domain:philippelemoine.com
Jiro
12hr ago
Rules are bad. They're literally symptoms of problems rather than solutions to them. You cannot fix every loophole - you can only get rid of the type of person who would exploit a loophole.
Closing loopholes affects bad actors on the margin. Yes, someone who's sufficiently determined can find loopholes in almost anything. Buit it can be easier or harder to find loopholes, and it can be easier or harder to get those loopholes past that subset of judges who are actually fair.
The second amendment has probably done quite a bit for the right to bear arms even though state and Federal government constantly finds loopholes ro work around it.
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
12hr ago
A search for all instances of "fifty stalins" prior to year 2014 shows the Slate Star Codex article (archive) as the only result.
Jiro
12hr ago
The founders did seem to think that there was a meaningful difference between Armies and Navies, naming them separately rather than some unified term and including entirely separate clauses addressing particulars of each.
Sure, but that seems to substantially agrere with the person who was using "gymnastics".
Michael responds to this post here. His reply is difficult to summarize, but if I understand it correctly, the key claim is that an independent Air Force is permissible under the text of Article I so long as the "powers" it exercises can legitimately be considered either "Army" or "Navy" powers.
If you aren't sure which one it comes under, that's different from not thinking it counts at all. It seems unlikely that the founders would think the Constitution doesn't allow for an air force at all just because you're not sure exactly which thing it's most similar to.
JulianRota
12hr ago
Along the lines of what Amadan said, I think you need to first think about what the long-term future looks like with all of the options you are considering.
Say the woman at least intends to be genuine and the baby is real and actually yours, and you actually move there and attempt to raise a family. Do you really know this woman well enough to know what a long-term relationship with her would look like, across such a huge gap in culture and wealth? I don't know what you did with her over those weeks, but did you really see her in enough situations to get a feel for who she really is? Do you speak any of the local language at all? And what of your friends and family and any career you may have here in the US (assuming you were born and raised in the US, or wherever else you're from), what will they think of you when you tell them you're moving to the Philippines to marry and raise a family with a local stripper? What if it ends up not working out and you have to move back?
Or say you go along with the idea that the kid is real and yours and you want to support it. This will be an obligation for decades, and it will almost certainly come out eventually. What if, 8 years from now, you get into a serious relationship with a regular woman in your actual home city? She will eventually find out that you're sending money to and communicating with someone in the Philippines. What will you tell her and what will she think of you as a result of that?
Or option 3, you just block and ignore her from now on and completely forget about her, possibly sending money for an alleged abortion before doing so. This option closes the door on this unfortunate situation for good. Nothing in your current life or future will be affected by it, nobody will know except your own conscience and the people of the Motte here.
When you think about it like that, I think it's clear that Option 3 is the only real choice. Does it feel a little bad? Yeah maybe. But you acted like a total douchebag travelling to the Philippines and having unprotected sex with a third-world sex worker in the first place. There's nothing to do now but complete the act and ditch her. There's no magic pill to get out of this cleanly for you. If you feel bad about it, congratulations, you've discovered that you are not actually a total douchebag. Therefore, cease doing douchebag things. It's not really that bad in the grand scheme of things - you screwed up, but you've learned some about who you are and why you should not do certain things. And yeah, 95% chance she's scamming you and the kid is fake or not actually yours, and if it's the other 5%, well she's in the business and not a little kid, she should damn well know this is a possibility by now, and if not, it's about time she learned. Either way, she already has a big family and 2 kids, she'll be okay in the long run whatever the actual deal is here.
2710, top 16%. Scored 0 on three rounds, due to
Edit: looks like the same questions when I refreshed? Put the answers in spoilers just in case.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
12hr ago
I don't think you're a horrible person. Most commenters (even the fellow who thinks basically all women are deceitful whores) are just seeing red flags waving and trying to save you from making a mistake while you are obviously emotionally invested in a way we are not.
If I were you I wouldn't worry a lot about whether her pictures sent from the hospital are "real." Consider it a bullet dodged (and consider why she'd be sending you proof that she aborted?) and move on. This isn't going to end in some happy love story. Do not try to be Captain Saveaho.
sockpuppet2
12hr ago
Did Scott coin the "50 Stalins Protest?" If not, who did? If so, what were the prior descriptions of the notion?
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
12hr ago
I'm aware of what you think of pussy-havers, but most of them don't get into the life because they just wanted a new smartphone. You can argue they could have or should have chosen some other (likely even more miserable) grind, but you don't actually need to despise them.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
12hr ago
So it’s not the philosophical tradition of equality that got us the French and American revolutions, the 14th amendment, and the suffragists, all before IQ was really conceptualized. And it’s not the specter of communism, even though it influenced plenty of other groups to try their own flavors of radical egalitarianism. Nor can it be pure guilt-by-association with the Nazis; progressives certainly wouldn’t jump the gun there. And it’s definitely, certainly nothing to do with battles fought during the Civil Rights movement, such as the only Supreme Court case most people could think of relating to IQ.
