domain:web.law.duke.edu
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
2d ago
Watching Ken White/Popehat's descent into TDS has been sad, but his complete derangement on this topic is really extremely disappointing to me, as someone who once admired him for his free speech stance. White used to be a very strong and principled First Amendment warrior and frequently mocked the UK's much weaker free speech protections. Now he's saying this is "within shouting distance of prosecution" (another way to say "not prosecutable") and heavily implying that even though he's well aware this would not fly in US courts, he thinks it should.
Mantergeistmann
2d ago
I'd consider Vox Day more influential than Jim
Is Vox Day still relevant these days? I haven't heard much of him since Rabid Puppies and that one alt-right comic book attempt.
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
2d ago
First, the argument from exhaustion: because we've been trying to fix these problems for the better part of a century. Many hundreds of thousands of smart, capable, hardworking people have dedicated their entire lives to solving these problems for multiple generations, across fifty different states, and have uniformly failed every single time, on every single approach to every single issue...
Second, the argument from blindness: we have no way of effectively measuring the problem we're trying to fix, other than by raw outcomes. The dominant narrative holds that bad outcomes are caused by racism, but there is no detectable racism gradient. That is, there do not appear to be places in America that are noticeably more or less racist in any coherent or useful sense, as measured by outcomes, despite a wide range of policies, populations, and cultural norms...
Third, the argument from dementia: we don't approach the problem in a systematic way, we don't learn from our failures, and we don't even keep track of what's been tried or what the outcomes were. The realities of politics, policy, media narratives and public attention span and engagement mean that there is no consistent train of thought, no effective accumulation of experience. People can and do spend their whole lives pushing solutions that were proved to be a dead-end a generation ago. For obvious reasons, this makes the previous problems much worse. It's not just that we're stuck in a maze, and it's not just that the maze is extremely vast, it's that we aren't capable of remembering what turns we took. For an example, look at the ubiquitous claims that bad educational outcomes are caused by differences in school funding between majority-white and majority-black schools. Note, halfway down that article, the following sentence:
The analysis does not include federal dollars, much of which is targeted to the poorest communities.
You will find a similar sentence in most articles on this subject, because those federal dollars completely close the gap. Less educational funding for black students looked like an obvious example of low-hanging fruit, so we fixed it by using federal money to compensate for differences in local funding from disparate tax bases. Only, the disparate outcomes didn't go away, and so people willfully ignore that the solution they're advocating has already failed...
Fourth, the argument from sociopathy: powerful institutions are incentivized to aggravate all of the above problems, because doing so provides significant short-term benefits at no appreciable short-term cost. Blacks get the soothing reassurance that all their problems are the fault of the out-group, not the inevitable result of their own bad individual choices. Progressives get a profoundly loyal block of supporters, and a massive rhetorical cudgel to beat the out-group with. And of course, the alternative is admitting "things suck, and we have no idea how to fix them", which is never going to be a winning answer, despite it being the truth. At this point, any solution is pretty clearly going to require a minimum of decades of constant effort, and the reality is that on the timescale of our existing political system, decades-long solutions are effectively impossible. Lying provides immediate and significant benefit at no cost, and not lying imposes significant costs with no compensating benefits. The result is that lying is adaptive, so our political and knowledge-production systems are absolutely overrun with liars...
Fifth, the argument from senescence: we do not get unlimited attempts at a solution to the racial justice problem. Attempted solutions burn social cohesion, and we are running out of social cohesion. Despite popular narratives, this is not primarily a problem between Conservatives and Blacks; Conservatives and Blacks mostly don't live near or exercise power over each other, so there's not all that much cause for direct, serious object-level conflict. No, the problem is between conservatives and Progressives, who are locked in a direct and extremely damaging culture war due to incompatible values...
self_made_human
amaratvaṃ prāpnuhi, athavā yatamāno mṛtyum āpnuhi
2d ago
It adds up to a whopping "I don't know" and a "I'm touched you guys think I'm the right person to ask". I'm probably better than anyone else on this site, but that really doesn't mean all that much.
