domain:archive.ph
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
25m ago
I’m arguing against the notion that “Israel doesn’t want to kill all Gazans because they haven’t done that”. They appear to be doing what they can to accomplish this goal within the constraints placed on them externally. The reason that I think they show disregard for human life is because various international bodies, doctors on the ground, and the little available videographic evidence on the ground supports this. The reason I think they are genocidal is because the statements of their politicians suggest this. The Israel apologist is forced to deny the legitimacy of the statements which the politicians (and public) have made indicating their genocidal intent. But the apologies can’t argue, “if they wanted to they would”, because they risk becoming an actual pariah state if they did so, and may even see the deportation of Israelis abroad etc.
Quantumfreakonomics
42m ago
A quick google search indicates that Harvard’s annual operating expenses are over $6 billion. Ten years of cushion is a lot, but not so much that they never need to worry about money again.
Probably the next administration rolls all this stuff back, but that’s not guaranteed.
WandererintheWilderness
48m ago
I believe the way I found it was that he'd once linked to his pianist brother's YouTube channel in an early post, and that one's under his real name, so combine that with Scott saying on multiple occasions that "Scott" was his real first name and there you have it. But I think it was also possible to find it directly by trawling through his old LiveJournal.
gattsuru
50m ago
I'm going to start off by saying that I am glad you wrote that, and I am glad that it got a QC. I'm glad that Impassionata got banned then, and last week, and whenever theschism mods get tired of it and finally banned Imp permanently I'll be glad -- and I don't often favor bans.
But I'm going to point out that it specifically in response to claims of 'right-wing' 'fascist' violence supposedly incited by Red Tribers, in 2023 long after BLM had ebbed; it does not name Red Tribers that were hit (excepting arguably a rhetorical flourish about police stations), but neighbors and friends.
((It's also an example that predates two of the three assassination attempts I'm commenting on, and doesn't mention the third.))
Contra expectations, I don't keep an encyclopedic assembly of every poster on every ratadj forum, and the good reddit search is down. Maybe I've missed something you've said elsewhere; maybe you weren't active at the right times; maybe you just didn't have a great opportunity. But understand why this is more an example of FCfromSSC's point than a counter.
Tree
57m ago
The man looks at a madagascaran girl in rags picking vanilla beans and sees the american people being taken advantage of. He ain‘t right in the head. Better than starmer who hands her the nearest military base, but still.
This chagos episode recontextualises the tariff deal with britain for me. I did not understand why britain would agree to such terrible terms, maybe it meant britain was weaker than I thought, but now I realize it‘s just starmer being happy to always give in at whatever terms the other side offers.
Even if one interprets trump‘s tariff policy goals maximally charitably (de-coupling from china, avoiding trade deficitis), none of them apply to britain, your most accomodating ally who you don‘t even have a trade deficit against.
It reminds me of that scene in The Long Goodbye where the mob boss breaks a coke bottle on his girlfriend‘s face, and while she screams in pain and desperation at being permanently disfigured, he threatens Marlowe: "Her, I love. You, I don‘t even like."
ulyssessword
1hr ago
You did not count as vaccinated and dead unless you died > 2 weeks after your vaccination?
A couple years ago, someone here claimed that the risk stats were thrown off because of that. Essentially, that the reports were looking at:
- (unvaccinated deaths + recently vaccinated deaths) / (unvaccinated population)
- (fully vaccinated deaths) / (fully vaccinated population + recently vaccinated population)
When I looked into it, it fit with the raw text of the data analysis, but surely they can't be that bad, right??
Sunshine
1hr ago
If Israel were to do everything they could to kill as many Gazans as possible without losing what remains of international support,
See, now we've gone from talking about facts to reading minds. How do you distinguish someone who wants to kill as many Gazans as possible but is held back by the international community from someone who acts in line with the attitude of the international community because they're part of it? You're essentially blaming them for things they aren't doing, but which you assume they want to do.
self_made_human
Kai su, teknon?
1hr ago
I tried finding Scott's real name before the doxx and eventual official reveal. No luck at the time. Where precisely was it revealed?
self_made_human
Kai su, teknon?
1hr ago
I looked into PRP, and it's worse than I thought. It has a decent evidence base and moderate efficacy for orthopedic procedures, such as knee issues and rotator cuff repairs. For cosmetic purposes? A mire of tiny, biased/sponsored studies and a lot of nulls.
The face has a lot of blood circulation. From first principles alone, I doubt just putting more of it back in would help.
gattsuru
1hr ago
That's fair. Do you have an example of a community that is a) left-leaning, b) claims to be fundamentally opposed to political violence in all forms, and c) exists?
coffee_enjoyer
☕️
1hr ago
If Israel were to do everything they could to kill as many Gazans as possible without losing what remains of international support, what would they do differently than what they are currently doing? They know they can’t actually bomb everyone immediately, all at once. But they can bomb as many as they can get away with, keeping everyone in semi-starvation, causing maximum trauma, destroying every dwelling, and so on. They can kill them all slowly in this way, to reduce international outrage.
gattsuru
1hr ago
Ah, if you've got a familiar mentor, it's less serious a problem. I'd still recommend putting your root directory and home directory on different partitions (in a laptop) or even drives (on a desktop), but almost all serious issues are pretty solvable with a familiar expert.
self_made_human
Kai su, teknon?
