domain:city-journal.org
thejdizzler
18hr ago
I have had second dates, but not with Catholic women. I think the issue is my heterodoxy.
Closedshop
話說天下大勢，分久必合，合久必分
18hr ago
That part is not about working, but about taxes.
That's a bit tricky though.
You turned him down, even after he invested in a gift, and he kept pursuing. And I don't know what if any signals he was reading that led him to think it would succeed.
Meanwhile, the advice that men would get, both from most women and men, is you have to move on after a rejection, because continuing on is 'creepy,' or is 'simping' (ESPECIALLY the gift-giving), or maybe even straight up stalking or harassment. How many rejections is a man supposed to 'ignore'? How much should he invest before it becomes throwing good money after bad?
There is no good answer. And there's the risk of a woman actively exploiting this tendency in men to pump as much money and effort from him as possible.
This pursuit model of the man slowly, politely grinding down a woman's barriers and making increasingly enticing offers for her time and affection is one that I personally prefer. But it just doesn't work very well when women have many available options, and to continually pursue one who has already rejected you just reads as 'desperation' which is a turnoff on its own.
Simply put, why would a guy put himself through that without some reasonable expectation of success?
Supah_Schmendrick
18hr ago
The reason right-leaning news is growing is that it at least tries to get the facts right
Ehhhhhh....some yes, many others no. The pressure to cater to the consumer's pre-existing beliefs is very strong, and right wingers are just as susceptible to confirmation bias and all the other old, familiar rationalist hobbyhorses as lefties.
hydroacetylene
18hr ago
Journalism is a shrinking field, which means you need the respect of your peers to keep working in it, which means ‘impressing other journalists’ is more important than ‘impressing the public’.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
18hr ago
Thank you for the response. Just to press the point, is the worst that would happen to a hypothetical child that he or she would end up like you? Is that so bad?
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
18hr ago
Wow apparently I misclicked because my question was meant for someone else, apologies.
Supah_Schmendrick
18hr ago
Blackbagging by ICE seems to be an extrajudicial process by design
You need to clarify what you are talking about. Are you talking about arrests of individuals who already have a final order of removal or order revoking a lawful visa against them? Are you talking about arrests of individuals based on probable cause that they are in the country illegally? A secret third thing? Immigration law is very complex and, yes, mostly delegated by act of Congress to the administrative branch through administrative adjudication, and discussing it based on vague generalities actively obscures more than it enlightens.
fmac
Ask me about bike lanes
18hr ago
Yeah Isreal is doing an amazing job shitting all over their military and nuclear programs.
It's just very unlikely to cause a regime change or cause Iran significant long term harm. They'll be neutered for the next few years for sure though.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
18hr ago
Hmm I suppose I am, though from your reply it sounded like you had done none of those things.
I could go down a whole rabbit whole on history and the symbolic worldview versus materialism etc but idk I don’t want to evangelize if you aren’t into it hah. Thanks for following up.
TIRM
18hr ago
actively fund the destruction of everything that used to give life meaning
That's certainly one way to portray working.
Lykurg
We're all living in Amerika
18hr ago
I have a bit of a different perspective than the other two here, but perhaps it will help you understand them.
The evidence for human free will appears to me to be overwhelmingly strong
If I ask you why you did xyz, you can probably give me an answer. In what sense is that answer true, if the reasons you give me didnt cause you to take the action? If you agree that they caused the action, congratulations, thats all the determination materialism requires. This is an unconventional perspective to take on actions, but a common one on beliefs. It is in this sense that people say they dont choose what they believe; my reasons are as they are, and they cause me to believe as I do. And for me, "I would really like believing it" is not one of the reasons that convince me (at least, not a very convincing one) - so it may be that I want to believe something but dont believe it. I dont know what "observation of free will" you think contradicts this, but IME people are unable to describe it in non-circular terms.
