellate justices. Jackson in particular told us everything we needed to know about her intelligence when she asked, "what is a woman?" Tribe's characterization of Sotomayor (linked in this thread) as "not nearly as smart as she seems to think she is" is also widely shared by people who "have access to information that hasn't been made public," as you put it.
To be quite clear: this is not, at all, about substantive disagreement (I also regard Kavanaugh as of sub-par intelligence for a SCOTUS justice). I don't say they're low-IQ to boo-outgroup them; Kagan is definitely my outgroup. Sotomayor and Jackson are dim bulbs. I'm not evaluating their politics, I'm evaluating their apparent intelligence, and I find it noticeably and objectionably lacking.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
14m ago
What makes trust the stress score rather than your own feeling? I sense a loop here, as if you are feeling stressed not from stress, but from this score. While ironic, this is the very nature of so-called biofeedback. Just a thought.
TitaniumButterfly
14m ago
From a game-theoretic standpoint it probably increases her reproductive potential. She's much more likely to find a new mate (and get more kids in better conditions) than if she were a single mother.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
17m ago
There is a clip of Sir Laurence Olivier reciting on Dick Cavett a Shakespearean sonnet. He does it well, beautifully, but fucks up one word. No one picks up on it. I have never told anyone this but I definitely noticed. It gives an odd satisfaction.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
20m ago
Yes. I have a thing where I memorize Shakespeare sonnets. I have no reason for doing this and it never got me laid, but I am occasionally pretentious enough to recite them. I know a few other poems as well just from repeated reading of them (usually only one and often not even all of one before everyone loses interest). I don't know what benefit it has beyond the same benefit one gets from listening to beautiful music (not catchy, not rhythmic or current , but beautiful): you have knocking around your brain some of the best things, instead of a bunch of memes, porn, etc.
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
21m ago
IMO, step 1 in devising a long-term plan is figuring out your financial outlook. At what age do you expect to be able to retire in your current position vs. in your alternative scenarios? If you're in the US, you can use the Consumer Expenditure Survey of the Bureau of Labor Statistics as a baseline budget (size of consumer unit by income before taxes: one person, < 15 k$/a). Plug that into a spreadsheet and add some assumptions for investment growth, inflation, and life expectancy.
Are mastectomies really that expensive? Aren't there a good deal of insurance companies that cover it?
In any case, my argument is one I've made before: many parents are Milgram Experiment-ed into it. If they want to travel to California to lob their daughter's breasts off, it's their choice, but if the practice is locally illegal, they'll probably figure out they don't have to listen to the psychopath in the labcoat.
thejdizzler
23m ago
I agree with you on trades. One of my friends in grad school has brother who is now an electrician. He's up every day at 5 am, comes home by 3 absolutely filthy and exhausted. Some amount of hazing, but doesn't seem to worth the money.
Have you thought about organic farming? Or alternatively transitioning to a more management role within the same industry?
TheDemonRazgriz
25m ago
Despite the utterly bizarre attempt by Biden and Harris to declare the "Equal Rights Amendment" passed (how was he not called an attempted dictator for that?)
It’s still amusing to me how little attention was paid to this, all around. It seemed like even the right wing thought it was so totally unserious as to not be worth any reaction whatsoever. I would love to hear an insider perspective of what the hell actually happened behind the scenes there.
Tenaz
26m ago
Well, no, as soon as they are utilizing it they're awake. A sleeping human does not have the capacity to think at all, they have the capacity to wake up. Some, like people in comas or under anesthesia, don't even have that. It's not that they aren't using their capacity for thought, it's that they literally can't use it, and therefore do not have any capacity for thought.
"Cognitive capabilities" sounds like a solid, principled way to define moral worth, but it hides endless moral complexity under the hood.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
27m ago
My normie perspective: It definitely 100% sounds like a manipulative weirdass culty thing. Teenagers? That's minors. If it's therapeutic what's the licensing? Based on what?
Attend as you like but there is zero reason for you to make any attempt to adhere to their framing when in interaction with them (i.e at the meeting.) Be an observer and listen as closely as you want. No hugging or touching me plz, not my thing. If they don't allow or tolerate that or try to guilt you, boom, proof that it's manipulative scam. Watch for signs of incremental steps toward closer physical intimacy. This sort of bullshit is a slippery slope into sex (probably reframed as something other than sex). I'm assuming there is something desirable in the females involved who are being incorporated into this gang. Maybe just youth and vulnerability. Any teenage boys also involved? My alarms are going off.
Then do the responsible thing and (should you agree with my assessment and your current suspicion) make one of two choices:
-
Ask the friend if she has had similar weird vibes or understands why others do, explore the why, say you do too, and suggest she extract herself from the influence of these people. Maybe she's actually into one of the people in the group, or maybe she just feels a connection she's been missing and wanting, etc. etc. Yeah we all have that, but there are other less obviously weird ways to fill that void.
