domain:natesilver.net
No_one
1d ago
Don't forget Jack L. Chalker.
I'm somewhat fascinated by the frequently short lifespans of American writers.
No_one
1d ago
...focuses? No. It doesn't. It's incidental to an experiment in trying to understand partner's POV.
cartman
1d ago
You've provided a map without much context with regards to population or voting demographics, so in the absence of that information the map doesn't demonstrate much of anything about the prevalence of gerrymandering
self_made_human
Sajjano durjano bhūyāt, durjano badhyatāṃ sadā, baddho'nyān nibandhāyet
1d ago
Goddammit, I knew I'd done something wrong. I was actually aware that it's not correct to use the population mean of 100, but I was unsure how to account for it. Thank you for the correction.
self_made_human
Sajjano durjano bhūyāt, durjano badhyatāṃ sadā, baddho'nyān nibandhāyet
1d ago
Belonging to the Global Latina Belt has its perks.
self_made_human
Sajjano durjano bhūyāt, durjano badhyatāṃ sadā, baddho'nyān nibandhāyet
1d ago
Noticeably below average, if not actually retarded. The kind of person who is literate, but definitely struggled in school, not that I have her test scores at hand.
EilonwyPrydain
1d ago
Hey, appreciate it. Mostly I was just feeling low and felt like venting about how sucky life can be sometimes. I agree with all the advice (sports, role models) but it's so hard to put into practice. I can't magic male role models out of nowhere. He does see his dad a couple times a week, for what that's worth. The sports thing has sort of been a perennial struggle because the boy really digs in and gets resistant as soon as I suggest something "organized". When he was younger he would run and play on the playground and climb everything in sight, but he freaked out when I wanted him to do an actual parkour class. Wrestling or boxing or track might be something if I can find something age appropriate.
I was being flippant about the AuDHD - he has been formally diagnosed with ASD and ADHD. The ASD is more recent so I'm still navigating what it means and how it should change my parenting approach.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
Is there any evidence that what she did was in any way warrented?
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
1d ago
Yes it would be a serious issue. But there is no evidence that Chattah did that
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
1d ago
Here's a court opinion from Queensland, Australia.
-
At three in the morning, a drunk 19-year-old male engages a 51-year-old prostitute for a 30-minute session. After the woman tells him that his time has expired, he angrily responds that he hasn't finished (ejaculated) yet and punches her in the face multiple times, resulting in "significant" injuries. Two hours later, he accosts a 66-year-old woman who is on her morning walk and rapes or attempts to rape her three times—once with fingers in vagina, once with penis in vagina (just an attempt since he failed to achieve an erection), and once with penis in mouth. He also inflicts severe injuries on the 66-year-old (dislocated shoulder, broken jaw, fractured eye socket, and broken nose). Some hours later, he is arrested, makes "partial admissions" to the police, and expresses "genuine remorse".
-
The 19-year-old pleads guilty. Before the sentencing judge, the prosecutor suggests a total sentence of 14 years—3 years for the assault on the 51-year-old, and 10–14 years in total for the attempted and actual rapes and grievous bodily harm on the 66-year-old. The defense accepts that a range of 10–14 years is appropriate for the second set of offenses, and asks for a total sentence at the low end of that range. The judge imposes a total sentence of 13.5 years (with the possibility of parole after 10.8 years)—1.5 years for the assault, consecutive with concurrent sentences of 12 years for each actual or attempted rape and 6 years for the grievous bodily harm.
It is critical, as is required, that a sentence be just and appropriate, and not too crushing and disproportionate. What I have sought to do is ameliorate the sentences so that the overall sentence is just and appropriate. The likely overall sentence would have been, I think, about 16 years; that is, the sentence for count 1, in my view, is likely to have been over two years, and was likely to be over 13 years for your sexual offending, coupled with the violence.
-
The appeals panel reverses. In this case, the offender was only 19 years old, had no criminal history, had a disadvantaged background (his mother committed suicide when he was 13, and he lived unhappily with his grandmother afterward; he was exposed to excessive drinking and violence in his childhood; he started drinking at age 15), has expressed remorse, and has been out on bail for 16 months without reoffending. In the context of both the crimes and the offender's background, the sentence imposed was "manifestly excessive".
The case of R v Wark, in which the offender was resentenced, on appeal, to 12 years’ imprisonment, supports the view that 12 years was too high in this case. The offender in Wark was 51 years old, with a limited criminal history of minor drug offending. He too had a problem with alcohol and had been drinking in the lead up to the offending, which started at about 1 AM one Saturday morning. The complainant, a woman in her 30s, [suffered one assault while armed, one assault with intent to rape, one deprivation of liberty, five actual rapes, and one attempted rape]. Both by reference to the circumstances of the offending (which involved a far more prolonged series of violent and degrading sexual assaults) and the offender, Wark is a more serious case.
The panel resentences the offender to 11 years (with the possibility of parole after 8.8 years)—1 year for the assault, consecutive with concurrent sentences of 10 years for each actual rape, 5 years for the attempted rape, and 5 years for the grievous bodily injury. -
One judge on the panel dissents. She would impose a total sentence of 10.5 years (with the possibility of parole after 8.4 years)—1.5 years for the assault, consecutive with 9 years for the oral rape, and no further penalty for the other crimes.