You can't compare their Kolmogorov complexity, or Minimum Message Length, or employ any other test to determine which of them is more likely than the other
Those are some very heavy guns for what in this case amounts to a very simple argument: What reason is there for thinking the uncaused cause is embodied in a human born around 0 AD? Not a cosmological reason; because it is quite different from the phenomena which are visible cosmology, and would be complex to nail down based on them (try if you dont believe me!). By contrast, there could be cosmological evidence for a seamless loop; a big crunch for example may just imply it as a straighforward application of ordinary physcial laws. There are other things which could be proven by cosmology, even if none of them are currently - but christianity is not one of them. If there are reasons to think the first cause is the christian god specifically, they are not about cosmology, and would likely be just as convincing without making the first cause argument to begin with, so dont.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
18hr ago
I said I haven't tried everything (like LSD). I certainly did try some things. I'm not contemptuous, but I am pretty confident, and you're doing exactly what I predicted: if there's one "opening yourself to the supernatural" that I missed, then clearly I'm just contemptuous and didn't really try. Like I said, I have heard all the angles and apologetics.
faceh
18hr ago
My brother is pretty much the dropout guy. Rents a room in a friend's house, makes very little money through various gigs (and some less-legal stuff), but has no space to host or otherwise have people over at a whim.
But he's so damn affable and charismatic that he never lacks for invites to go and do interesting stuff. The dude took a day trip down to Key West yesterday (didn't even invite me) and a couple days before that he was hanging out with some guy who, no joke, is building a large reptile zoo facility on his property.
I don't envy him, per se, but I don't get invited out nearly as much as he does. I have to do the hard hosting work. And someone has to.
There's also the aspect that he'll have to clean the mess all up afterwards or hire some maid to do so, and that his social circle will come to expect him to keep throwing cool parties.
Thankfully my friends are pretty tidy guests, and don't tend to expect me to host. Hell, they seem nervous even asking.
Walterodim
Only equals speak the truth, that’s my thought on’t
18hr ago
Are the blackbagging tactics of ICE a necessary evil, a dangerous overstep, or some nuanced in-between?
Assuming we're simply referring to "blackbagging" as forcefully and publicly initiating the detention of illegal aliens for their removal, they are a necessary good. I want the illegal aliens removed, but it would be even better if they simply noticed that they're unwelcome and left of their own accord. To that end, this process should be carried out openly, publicly, and with no undue kindness.
Dean
Flairless
18hr ago
That's part of it. When working in lower-trust societies, people make judgements based on their personal relationships, and part of that personal relationship comes from non-textual connotations. There are some writers who can convey their own personality, but by and large its easier and quicker to do so on the basis of the factors you mention.
faceh
18hr ago
I've psyopped myself into believing that the general task of continuing human civilization and seeding the galaxy with intelligent life is important (I've taken the Muskpill, if you like). So having and raising kids, avoiding existential risks, and generally trying to push society forward technologically are goals that I find give me a sense of purpose.
And there's something to be excited about there. No matter what it is you like about living on planet earth, EVERYTHING ELSE is out there in space, if you can just find a way to get there. Every human could have their own planet to shape to their preferences, eventually.
But I've also got to recognize that most people don't have an inherent appreciation for space exploration nor any expectation that space exploration will improve their lives.
And as AI and VR tech gets better, the majesty of outer space is going to have to compete with just plugging into the infinite experience machine that will make you feel whatever emotion you want to feel and allow you to have endless new experiences customized to your liking... without ever leaving home!
Me, I like living in (what I perceive to be) baseline reality too much. There's still so much goofy stuff to discover, and we haven't even unlocked the truly interesting stuff on the tech tree.
Jiro
18hr ago
Every time I read one of these pathetic tough guy screeds, my first thought is to laugh at the absolute lack of self-awareness. 'Reee, my outgroup is full of animals who would never compromise or act in good faith! This justifies me never acting in good faith either.
Cool. Tell me about some relevant instances of your outgroup acting in good faith.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε, ποίησόν με ὄργανον τῆς ἀγάπης σου
18hr ago
In the correlations with easier, the countries with higher establishment media trust, and the higher willingness to support media truth-corrections, are also the countries where most people still prefer to read rather than hear (or watch) their online news.
This makes me wonder if the rise of podcasting/media is partially due to the fact that when you don't trust someone, you want to get more senses/more data when you take in information. It's much easier to consistently lie in print than it is in a talkshow or video, if only because you can pick up on tone of voice, pitch, etc etc.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
18hr ago
To be clear, I'm describing the life I used to have; I'm not living that way any more.
