domain:jessesingal.substack.com
faceh
1d ago
Yeah. I can't say for sure how much of it is just my own perception, but the time of a single woman going out by herself to places where she might get noticed and approached seemed to be literally over.
Its always a girls' night thing, or she's with a group of friends for a specific event, or maybe its a date she pre-arranged on the apps.
TIRM
1d ago
But not every cultural reference needs to be explained. You understood his post, except for one reference tacked onto the end. And that's fine.
GBRK
1d ago
I didn't spell it out, but it should be obvious. If it is appropriate to ban a class of weapons because they are the weapons with which "[m]ost crimes and accidents happen", then a successful ban on that class will result in another class becoming the weapons with which most crimes and accidents happen and are therefore OK to ban. Thus such a principle leads to banning all weapons.
If the slippery slope principle worked on guns, then banning military-grade weaponry would have resulted in banning all guns. But it hasn't. Because anyone who isn't a rabid partisan understands that it makes sense to ban particularly harmful types of weapons while allowing particularly useful kinds of weapons to remain in their owner's hands. My argument isn't fundamentally about banning weapons-- it's about rethinking which harms and uses are statistically greater.
The second part is not empirically true
Are you saying, "you lack empirical evidence" or "I have empirical evidence to the contrary." In the latter case, I want to see it. To pre-register, videos of good samaritans with guns won't convince me of anything, but some sort of statistical analysis pointing to a lower aggregate death rates for robbery + rape + murder victims would convince me. An analysis that only considers people who avoid getting murdered by having a gun wouldn't; due to the base rates of robberies + rapes vs murders, I suspect the reduced likelyhood of getting murdered in a murder would be far outweighed by an increased likelyhood to get murdered in a robbery or rape.
and walking around with an AR-15 all the time is simply inconvenient
Yes, that's part of what would overall reduce gun crimes. Sure, some criminals would still have pistols-- but far fewer, compared to now, because so much of the demand would be absorbed by other kinds of weapons. In a country that bans guns, if you're going to buy a guy anyway, it might as well be the best fit for the job, so black market suppliers have plenty of incentive to exist and offer the right kinds of weapons. In a country that only bans small, concealable weapons, most would-be robbers still have access to larger weapons and would go for those over the hassle of finding a black market and buying a perfect pistol. That would in turn shrink the size of the black market and make pistols even harder to acquire.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
1d ago
More of a legal question than anything, but wouldn’t a recall be a tacit admission of guilt? It seems like it might well be, as you’d have to have an understanding of the mechanism that’s causing the failure so you can replace either the part or replace the gun with a completely different design that removes the offending mechanism.
quiet_NaN
1d ago
Moses brought back "thou shalt not kill" from Mount Sinai, it had more exceptions to it than any rule stated so fundamentally should possibly have. It did not apply to people from other tribes -- killing the kids of enemy tribes was fine. It did not apply to people found guilty of any of the numerous crimes which were punished by stoning. Or being willing to sacrifice your kid if God gaslighted you into thinking that this is what he wanted. And don't even think about non-human persons.
hydroacetylene
1d ago
You believe pro-life advocates see motherhood as a punishment?
Grant_us_eyes
1d ago
A girl with OF isn't going to hold my hand while we walk into Home Depot to pick out supplies for our weekend project.
...well, not unless I pay her an obscene amount of money.
Terracotta
1d ago
And maybe it's regional, but after HS I never once encountered a woman who wasn't "acting like that".
This feels so bizarrely foreign, because almost every married couple I know, myself included, built their early relationship in a way that closely matches @urquan's account. This happened mostly in college, but with a smattering of post-college relationships as well. Just a lot of average-looking, average-quality people hanging out and doing random social club things, shyly getting to know a similarly average-looking person and asking them to a play or movie or something, eventually getting serious then either breaking up or getting married and starting a family in a more-or-less dual-career household. Nobody "acted like that," that I'm aware of. No first-date hookups, negging, harems, nude pic demands, findom, tradwifery, false or true rape accusations. Very rarely any cheating, even. The guys were mostly respectful, earnest and nice, the women were mostly honest and friendly. Some of those marriages got worse over time, but many are still doing OK.
I would really love to know where all these apparently horrible young singles (of both sexes) come from. Are people trying to date way above their league and getting toyed with as a result? Did all the helicopter parenting just raise a generation of unpleasant narcissists who will never play well with others?
2rafa
1d ago
KLCC and the wealthier suburbs, like the gated communities around Putrajaya, are pretty unique. I think we discussed them before. Clearly the oil money is going to someone, but much of Malaysia is still pretty poor, and comparable with other parts of ASEAN that aren’t Singapore.