No, women hate and fear IQ because they know it proves men are superior.
Seriously?
I am not even condemning them for it; it's a survival strategy for desperately poor women who have few other options.
It's almost never merely a survival strategy nor are they that desperate.
From their perspective, converting pussy to pesos (or whatever local currency) is just a path of lesser resistance and higher ROI than grinding away at some regular day job like a chump. A newish-model smartphone, a replenishing supply of makeup, and a recurring supply of new clothes aren't going to pay for themselves—which her stupid parents and/or an ordinary boyfriend/husband are/would be too stingy or poor to provide. Scamming foreign men is the cherry-on-top, whether playing the short- or long-game, as it's easier and more profitable—and even more fun—than picking up more shifts as a bargirl or tacking on an additional side-gig at a normal day job.
WandererintheWilderness
13hr ago
It depends on specifics, but in a lot of casting-couch cases I think the actress who's been offered the deal has a credible fear of retaliation if she says no - not just that she won't get the job, but that the spited producer will pull strings to get her blacklisted and ruin her career, leaving her much worse off than one who was never offered the deal in the first place. While you can still view giving in as the morally worse option, I think even an actress who gives in to that kind of ultimatum deserves a lot more sympathy than one who tries to sleep her way to a job of her own volition, with no expectation of actively negative consequences if she doesn't.
phailyoor
13hr ago
There's nothing morally wrong with being a psychopath either but the stigma around that term isn't going away anytime soon either. Having a mental disorder may be morally neutral but the results are not for the vast majority of those afflicted, so I can't blame the public for having prejudice.
And yet lots of people keep covering such things up and not freaking out and leaking them out of moral outrage.
anti_dan
14hr ago
Yeah, I don't think that sort of thinking is held by anything close to a majority of Americans.
Most of the replies I've seen are people like you who just want to tell me what a horrible person I am
I didn't say you were a horrible person, because I never thought you were a horrible person. Naive, stubborn, sensitive, defensive, pussy-whipped, yes, but the former four traits could be a temporary status as the result of the last and not a permanent fixture of your personality.
Anyway she sent me photos of her at the hospital today, recovering from the abortion. So it wasn't a scam. (yeah yeah I hear you thinking "but what if the hospital photos were also fake!" she's not some expert photo editor or stage magician).
It's entirely possible she was at the hospital today recovering from aborting your fetus, but <Old Joe from Breaking Bad Voice>: How do you know the photo was from today? How do you know the hospital photo was from an abortion? Did you see a photo of her holding her medical records with the contents readable? Even if she was in the hospital for an abortion today, how do you know the fetus was yours? If you sent her money for the abortion or "abortion," how do you know you were the only John to do so?
Chicks in both poor and rich countries alike will reuse old photos (or videos) to invent excuses, create alibis, or provide "corroborating" evidence for themselves. This only increases for women of dubious backgrounds abroad and can include hospital photos, of which foreign chicks can have aplenty, as in many countries people use hospitals for general practice services (not only the ER/urgent/specialized care say, Americans, might associate with hospital visits).
As an example, a classic variant of the old photos scam is young women planning dates with Western (or even local) men and when the time comes, sending photos of her herself all dolled up, saying she's ready but just needs him to send money for cab fare. Where once the money is received, she'll then block him or make some excuse to flake/temporarily ghost in an attempt to keep the gravy train going. This scam can naturally be pulled with multiple men simultaneously. Albeit it's somewhat tougher for chicks to pull nowadays since genre-savvy men will say they'll just send an Uber via their credit card, but the counter-defense chicks have developed is to say they don't trust Ubers or rideshares for this or that security or some other reasons, and need cash to use a trusted personal driver.
Turns out I actually know more about my personal life than random people on the internet.
You might know more about your personal life than random people on the internet, but you may not know more about hers than random people on the internet. You may know less due to unwise inferences; this being your personal life and you being smitten with her is likely clouding your judgement. Hence the recommendation that people shouldn't represent themselves in court: "he who represents himself has a fool for a client."
It was a mistake for me to post this here, I know.
Hmm yeah, that was the biggest mistake with regard to creampie-ing and developing one-itis for a single-mother prostitute: posting about it and your e-acquaintances not being overly reassuring as to her Wonderfulness.