1hr ago
I have a pretty high floor on the amount of intelligence, beauty and ideally wit I want in a long-term partner. I'd say that my ex before my last one was the closest to marriage material, barring what I strongly suspect is undiagnosed BPD. There's such a thing as too crazy to handle, no matter how hot.
Of course, these are, to an extent, fungible. But I still have strict floors. Too dumb but hot? Okay for a fling, but I'm not risking my kids coming out with my beauty and her brains. As I humbly explained in another comment, I had a hot model with a loaded family begging me to stay back in India and marry her. She was, unfortunately, very dumb. I could have taken advantage of her by promising marriage and then screwing around like her exes did, but I have some personal ethics.
Similarly, I'd love my partner to be intelligent, more than me? Even better. Helps the kids and makes them more engaging. I'd probably not go for someone brilliant but horrendous, being ugly is a severe disadvantage for future kids.
Think of where you'd compromise on a perfect partner, would you want them a little dumber, a little uglier, a little less sexual, a little meaner? You will also get some of that compromise, because you won't be perfect for them. What does a woman's willingness to compromise on a trait say about them? A woman willing to compromise on attractiveness a bit might care more about who you are. The part of you she cares about might vary, money, intelligence, humor, etc. But it's not necessarily a bad sign.
I can accept tradeoffs on any of those axes. I don't feel like any of my partners to date had to settle. While I'm not outright handsome, I at least look decent enough that it's not an outright detriment, just neutral. Unfortunately, the universe is unfair, and there are other men who are both smart and handsome to compete with.
A woman willing to compromise on attractiveness a bit might care more about who you are. The part of you she cares about might vary, money, intelligence, humor, etc. But it's not necessarily a bad sign.
I'd expect the sum of everything other than my looks to still be decent, but they certainly haven't dated me for my ravishing appearance. I do agree that it's better to have them attracted to me for my personality or wit, but eh, the real world is messy.
The_Nybbler
In the game of roller derby, women aren't just the opposing team; they're the ball.
1hr ago
From the article:
The nation desperately needs this sense of proportionality in dealing with its educational and cultural institutions. Harvard, as I am among the first to point out, has serious ailments. The sense that something is not well with the university is widespread, and it’s led to sympathy, even schadenfreude, with Mr. Trump’s all-out assault. But Harvard is an intricate system that developed over centuries and constantly has to grapple with competing and unexpected challenges. The appropriate treatment (as with other imperfect institutions) is to diagnose which parts need which remedies, not to cut its carotid and watch it bleed out.
Fact is, the right has tried that, most recently with SFFA v Harvard, which Harvard essentially thumbed its nose at. And Pinker himself, by his own testimony in this article, has tried that. It did diddlysquat; Harvard doubled down on the bad behavior. So either those opposed to what Harvard is doing must back down, or they must escalate.
Also, universities are committed to free speech, which includes speech we don’t like. A corporation can fire an outspoken employee; a university can’t, or shouldn’t.
FIRE (not a right wing organization) listed Harvard as the worst US university for free speech two years running. And it got the worst score EVER for any US university in 2023. Harvard cannot credibly use a commitment to free speech as a defense for anything, because it lacks one. Yes, I know Pinker objects to this ranking, but not really credibly.
sarker
It isn't happening, and if it is, it's a bad thing
1hr ago
Indeed I work in industry, not academia, but I don't see it as any way bad if foreign students use American academia as a stepping stone into American industry. It's still a net benefit to the US.
Had they not come these jobs would have still been filled (probably at significantly higher cost, but if that’s the cost of a more equal society, so be it).
It's unlikely that these jobs would have been filled at a higher cost on account of the cost already being very high. It's more likely that the job would have been not filled or filled with inferior people.
An example of the top of my head - all but one of the authors of Attention is All You Need are foreigners. I don't know if you count Google Research/Brain as a "fairly standard job" but it's pretty obvious to me that there aren't seven foreigners on this paper because they're cheap.
In my experience, the typical elite undergraduate student is a capable smartish rule follower, regardless of if they're international or domestic. Dirt poor internationals don't ever make it to elite schools, and dirt poor domestics rarely do. The dirt poor domestics aren't particularly brilliant.
The occasions where someone is brilliant are rare, and they tend to be children of middle class professionals, regardless of if they're international or domestic. They do attend at higher rates than typical universities.
Technical PhDs are always smart. Masters students are universally idiots.
SkoomaDentist
2hr ago
Linux development is heavily biased toward prioritizing server requirements over desktop requirements when they conflict.