The NHS, and its ERs/A&Es are a fucking mess. But if they can tell that your issues don't warrant admission, or anything more than a Tylenol and a kiss on the forehead, they might let you out early, depending on how cute you look. People come to the A&E with frivolous complaints all the time, they also come here when they're dying. It's a toss up, and I'm out for a piss-up so take my words with a grain of salt.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
2d ago
This post is very bare in substance. You haven't done much more than link a fringe blogger and write a summary of his latest post. Dread Jim is very much a Culture War figure, but you're not offering anything in the way of opinion or commentary of your own, just "Hey, look at what this guy said." What do you want to conclude from this? What sort of discussion were you aiming for?
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
2d ago
Many of the controversial positions that are now considered inside the Overton window of The Motte, such as HBD and the disaster of the sexual revolution, were first popularized through his blog.
I think you are giving him too much credit. I'd consider Vox Day more influential than Jim, and neither of them are really well-known outside the highly politicized Very Online. I am skeptical that Jim was the first to "popularize" HBD or criticism of the sexual revolution.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
So what's diagnosis, doctor? "Long wait times" makes it sound like could be fake, "documentation would take 30 minutes max, and might not even be counted" sounds like it could be plausible. What does it add up to?
In my view is that coordinating effect of Twitter trends can't be underestimated in my view. The activists lost the thumb on the algorithmic scale when Elon kicked out the activists. And the ensuing exodus of the most extreme voices the decline was cemented. They are trying to recreate the feel with bluesky and mastodon, but they can't artificially create culture war with trends with the same way anymore.
But there is another aspect to it. So if we go back to the credit crunch of 2008 and after a couple of years(2011) after was the Occupy Wall Street movement. Now not many people remember or care to know that mainstream media was making fun of the woke groups that was part of the protests. Clips are near impossible to find with google(or maybe I suck at googling). Those segments that I saw on Comedy Central was the first contact I got with woke terms. I've gotten the distinct impression that the most extreme activists derailed the whole occupy movement. And for some reason Blackrock and Vanguard started pushing ESG and most of the talking points that where made fun of became holy for the mainstream media. Strange that.
The last thing that I also think is contributing to the decline: Rob Henderson's Luxury Beliefs is really well named and that a bunch of people can't afford to hold luxury because they simply can't afford it anymore, since people can't be bullied anymore because of lack of coordination and less usage of ESG scores. Regular people speak up with less fear because of the political climate and layoffs that affect non-producing departments like HR and DEI initiatives.
self_made_human
amaratvaṃ prāpnuhi, athavā yatamāno mṛtyum āpnuhi
2d ago
Maybe @self_made_human can shed some light on what standard practices are considering that he might be a doctor at the same hospital and would at least be familiar with Scottish medical records, but assuming they're substantially similar to American records, I'm not seeing much here.
Does a bear shit in the woods? Nah, they're shitting at the same gay pub I am, at the time of writing this missive.
Anyway. The NHS:
There are places where wait times can exceed 12 hours. Up in Scotland, 4-8 is my best bet for anything we don't think is going to immediately kill you.
It really depends on the particulars. We do a lot of documentation in the NHS, my life is 90% documentation, 10% checking up on whether they're going to die before my boss talks to them. It is not impossible for someone to be swiftly dismissed if they appear grossly unharmed, but this was likely at Ninewells, the main hospital in Dundee. It has a certain reputation, I remember someone telling me that there was a period where it was without electricity for the better part of a week, let alone the abysmal wait times. But if they can triage someone as insignificant, they will. Looks great when it comes to KPIs.
Documentation would take maybe 30 minutes at worst, if it was a few scratches and the patient was young, healthy and more eager to get back home. The main delay would be egregiously long waiting times, then a quick physical and history taking. Even if the documentation was profuse, it might not be counted, as we often spend hours finish up even if the patient has, for all purposes, been discharged and told they're free to go home.
Throwaway05
2d ago
I mean soccer aka football.
Always useful to have something you can talk to patients about. It can distract them, calm them down, normalize you, establish empathy, whatever.
It can be hard to be a normal person in medicine.
VoxelVexillologist
Multidimensional Radical Centrist
2d ago
its own period of dealing with failed prophecies
I have seen a common thread on this: there are a few topics where what I consider to be "woke" types express epistemic certainty based on a tiny number of very small studies with results that sound really nice and politically convenient for partisans explaining the world, and occasional shouting down of alternate takes. For lots of these we've collectively thrown lots of effort and money at applying more broadly, but strangely have never gotten a good larger scale followup on those implementations. I personally have found it frustrating how slow we are to walk back claims that I suspect a good chunk of conservative-leaning people [1] thought were "too good to be true" all along.