-
Manipulate her into extracting herself. (Which is in essence not much better, if better at all. But manipulation works.)
I thought of a third: Do nothing, thanks for catching up, guess you'll soon go radio silent on me as you become fully indoctrinated. Lose your friend to whatever she ends up becoming (a version of this will happen no matter what you do.) Read about it later. You can't save everyone.
WhiningCoil
27m ago
Man, late 20's huh? 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.
In 2006.
Looking at the industry in 2025, making $45,000 and being lukewarm on the actual task of programming, I'd do trades, hands down. I mean, myself, right now, with 20 years experience, making what I make, no way. Though even still, if my industry exploded enough, it's a thing I'd consider, but it would be a downgrade. But it doesn't sound like that path is open to you. Don't worry about what vices other tradesmen end up developing. Plenty of software guys have self destructive habits too. Just look at WallStreetBets.
RE: Family, never say never. Just, plan as though you might. Don't go full hedonist and spend every penny you earn, or wreck your health
oats_son
28m ago
I don't actually hate it, I just find it difficult, mainly because I have gotten very good at amusing myself over the internet. I feel like I am slow to code and I do a lot of googling and a fair amount of thinking without coding when I am actually focusing on problems and not distracting myself from said problems. I don't know how much of that is normal (I suspect some, but not all, is), because I don't have any coworkers that code. I'm no hand with screwdrivers or drills, which makes me think I ought not look for another embedded systems job.
I don't know that there is much room in the industry for someone like me that has no passion for it, because hiring is getting tight and there is an oversupply of computer science graduates.
gattsuru
28m ago
The procedural posture here is also weird, even if no one but Kagan wants to rest their opinion on it. This is an appeal of preliminary injunction that was denied, while other preliminary injunctions or final judgements against other trans minor laws were upheld. Including one where SCOTUS pared back a wide preliminary injunction... to just the plaintiffs).
So now there's a SCOTUS-approved preliminary injunction for an equal protection challenge that SCOTUS just said can't win, sitting in the 9th Circuit. Except they didn't really hold that, they just made it really clear what the breakdown of how they hold the balance of law. Except in this case, the only person treating it like it's not final judgement was Kagan, and that in a minority-of-a-minority dissent.
laws that classify in some other way, which only get rational basis review (almost impossible for a law to fail this one).
I'll caveat that there's two forms of rational basis review: the normal form a la FCC v. Beach Communications where the law is upheld even if the government provides no good reason for the statute, so long as the court can imagine a single even incorrect cause; and the Cleburne version where the law is held to be motivated by animus, and then the statute near-always falls even if there is a named good cause. Some of the finangling in the oral args were about that.
There is some wiggling around to deal with Gorsuch's opinion in Bostock (which is what causes Alito to concur in parts of the opinion rather than the full thing since he dissented from Bostock), but Gorsuch joined this opinion in full, so apparently he didn't have a problem with the Court somewhat limiting Bostock here.
Yeah, that's a mess, and I dunno how he's juggling it. Roberts says tries to distinguish by saying the law here distinguished based on a transgender diagnosis rather than sex, using the metaphor of hirsuitism, but since whether someone will be diagnosed with hirsuitism depends on their sex that seems transparently wrong (and he even spells out that this is often called "male-pattern hair growth"). Presumably he's done that because he knows a hard limit on medical exemptions recognizing sex will result in the same law coming right back up with the medical exemption excised, and that's worse from a pragmatic perspective, but as a matter of law it's clear as mud.
Gorsuch signed onto it, so I guess he must agree? Or maybe he didn't want a bunch of circuit court misreadings if this case ended up in a 4/1/1-3 mixed-majority. But the reasoning here's vague enough that red circuits can draw every other transgender case that isn't specifically a CRA thing (and maybe even some that are) as about Skrmmeti-like distinctions, and blue circuits can draw every other transgender case as more like Bostock.
Thomas or Barrett's distinctions are clearer, but in turn they're a lot more strict.
For 'bottom' surgery, yes (ish; not everyone does actually go to The Best, and some transmen don't do what they'd count as bottom surgery and just get a hysterectomy that their local surgeons can do). For top surgery, it's a lot more varied, and I personally know trans people who've had mastectomies or breast augmentation in Red Tribe states. For other surgical procedures, as far as I can tell, very long distance travel seems an outlier. You might hike to the best facial cosmetic surgeon in the region, but you don't need to cross the ocean to find someone pretty good at it.
((And that's ignoring stuff like laser hair removal that gets categorized as 'surgery' for stupid medi* reasons.))
More options
Context Copy link