It seems to me that a comparison with the offending in Wark and the offending in the present case shows that the primary judge’s starting point of perhaps 16 years for the total of the appellant’s offending was significantly too high. Serious though it was, the appellant’s offending was objectively much less than Wark’s offending. Not only was the starting point too high but, again in comparison with Wark, a reduction from 16 years to 13 and a half years in the present case was an insufficient reduction to reflect a guilty plea. Significantly the primary judge in this case needed to mitigate the sentence he imposed to reflect a guilty plea, and also to reflect the fact that the appellant was a young man with no criminal history (Wark was a mature man). The appellant’s youth and lack of criminal history bore upon his prospects of rehabilitation. His youth also bore upon the primary judge’s consideration of totality. That is, in considering what might be a crushing sentence, the primary judge was obliged to consider the appellant’s youth.
The period of nine years is inflated to allow for the criminality of all the offending against complainant 2.
(The judges don't mention it, but obviously any 19-year-old male who would choose to hire a 51-year-old prostitute also has a severe mental disability that warrants special sentencing treatment.)
clo
1d ago
I had a comment a while ago about how people outside America looking in are still at the "call a spade a spade" level of meta, and when they do what they say and yell about what they want they're confused about why the dominant American culture doesn't get it. The dominant American culture has been sipping industrial grade postmodern self-aware media propaganda and their mainstream entertainment is constructed out of large irony blocks.
Maybe African-Americans are not deep enough within the levels of simulacra to have internalized not to take either wing of the political aisle at face value yet.
George_E_Hale
insufferable blowhard
1d ago
That's what my brief look-up said, and it also said what I mentioned, e.g. that this is not a clinical term.
No_one
1d ago
I was reminded of the culture when reading the otherwise not that good AI-2027 essay.
There are even bioengineered human-like creatures (to humans what corgis are to wolves) sitting in office-like environments all day viewing readouts of what’s going on and excitedly approving of everything, since that satisfies some of Agent-4’s drives.33
RenOS
something is wrong
1d ago
Maybe I misunderstand you, but this is imo calculated the wrong way. Presumably, most of the dudes family is also 130 IQ, and you already explicitly spelled out that her parents and siblings are all 130 IQ. If the expected child IQ of a 130 IQ pairing from a 130 IQ wider family is actually 118 ... What astronomical luck did the families have up to then?
First, heritability is a red herring, since we're not in an adoption study or similar situation. These are rich parents raising their own rich daughter. The relevant factor is regression to the mean, which is generally estimated to be ca 0.5, i.e. if you take your spousal IQ_s, and compare it to the population mean IQ_p you're descended from, then you're kids IQ will be roughly (IQ_s + IQ_p)/2.
The population mean you regress to is generally speaking that of your actual sub-population, which is your wider family; Ideally you also know the IQ of your grandparents and uncles and aunts, that improves the estimate further. It's not always 100, which is a very common misconception. It's generally trivially acknowledged for clear examples, such as ethnic ashkenazi jewish among gentiles, but it even holds among seemingly homogenous groups. The reason you see regression towards 100 is partially that assortative mating in superficially homogenous groups is only moderate, so usually there is some difference between the respective spousal family background, and partially an artifact of averaging. But it certainly holds for ethnically separated groups with rather strict assortative mating as is typical in large parts of India, as I understand it.
So the expected child IQ of a 130 IQ pairing from a 130 IQ wider family is simply 130. With a single spouse at 90, the spousal average becomes 110 instead, and the final number after regression is around 120. Still a 10 point difference though, so I guess not a big difference on that account.
RandomRanger
Just build nuclear plants!
1d ago
You have succeeded where AI and myself have failed.
MathWizard
Good things are good
1d ago
In general I think AI content belongs in separate designated zones. If not its own website, at least a dedicated section. AI fiction should be found in the AI fiction section, not mixed with the regular fiction. AI art belongs in the AI art section, not mixed with the regular art. AI non-fiction... probably doesn't need to be posted anywhere. It's going to end up some combination of wordy filler and stuff that's already been said somewhere else. Basically a super fancy version of a google search. If you're not prompting it yourself such that you want a super fancy version of a google search, reading essays someone else told an AI to make is unlikely to provide value.
A general exception to this is AI content which is supplemental in support of a greater creative work. If you're designing a game and the primary design and development is original work, but the art assets and/or music are AI generated that's probably fine. They're there to maintain immersion for the game. Or if you're writing a novel and the cover art is AI generated. I think this is an excellent use to allow AI to cover for your weaknesses so that you can play to your strengths. If the majority of something is AI generated then it belongs in the AI generated section so that people can voluntarily choose to engage with it with that in their mind.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
1d ago
I think the biggest problem for me is the difference in framing and tactics. The people here frame it as a war, but I don't think it was ever that.
Are you familiar with Zunger's Tolerance is not a moral precept, or Ozy's Conservatives As Moral Mutants, written in January 2017 and June 2018, respectively? I'm not sure how far they spread in the Blue intelligentsia, but I can say that they seem to me to have provided great predictive and explanatory accuracy in the following years.
