domain:astralcodexten.substack.com
freemcflurry
7m ago
I didn't get the impression that ideology mattered all that much to the Nazis. Their goal was to make Germany strong and big. If that meant allying with the Poles and calling them Aryans then fine, if it meant invading Poland and killing a fifth of the country that was also fine. The goal of expanding Eastward and settling the steppes with Germans predates the Nazis though.
faceh
19m ago
are we sure this whole thing isn't some not-so-veiled critique of left-wing activism?
It could be. Not even hard to read it that way.
Hughie keeps trying to do things "the right way" and he ultimately got completely duped by Neumanns "empathetic liberal" shtick which she learned from Stan Edgar himself. Hughie comes back around to Butcher's "kill 'em all" mentality as the only workable solution.
Homelander is objectively a threat to human civilization, and they are just dicking around "fixing" minor side problems while he ticks ever closer to a mental breakdown.
Like they're more concerned with earning brownie points than ending the threat.
If they had literally just let Soldier Boy do his thing it would have been ended.
Homelander is a problem that activism cannot solve. Unless they come up with a much more creative solution than the comics do, somebody will have to fight dirty and finish him. There will be (already is) collateral damage.
Every day he continues to exist is demonstrating the protag's uselessness.
So yeah, I find it amusing how this show basically makes liberals out to be ineffective hypocrites, whilst the liberals watching the show fixate on the surface level jokes.
Felagund
29m ago
Okay, more clearly.
In general, when you have arguments, there are assumptions. You can make some argument, and reach the conclusion, and so claim that that the conclusion must be true, this being a form of modus ponens ("the putting way"). But people could instead think the conclusions are obviously false, and so conclude that a premise must have been wrong, which is modus tollens ("the overturning way"). This is pretty much always going to be possible in arguments.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
30m ago
Criticizing a woman directly about anything is a mistake that will not produce favorable results.
This is so true it hurts. Depends on the woman of course - my wife can take some criticism, but my mom can take none whatsoever. Still, even with my wife I hold back because I need to consider whether I really need to use my limited quota of criticism on this topic.
DradisPing
30m ago
She actually doesn't look much different in the show. I think someone taught her to do an Instagram model face for that photo where she sucks in her cheeks and puts her lips in a weird position.
pm_me_passion
אֲנָשִׁים נֹשְׂאֵי מָגֵן וְחֶרֶב וְדֹרְכֵי קֶשֶׁת וּלְמוּדֵי מִלְחָמָה
30m ago
Depends on how the c-section went previously. VBAC is definitely possible. I don’t know how it goes in the states, so he should consult a local doctor and read up on which hospitals will do it.
SubstantialFrivolity
I'm not even supposed to be here today
31m ago
Yeah I have no idea what that's about. Similarly, I bought some tea recently which smells divine. It's one of the best things I've ever smelled. Unfortunately, it tastes just as bad as every other tea I've ever had.
If we have a phrase:
If A, then B.
From this, one can say, A, hence B.
But some might say not B, hence not A.
This says that, if you make a claim, some might choose not to go with the proof you meant, but choose to say that the first phrase must be false.
Now I will stop with the use of short words.
JulianRota
39m ago
Nope.
Whether or not German racial purity laws considered Slavs to be "Aryan" or not isn't terribly important. I guess that's what's actually being argued there. It may or may not be technically true, but it doesn't change the fact that the Nazi regime launched effectively a war of annihilation against the Slavs, seeking to seize "Lebensraum " for the "German race" from them, produced boatloads of propaganda claiming the Slavs were subhuman, and then via the Barbarossa Decree declared that it was in fact a war of extermination and there would be no such thing as a war crime on that front.
And yeah, that's SecureSignals, our resident Nazi apologist. I don't think he'd even object to that label. We do need a little of that, since the anti-Nazi types aren't free from bullshit either, but yeah you might want a large grain of salt on that subject.
f3zinker
Its A/B testing all the way down
52m ago
2 years late to the party but I've started playing Elden Ring.
Long story short, I mostly agree with the majority sentiment, that it feels like how games used to feel like. It's not exactly controversial to assert that modern triple A games are terrible. Much has been said and written about why modern triple A games have regressed in quality and how Elden Ring was a breath of fresh air because it didn't make those same mistakes.
But here's my shower thought. And it might be dead obvious but I'll share nonetheless. It doesn't have to be that way!
Elden Ring feels more like the games from the 90s than games from the 90s. And that's obviously because we have better tooling and hardware in just about every aspect. It's infinitely easier to make good games now than it was in the 90s, we just don't make them.
It's also infinitely easier to write good software now. We have gpt, forums with decades of content, ides, YouTube, etc. Why do we keep on writing bloated shit? We don't have to.
Macdonald's fries would still be good if they used beef tallow.
Just about every way In which the quality of things regressed, it's easier now than ever to make an even higher quality version.
Something is wrong with us, that we don't. And I don't believe it's an eternal September the masses want slop situation, that's a copout. Elden Ring is one of the best selling games of 2022. It's a culture thing.
curious_straight_ca
54m ago
That's not trading examples, I found that by looking for the exact comment you're referring to. Cjet's original post about race blindness, The Case For Ignoring Race, got 18 upvotes and 5 downvotes, which is a perfectly normal ratio. The most downvoted comment related to race blindness on his page has a net karma of ... -3, and it's in response to a 38 upvotes comment with the following:
As far as I'm concerned, the policy of acknowledging both race and additional information you have about a person is strictly superior to doing the same but ignoring race. I'd be more concerned if a black doctor was treating me since I know about how much AA they receive, I'd be less concerned if the doctor publicized his SAT score or had other objective markers for performance like a specialization in a field where his race counts for nothing (I doubt that's the case in the US, but I could be wrong). This is where AA in general taints by association, said doctor could absolutely be someone who managed to get in without not so subtle nudges, but since they usually lack a way to prove it, they're automatically discounted in the eyes of a rational agent with no additional information.
This is just ... not ... "people should be treated differently solely because of the race they were born as". This is "we should judge people on their merit, or our best estimate of their merit, and that merit is correlated with race is an objective fact about the world".
I got "You criticize me so little it makes me think you don't care." I'm still going to keep it as near 0 as possible. Similar to, "It's really annoying how you and your friends talk about things and just assume others understand." Yeah... not going the other way on that one either.
More options
Context Copy link