Also, even in KLCC there are pockets of low quality. Car-focused, walking very difficult, those meth / crack addicts on the pedestrian foot bridges just behind the big mall itself, still quite noticeable garbage on the street even sometimes. It’s just very clear it’s still a developing country, and of course plenty of developing countries have rich elites who like Chanel and Lamborghinis.
quiet_NaN
1d ago
Specifically, it would be nice if we could revoke its status as a "superweapon"; all too often, certain unsavory individuals will use "you're making me suicidal!" as an emotional manipulation tactic to immediately end all rational discussion and assert the priority of their own immediate desires.
Way ahead of you. If someone threaten to kill themselves to get something from me, I will happily call the cops and they will spend a night or two in an asylum. I have done it before. It is unlikely to restrict the patient's long-term autonomy, and will put an end to further blackmail attempts. (Not that I would stick around such a person, these days.)
OTOH, when someone were to tell me about suicide plans which are not conditional on my behavior, I would probably let them do it if I came to the conclusion that they had made up their mind.
quiet_NaN
1d ago
I think that for a typical liberal woman not looking to conceive, the preference order is:
- not get pregnant (using birth control)
- getting an abortion
- giving birth
So birth control is absolutely preventing abortions. It is also preventing some babies being born.
Of course, the pro-life crowd has largely not embraced birth control as a method to prevent abortions, which is telling. While I get that there are age-old Christian objections to abortions specifically, I think that a lot of the point of being pro-life is to want to punish women for a sinful lifestyle. "If you fuck around, you get punished by being a single mother."
BahRamYou
1d ago
I feel like I can do that, provided that she's sufficiently motivated to get off her butt and go out into the real world to meet people in meat-space. I also like to play with my phone when I'm sitting at the bar, but I'll put at away as soon as I meet anyone interesting to talk to. The real challenge is the women staying at home, using the phone as their sole means of communication... which is most women these days. I went to three bars tonight (fancy cocktail bars in a trendy neighborhood) and there was literally zero women there who weren't there as part of a date.
quiet_NaN
1d ago
Suicide is fucking barbaric, and honestly pretty selfish.
That depends on the alternatives. If you want to argue that jumping of a tall building after we have reasonable legislation for assisted suicides, I agree with you.
But as long as such legislation is not in place, my attitude is fuck society. I would still prefer methods which are unlikely to endanger or traumatize others, but if society does not provide a non-messy way out, they can hardly expect me to stay alive just to avoid making a mess.
Look at it this way. I believe in my autonomy to decide if I live or die (within the obvious biological limits, until we can get around them). I would happily blow the brains out of someone who is attempting to murder me. If some 6yo sees this they will likely be traumatized, and that is bad, but at the end of the day I value my autonomy over my life more than the kid's lack of trauma. I do not think that this is unreasonable, and few would suggest that I am not justified here.
But this autonomy is a double-edged sword. Wanting to die is just as valid a choice as wanting to continue to live. I would not blow my brains out in front of a group of kindergardeners if I have a better choice, of course. But at the end of the day, my autonomy comes first.
Southkraut
The rain fell gentlier.
1d ago
Sorry, I should have been more specific. I mean - please explain what political signage and iconography you see today, and please provide pictures thereof if possible.
Southkraut
The rain fell gentlier.
1d ago
Still trying to unfuck my Unreal mystery errors. Things just end up in weird places, behaving weirdly. I have made some progress. I have also been perfectly stuck on some issues for weeks (months?) now. Oh well. Looks like many of my problems were caused by mistaking specalized solutions from tutorials for more general than they were. Right now I'm taking a detour to refactor some code (mostly looking to replace inheritance with composition, and generally upgrade structural sanity), and I hope that by the end of that process I'm better positioned to debug the rest of my problems.
falling-star
1d ago
I'm a cum boy. I think there's at least 5 other regular posters that are too.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
Have you considered Godot's evil / based twin brother, Redot? I was working with it when they just forked, and it was no worse then Godot, and they're now teasing some pretty impressive benchmarks.
quiet_NaN
1d ago
And only now, as the modern world is becoming increasingly ignorant of traditional arguments against these things do we consider them "good ideas". They're chesterton's fences. Other examples are IoT, online IDs, social credit scores, mass immigration, censorship laws, guilt by association and "fact checking".
- IoT and online IDs and social credit scores are becoming a thing because technological progress makes them feasible. In 1994, when most people were offline and the few which were online were mostly running PCs with Windows 3.11 and a modem, a dishwasher costing twice as much with a BNC port to connect to a home network which 98% of the population did not have would not have been very successful. Today the hardware costs are basically nil and most customers have WiFi in their kitchen. That does not mean that these are good ideas! Mao simply did not have the tech level to track which of his countrymen were good commie citizens and which ones were bad at the level of granularity, but I think he would have liked the idea.