I don't think I could claim that it's the worst that could happen. My porn addiction was far more manageable and less destructive than, say, what I've seen of the median meth addict. There were pleasures and pursuits beyond mindless self-indulgence. But it was not a good life, and it absolutely was not getting better with time. I observed myself slowly degrading, becoming less in very tangible and concrete ways, losing my humanity and degenerating into something verging on the insectile, as bitter regret and the need to escape that regret grew more and more to define my existence through habitual loops of pointless escapism and empty stimulus-response. Lying awake in the early hours of the morning, I would remember what it felt like to have someone I loved lying next to me, and know for an absolute certainty that I would never, ever have that feeling again, and the pain of that was considerable. At the time, I joked to my family that my purpose in life was to serve as a cautionary example, but the joke wore thin the worse it got. Toward the end, I spent a lot of time fantasizing about being dead. One of my main objectives in my current life is to do what I can to help my children and nieces and nephews avoid ending up in a similar place.
...All this is to say that, in my experience, the question of whether sex is or can be better than masturbation depends on the mentality of the assessor. In my own experience, I know for a fact that masturbation appearing preferable was a consequence of profound dysfunction. I am at least somewhat confident that my own experience generalizes at least to some degree, but this is pretty obviously a question that grounds out at one's values. At a minimum, I'd endorse what you wrote here.
DelendaEst
18hr ago
The arresting of illegal immigrants bothers me not at all. And there is actually a point to making the arrests seem maximally scary, namely than illegal immigrants are not morons and are too numerous to deport all of them. But a scary deportation regime makes the act of illegally immigrating seem like a worse value proposition for those currently not in the US who are considering hopping the border, much as Biden's aggressively pro-immigrant stance made it seem like a good deal. Even if both administrations are actually deporting similar numbers they will have much different rates of new offenders.
All that said, I do not like the idea of the ICE agents being masked, it makes it too easy for bad actors to pretend to be cops. That erodes social trust in a way I find unnecessary and concerning. Their actual actions seem fine though.
The Economist isn't particularly highbrow either. Kind of mid-wit for just recycling consensus takes with branding. Very much in the middle of the low-mid-high IQ meme.
I think agents of the state should have to identify themselves as agents of the state when going about the business of the state. And the particular agents doing the state's business need to be identifiable after the fact to the people they interacted with for accountability reasons. I don't think this an insane thing to say? Maybe I am just too radically libertarian. There are just a whole[1] pile[2] of articles[3] discussing the phenomenon of people impersonating ICE officers to commit other crimes. It turns out a standard like "if someone claims to be from ICE you gotta do what they say, even if they refuse to provide identification or evidence, on pain of committing another federal crime" is a standard that is open to abuse!
On the more general topic I think black bagging is a lot harder in a world where ~everyone has a video camera in their pocket. All the Dem politicians detentions or arrests I'm aware of had contemporaneous video within minutes of them occurring. Even in cases of AEA-related deportation attempts the news has gotten out in hours or less.
My radical proposal is the judiciary should have their own police force, independent of the executive, for the purpose of enforcing their orders.
Why would someone who is being sued and appears to have some tangible assets choose a default judgment and not defend his or her self in court? This pertains to the Wes Watson situation. There is a thread about it: https://old.reddit.com/r/WesWatson/comments/1l39uoa/default_judgement_against_wes_watson_from_the_7/
It would seem completely irrational to not show up, especially as in the case of Mr. Watson , as he does appear to have attests that can be seized to fill the judgment. He can also be taken to court to testify under oath as to his financial situation and location of assets. I did some research on this , and typically there are exceptions (e.g. living expenses or homestead ) or the judge can set aside the judgment, but I don't think this would easily apply here. I also read a no-show would lessen the plaintiff's legal expenses, so this could lead to a smaller settlement if one does not expect to win.
Is it possible that he protected in his assets in such a way as to be judgment proof using a cool legal trick, or maybe he's actually as dumb IRL as he appears on youtube?
Massive immediate shortage of consumer goods, industrial parts and equipment, some kinds of food (which isn’t grown in China but is often shipped there to be packed or processed or canned), and basic military equipment (boots, uniforms, etc).
More options
Context Copy link