Other examples [2] that come to mind (hopefully not too uncharitably phrased):
- Housing-first approaches to homelessness
- "Harm reduction" against drug addiction
- Failing inner-city schools are that way exclusively because they are under-funded
- "Poverty causes crime, and crime doesn't cause poverty"
- Fat-acceptance and body positivity
- Gender medicine, especially in children: taxpayers funded a study on the efficacy of puberty blockers that strangely hasn't been published, presumably because its conclusions aren't positive. "Trust the science", though.
- The lab leak hypothesis for COVID
- Almost all conflict globally can be mostly blamed on colonialism
- It feels to me like there is an element of ivory-tower elitism in many of these conclusions in that they feel very out-of-touch with people who have to go outside and interact with the public on a regular basis. I think this is at least an element in the ongoing political realignment.
- Just because these claims likely seem overplayed doesn't mean that the inverse claims are completely right. I think there is a bit of a short-term alliance between reactionaries that'd claim the inverse and nuance-enjoyers that I think will gradually fall apart while they're trying to govern as a coalition.
volja
new user
2d ago
It's a simple problem to reconcile if you condemn both Kneecap and Mr Linehan. Mr Linehan's first two posts are rather cruel, but ought not to be illegal. His third SHOULD be, but so should anyone calling for TERFs to be killed.
I find Linehan rather odious and dislike his views, but most of them ought not to be illegal.
self_made_human
amaratvaṃ prāpnuhi, athavā yatamāno mṛtyum āpnuhi
2d ago
Better at diagnosing CTE and concussion? I could use that.
crushedoranges
Can Marx explain the used panties market?
2d ago
I would say that Jews have bought a little too much into their own national mythology, and seeing themselves as the perpetual underdog has not prepared them to wield power. It manifests in the obviously authoritarian crackdowns in the west against anti-semeticism that even the most blind liberal has noticed. No one can honestly claim the Jews have no power in the west, and they have obvious tribal enmity with the Arabs. Is this not the prejudice and power that progressive constantly scold against?
Something something, golem...
Mantergeistmann
2d ago
I think I recall loving the movie, and then hating the final scene/ending.
Ioper
2d ago
Isn't it just a case of a preference cascade? The vast majority's opinion on woke ranged from mildly annoyed to actively hating woke stuff but falsified their opinions publicly due various well known factors. Wokeness then suffered a number of setbacks, plenty of them self inflicted, that caused annoyance to both boil over and being able to be expressed, leading to a preference cascade.
The opinions "disappeared" quickly because >90% of people never held them in the first place.
This of course doesn't mean people are rightwing, if anything redistributive policies seem more popular than ever. It's just that woke specifically was never popular on a grassroots level (perhaps outside a brief period of post Floyd hysteria).
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
2d ago
No, I don’t think he gets flagged. Again, nothing that looks bad on camera, just your standard on-field verbal stuff that goes on throughout the entire game and doesn’t get captured unless a guy is mic’d up. (And then even if he is, the team just edits the hell out of whatever audio they capture.) Unless Dak said the same thing to a ref, in which case he’d get flagged.
Mantergeistmann
2d ago
an oppressor/oppressed framework
I mean, how did people not see that "racism is power + prejudice" basically pattern-matched to bog-standard anti-semitism? Was it that they didn't want to think it might turn against Jews? That this time, it would be used righteously despite being almost word for word how anti-semites justified hating a small minority that they thought were privileged and had control? (See also: Men Kampf)
The Dreaded Jim is pretty much the most right-wing blogger on the internet. Many of the controversial positions that are now considered inside the Overton window of The Motte, such as HBD and the disaster of the sexual revolution, were first popularized through his blog.
He is legendary for his bluntness, explaining in ten words what others do in ten thousand, sort of like an anti-Moldbug. Readers who are not scared off get redpilled twice as fast as by any other source.
Jim has been doing this for a very long time; the original blog dates back to 2005, the original website to 2002 1998, and you can find mentions of his name on Usenet archives going back to the 90's.
His actual pseudonym is James A. Donald, or Jim for short, but Scott called him The Dreaded Jim once, and it stuck.
Throwaway05
2d ago
What Dak did has always been permissible under the rules, and, again, doesn’t really seem that bad or out of the ordinary. He literally just spit on the ground in the general direction of Jalen Carter;
So same stuff happens, Carter doesn't respond, a ref catches it... you don't think Dak gets flagged this game?