- Censorship is an ancient idea. When the first warlords turned into nobles at the dawn of civilization, they very likely reacted badly to anyone claiming that Kodos would make a better king than Kang. You put "fact checking" in scare quotes, and I get it -- calling biased fact checkers neutral and objective does not make them so. My personal approach to fact-checking would be bottom-up. Rather than having a fact-checker in chief appointed by the president, I prefer random bloggers who have a track record of being credible in my book (i.e. Scott Alexander). I would also add that fact checking has become a thing because populists have increasingly told the public laughable lies. A lot of politicians lie, but GWB lying about WMD in Iraq (which CNN was not in the position to call BS on) is different than Trump lying about Immigrants eating cats and dogs or the size of his inauguration crowd. News organizations should call bullshit on provably wrong claims of fact. (Like SA, I have a bounded distrust for MSM. They will certainly report selectively and apply spins, but they will rarely conjure a story out of thin air. My distrust for Trump is unbounded -- if he told me the sky was blue I would go outside to check.)
- Guilt by association is likewise ancient. In Rome, the smallest legal unit was generally the family. It mattered little who in a family had committed an offense, the head of the family was on the hook for paying the fine.
- "Mass immigration" is likewise nothing new for the US. In 1850 and 1930 and 2000, about 11% of the census were foreign-born. In 2022 it was about 14%. More, but not dramatically so.
2rafa
1d ago
I don’t believe that with your appearance and accent you were hooking up with large numbers of beautiful European women in Thailand or Bali or anywhere else, but it doesn’t really matter. If you did, then your post history clearly shows it brought you no fulfilment or happiness.
You hated the man you were, so you constructed the fantasy of an alpha male, a sexually successful man, to replace him. But the neuroticism, the angst, the self-doubt, the fear of a life unlived still haunts you to no lesser degree.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
How have you been doing @Southkraut?
As mentioned last week I deployed my project and was testing / fixing it over the week. While there's tons of missing features, weird quirks and bugs, it's still a massive quality of life improvement over my previous nitter+miniflux setup:
- Nitter was acting up because of issues with the authentication token. I have 2 Twitter burner accounts, so I thought it would solve the issue if I just switched up the tokens, but each only works half-way. I can either browse twitter with one token or have a working RSS feed with the other. The new setup had some issues with the token as well (it got rate limited, possibly due to both projects running on the same server), but it somehow recovered on it's own within a day.
- The ability to browse twitter from the same page is a huge improvement. What's more every reply tweet I see is getting automatically archived, which wasn't possible with the old setup. On top of that, the ability to follow a new twitter account at the click of a button is a HUGE boon (I used to have to got to the "new feed" page, copy-paste the RSS-view url, etc).
- I might have been having a bit too much fun with custom layouts, particularly for the error pages.
Like I said, far from finished, there's still plenty of retardation in the code, but it works well enough for me to use it over the old bespoke setup, so here's a github for the curious
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
You'd be amazed what you can accomplish with a few electrodes...
one wonders if they are using the same social time preference rate when calculating the costs of global warming in the future vs the costs of preventing global warming in the present. my understanding is the Stern Report used a discount rate of around ~1.5%. So that seems kind of suspicious that they are using a discount rate of between 2.5 and 3.5% here. however, the difference in rates is not super large. I think if they used a Stern rate it would increase the present value of the payments by a factor of 1.4 (where 1.0 would be the same value) compared to the rate they used.
also, whether it was misleading or not I think depends on how it was worded. If they said something like "the cost of the deal is 3.4 billion with payments over 100 years" then I think that is misleading because it gives the reader the impression that the payments are going to be something like 100 payments of 3.4 billion / 100 and a reader might think the net present value will be much lower. If you did not want to mislead the reader you would use more explicit wording like: "the net present value of the payments is 3.4 billion and will be paid over 100 years". My guess is the wording will just be standard wordcel games where you try to put false impressions in the heads of other people and then later claim the reader is at fault. I guess its also completely possible that all of the detail was shared with parliament but no-one in parliament actually reads the detail.
i've read the telegraph article and part of the article is written by the shadow foreign secretary priti patel. it seems like everyone knew what the cash value of the payments were all along but did not know how the treasury were calculating the final cost. i think in this case its hard to claim that treasury were that misleading. treasury should have explained originally how they came to their present value calculations but it's not like the value of the cash payments was hidden.
Only in the uncharitable case; more charitably, the inevitability of motherhood as an inescapable consequence of sex forms exceptional leverage when arguing for the cultural aesthetic they want.
If they can (unnaturally) impose the former condition, the latter naturally follows- it's the same thing the abortionists are doing when they argue for their aesthetic.
"More sex, less baby death" is not a goal the anti-sex side or the pro-baby-death side can publicly profess, since the anti-sex side promises less baby death as a consequence of less sex[1], and the pro-baby-death side promises more baby death as a consequence of more sex[1].
[1] Well, I say 'sex' but it's more 'choice', as in, which faction gets to write the social rules about how women get to leverage sex as a meal ticket. The "celebrate my abortion" stance is consistent with this, as is the "life begins at conception" one (but requires a bunch of other social context to fully understand why, since this is more a piece of a larger system that adds up to leverage rather than bestows it by itself).
More options
Context Copy link