Often to a ridiculous extent as seen in all the schedulers where huge benefits in desktop use are rejected from mainline in favor of 0.1% throughput increase in servers.
I have very high standards for the quality of partner I would marry and entrust to give half their genes to our kids. By virtue of being more attractive, I have a wider pool to work with, and can winnow them with more care. To the extent that hot, smart and successful women demand the same in their partners, I can only work towards making myself better at them all. I wouldn't want to marry a bimbo, what if the kids come out with my looks and her brains?
In other words, I can pretty easily find someone to marry. I could do it tomorrow, my family has had feelers put out by Indian families, here and in the UK, who would put a ring on it. Even by dint of my own efforts, I think about 20% of the women I dated over 3 months (before going steady with one) wanted to marry me, and were serious about it. One of them was a very hot, rich professional model, but she was dumb as rocks. She begged me to stay back in India and marry her. I turned that down. I could probably have taken advantage of her, screwed her and fled like her exes did, but I try not to be an asshole.
I hope that makes my point clear. Investing in my appearance (and I've worked on everything else) by getting work done and working out increases my appeal on the dating market - - - > increases pool of women to sleep with/marry - - - > increases the odds of finding the One. I'm not worried about getting married, that's trivial, I want to marry someone who makes me feel great about that choice.
quiet_NaN
2hr ago
Are you saying that the SJ left has not been very successful with their strategy of going through the channels and enshrining DEI into federal law, and leave the enforcement to the justice system?
There are places where the best way to enact change is to pick up an assault rifle and form a gang. The US is very much not such a place. Instead, you want to cooperate with existing institutions to get the behemoth of the US military on your side.
BurdensomeCount
Messenger Status: Shot
2hr ago
Harvard is top tier in the life sciences , same league as MIT.
quiet_NaN
2hr ago
but no one thought it was no big deal or worse, something to be encouraged.
Here, seconded by another gray/blue-leaning Mottizen. I will not pretend that I would not be happy if Trump dropped dead from natural causes, but the erosion of political standards inherent to his assassination would not be to the benefit of anyone who likes peace. (Besides, I think a dead martyr Trump would be a great boon for the MAGA cause, while from what I have seen so far this year, a live Trump who might even insist to run again in 2028 is much more of a mixed blessing.)
That being said, the prime example for the left applauding a political murder is not Trump, it is that UnitedHealthcare CEO. I have to confess that while I am against murder as a policy, especially when it is unlikely to solve the underlying issue, I am also not particularly upset about that one. A drug dealer can at least defend himself by saying that he is simply serving the forces of the market, while someone offering health insurance to employers is serving a twisted parody of a market mandated by US law and kept in place through continuous lobbying efforts. So sure, I am slightly less sympathetic than I am to some homeless person who gets stabbed by a psychotic homeless, or whatever the median sympathy murder is. Mostly, it is a distraction, what is wrong with the US health care system can not be fixed by shooting any number of CEOs.
I will grant you that it is hard to measure the real level of support for that killing by the average person on the street, but left leaning social media generally rejoiced.
Lizzardspawn
2hr ago
Trump is good at identifying problems. Terrible at implementing solutions. Rise of china was fueled by hollowing of the rust belt, Europe is not paying for it's defense, multinational companies do take disproportionate profits from US and so on, immigration and birthright citizenships are loopholes, the universities are too woke ... he just doesn't have the proper managing capacity to solve them right. And he is just using brute force and clumsily.
Mantergeistmann
2hr ago
They've already been bombing Gaza intensively, that's not what a precision air campaign looks like.
Intensive and precision are not opposed. I'd say it looks roughly like what I'd expect a targeted campaign against a foe deliberately and firmly embedded in infrastructure to look like.
What is Israel supposed to do against the Houthis? Israel doesn't have any navy worth caring about. The US navy, bigger and better in every way, has proven totally unsuccessful at beating the Houthis or bombing them into submission.
Israel is far more willing to hit targets of vital import (pun on "port" not intended) that the US is unwilling to hit. Remember when everyone complained about how horrible the US was for hitting a fuel port, which is about as close to a military target as you can get without it being a guy in uniform? Israel is under no such constraints, and that's the sort of thing that would degrade their capabilities properly.
they're a fundamentally small power with a foreign policy that presupposes access to vast resources that don't actually belong to them. Pakistan has nukes too, Iran probably does. They're hugely outnumbered. Israel needs to get more realistic in their aspirations. They can't escalate out of this.
Weirdly, it's possible escalation is their only possible strategy. As you said, they're outnumbered and surrounded. You don't win that one by letting your opponents build up their strength, coordinate, and keep chipping away at you with rockets and low-level proxies. And if option a) is "negotiate with people who are on record as wanting us all dead", and "fight to survive"... You don't worry much about building hearts and minds with the current regimes.
The problem for them is that it’s mostly illiquid. So you’d have to borrow against it.
More options
Context Copy link