I absolutely think they'd throw a flag for spitting at Carter while shit talking.
We'd probably be talking about it being an overreaction, but still.
Hoffmeister25
American Bukelismo Enthusiast
2d ago
So the metagame then - if you throw the book at Carter and let Dak "get away with it" it's going to make players feel that being a dick on the field is incredibly useful, as long as they don't get caught.
I don’t think that’s the message at all. The league has had on-field shit-talk for as long as it has existed. What they can’t tolerate is overt, visible aggressive actions that can be seen on-camera. I’ve seen the argument that the league’s renewed focus on eliminating visible displays of bad sportsmanship from its TV product is part of a larger push to stop hemorrhaging trust among current parents of children. (The rising clamor over CTE has a lot of parents deeply wary of involving their boys in football; the league can’t afford to alienate them further by broadcasting their players being aggressive and unsportsmanlike toward each other.)
What Dak did has always been permissible under the rules, and, again, doesn’t really seem that bad or out of the ordinary. He literally just spit on the ground in the general direction of Jalen Carter; he’s not responsible for the fact that Carter has the emotional continence of a small child. If it’s that easy to get in Jalen Carter’s head and make him do something bad enough to get him ejected, then perhaps he’s not cut out for this league long-term.
4doorsmorewhores
2d ago
thank you 25 patrons
teleoplexy
2d ago
mocking
I mean that as non-confrontationally as possible, as good faith as possible: you might want examine your biases if you take my literal statement of
I just don’t see it, the collapse of the Western civilization, or the climate change wiping us out, or capitalism turning into “Neo-feudalism” and enslaving us all or white replacement. There are problems, but none of them induce the doom and gloom in me that ultimately summons the revolutionary zeal.
as laughing at anyone. I'm not, I'm not here on The Motte to sneer. I'm saying that I don't see those problems as world/civilization ending, something that justifies, in the words of whoever that Dread Jim guy is, killing people in droves, normies and gays, apparently including normie myself. I say in the quote above, literally, that there ARE some problems in the society.
It's the most milquetoast disagreement that I could've voiced and you treat it as mocking you (or the right in general) - this level of defensiveness is remarkable in and of itself.
Let me rephrase my point in the most productive way:
I've spent time with real-life Maoists and they speak in exactly the same language. Their in-group communication where they don't have to justify their priors to each other looks remarkably similar. "The civilization will inevitably collapse due to [insert cause], this is why we need a violent revolution now. We need to kill [these groups of people] during the revolution." Maoists, in my experience, reinforced their positions to each other and then they "go to the people" to gather ideas and refine their theories. What they often found out is that normies (like me) are resistant to them because their purported solution to the problem is violent revolution.
That's all there is to my the observation - I sincerely apologize if you find it disagreeable.
Throwaway05
2d ago
I think their is a kernel of an interesting conversation in discussing the union of impulse control, testosterone, substances of abuse (as are likely present) and how some of this may in fact be beneficial given the sport...but I don't know where to take that so I'll toss it inside.
Instead let's consider the game and metagame of this. Given that we can't take anything either of them say at face value (I assume Big Dom's hand is shoved firmly up Carter's ass and Dak is a pro at this point).
The game - I "believe" Dak probably was trying to instigate given the shit eating grin and the fact that both teams clearly came to play and were chippy as hell. But I think a reasonable person could believe Dak was doing it on purpose, and a different reasonable person could believe it wasn't deliberate.
So the metagame then - if you throw the book at Carter and let Dak "get away with it" it's going to make players feel that being a dick on the field is incredibly useful, as long as they don't get caught. That's a complete failure of the point of emphasis.
Do I think players are going to walk away believing that? Unsure. Certainly Eagles fans and anti-Cowboys fans will mostly think that.
Sidebar-
For the Eagles haters out there, this might be better for the Eagles in the long run, since it might decrease how much of a cap hit Carter causes when his big contract rolls in.
I think you know what I mean now based on your update, but early Hollow Knight was annoying-ish in the sense of "You don't get a dash or double jump for several hours." Silksong is annoying-ish in the sense of "I've died five times in a row to this gauntlet of ant mobs that take eight hits to kill each"
I do enjoy how mobile even early game Hornet is though. (Tip: Keep holding C after dashing to sprint)
More options
Context Copy link