The left might learn something from the independents turning away, but I guarantee you they won't "learn" anything from the right's current tactics. They'll simply see it that the right is completely okay with using the full force of government to try to control culture, and think they need to play dirtier.
I think this is a likely-accurate prediction of how the logic plays out, but it still, at this late date, seems necessary to point out that the left has in fact been very actively using the government to try and control culture, to a degree that even Trump has not yet approached. Reds have not yet tried to exclude Blues from the finance and banking systems, nor leaned on the social media industry to implement broad-spectrum censorship and de-platforming of their opponents' political speech, to name two examples. Organized gangs of Reds are not marching in the streets beating people who disagree with them, while the police are ordered to look the other way.
BlindDeafRat
1d ago
AuDHD is a combination of Autism and ADHD.
Tiber727
1d ago
I think the biggest problem for me is the difference in framing and tactics. The people here frame it as a war, but I don't think it was ever that. To me, I think that the real problem with cancel culture is not a sort of "factional left vs. right" conflict. I think that the left has adopted the framework of the internet. What I mean by that is, you can pick a forum and cultivate your own echo chamber. If you don't agree with someone block them. There's a range of disagreement between "I disagree with you but that's okay" to "It's disgusting that you believe that and I don't think we can share the same space." I think that the left has developed a neurotic personality leading to the range of acceptable disagreement being tiny. I don't think they "took over" institutions so much as many individuals gravitated to similar locations based on their personality, and pushed out the right due to that tendency and the fact that they gravitated there in greater numbers.
They don't even think they're waging the culture war. They think they're going about their day doing boring and uncontroversial things like protesting for trans rights and then some asshole came along and they kicked him out like any normal human being would do. That's why the left claims the right invented the culture war or that "cancel culture doesn't exist."
I think the real problem is the neurotic personality more so than their ideas. Bad ideas are fine. I don't have much hope for the current generation, because attitudes are hard to change. I see articles like this that start to get it, but of course even here she can't shake the "the message wasn't bad, only the delivery" trap. That said, the real barometer is the next generation. Younger folks are rejecting the Democratic party even though politically speaking they're arguably more left than right.
The right is in full "We're aiming to crush you" mode. The left might learn something from the independents turning away, but I guarantee you they won't "learn" anything from the right's current tactics. They'll simply see it that the right is completely okay with using the full force of government to try to control culture, and think they need to play dirtier. The independents are the real decider here, and they may reject the right for their tactics.
ser
1d ago
I get a big improvement in mental state after lifting, but it's after work 3 times a week. I used to improve my mental state by running, but my legs can't handle that and squats at the same time. What could I do on off days/daily?
No need to run. A walk at active pace for an hour or two is more than enough
Also, I don't recommend treating dating like a job interview, which you seem to be doing by having an extensive lists of prerequisites you're forcing yourself to get done before even trying. You're definitely on the right path in improving yourself, you definitely should keep going, not for the sake of dating but for yourself. Change the mindset from "I'm lifting because I want a girlfriend" to "I'm lifting because I want to be healthy" or because "lift heavy rock make bad thought in my ape head go away". Reason why I say all this is because with online dating, you're bound to fail many times. You'll be meeting complete strangers, failure rate is high. It will discourage you from improving yourself because your framing will be that you did all this work yet you still haven't achieved your goal. People with bad eyesight and poor sleep still date, don't wait on fixing this.
Spending WAAAY too much time on the internet doomscrolling
don't beat yourself up about this too much. Can actually turn this into a positive for yourself. Everyone under 30 is doomscrolling for hours too, girls you will meet will be brainrotted to the core just as much as you (unless you're doomscrolling autistic sites which is highly likely since we're on the motte, you should hide that stuff on first few dates lol).
Lastly, once you actually start going on dates here's my final advice. Like I said earlier, failure rate is very high and you should expect most dates to not work out, but still make the best of them. And you do that by going in with minimal expectations. My favorite thing to do is doing some kind of activity that I was going to do anyway. New exhibition at the museum? Get a quick bite then go see the exhibition. That way I kill two birds with one stone, have a date and visit the museum. Even if the date goes bad, at least I visited the exhibition I wanted to see anyway. Any other mindset would have me stressing because 'OMG I'm about to go out with potentially my future wife I gotta put my best foot down and be on my best behavior', but that just puts way too much unnecessary pressure, so I just treat it like a hangout with a friend. Don't take this advice too far, you still gotta flirt and show interest, otherwise the girl will not get the spark or feel like you're not into her but don't worry about this too much because dealing with that will come with experience
raakaa
1d ago
FWIW, I didn’t bring those numbers up to make some point like “my side could beat your side in a civil war”, like a schoolboy going “my dad could beat up your dad”. I was trying to say that targeting 50% of the population creates conditions of total war far more than targeting 1% of the population.
It seems to me that almost every woman is more cautious around any individual man vs any individual woman (especially in isolated situations) due to the risk of sexual assault. Is this sexist? Should they not discriminate in this manner?
More options
Context Copy link