If you’re in California or a small handful of other states there are a few rules but otherwise it’s the Wild West. GDPR is the only real game in town in the EU. Your biggest challenges are cost and access (getting someone to sell to you is harder than closing the sale). It also really depends on what you mean by major country.
If you mean like, could China buy data on Americans from sketchy brokers and assemble it themselves? Yes almost certainly and they probably have. There is essentially no mechanism preventing them from doing so either. However, as I noted in my comment above, real-time and granular data from the biggest primary players is usually kept strictly in-house. They are also almost certainly keeping their capabilities in their pocket in case of major conflict.
In fact the CFPB was thinking about putting in nominal sale restrictions (really basic stuff) but the Trump admin tanked those plans. It’s my understanding that there are a few Executive Orders that attempt to fill the gap (eg prevent sale to China or Iran or Russia etc) but it’s unknown how much tooth or enforcement consistency they have (my guess: very little)
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
14hr ago
Congratulations, that's a nice problem to have.
There are basically 3-5 types of players of note. The government, large stack tech providers, and data brokers are the most distinct and relevant ones.
The government is extremely capable but also doesn’t usually bother to assemble its data into a full-you, longitudinal picture unless it’s motivated to do so. Theoretically that requires a warrant or a high degree of suspicion but in practice it just requires a casual interest. I think regular citizens worry far too much about this and powerful citizens worry far too little about it.
There are only about 3 players in tech with large “stacks”. Google, Meta, and Amazon/AWS. Second tier players in terms of exposure or will to track include Apple, ByteDance, and Microsoft. Any other tech company relevant for an American only matters insofar as they integrate their stuff with the final group…
The “data brokers”. These guys assemble pictures of you based on what dregs they can buy from bigger players, smaller but more comprehensive deals with single or more focused services, and occasionally supplement with data leaks even if such is technically illegal I’m pretty sure they still do.
It’s important to keep these 4 groups distinguished (there’s a major gap between the top tier of tech and the second tier). The answers and usage of the data differ a lot. To some extent the top tier hold back from their full theoretical power.
I will add that there is probably a fifth group of relevance: ISPs and cell providers. These groups are theoretically high exposure but held back due to regulation or fear of lawsuits. The government teams up with them again in cases of suspicion but otherwise doesn’t usually bother. (Banks might count as a sixth group but AFAIK they are super regulated about what they do so don’t matter)
I’d say that the exact words and recordings usually aren’t a major worry. It receives too much attention if you ask me. Your location is far from granular but big picture is likely very knowable even by smaller players. The data brokers are a bit inconsistent but potentially the biggest store of info and also the least regulated. However that inconsistency also works somewhat in your “favor” as the knowledge they get is by nature very inconsistent. You’d be surprised at how hoarding some companies are about their own data and how reluctant the biggest players are to share the Crown Jewels even if they only sorta use it themselves. Your web activity is pretty patchy because the tech evolves so fast and there’s a major wax and waning of exposure. Sometimes they can track a ton and sometimes the noise is strong and it’s hard to assemble patches of data with reliability.
And again each of the 4 nongovernmental groups get different slices of the data so unless you’re asking specifically about the top tier it really depends.
quiet_NaN
14hr ago
People are still going to call them pedos.
Then people are wrong. I discussed this before.
Let me put it more plainly and provocatively. The problem with calling a 50yo who fucks a 16yo teen in a clearly coercive setting "pedophile" is that you are equating something which is deeply morally objectionable with something which is fine.
In case there is any doubt about which is which, yes, I am claiming that there is nothing morally wrong with being a pedophile, in the technically sense of the word.
Now obviously, it is a sexual orientation which sucks greatly for anyone with a remotely working moral compass (and will lead to behavior which is very wrong for those without one), and I thank my maker that I am into women with tits instead so I have access to ethically produced porn and ethical opportunities to have sex (even if being bi would be strictly preferable in that regard).
Sure, there is a large overlap between child-fuckers and pedophiles, but my problem is with child-fuckers as child-fuckers. If some asshole decides to sexually abuse a kid, I don't give a rats ass if they were into kids or watching MILF porn at the same time to keep aroused, they should go to prison either way.
Using pedos as a synonym for child abusers is bad. Expanding it to include creepy sex pest-ry targeting underage victims is even worse. I also do not think that the general vibe of "your sexual orientation makes you the likeliest group to be deported to death camps without anyone else saying a word in your defense" is actually very effective at keeping ethical pedos (who are not complicit in sexual abuse) ethical, probably a society which was meh about ethical pedos but very much against child abusers (which mostly describes western legal systems) would offer a better gradient.
I am not much of a linguistic prescriptionist, normally. I use to beg the question correctly, but it is not a hill I am willing to die on. Still, words matter, and I think that on this forum we should strive to use accurate terminology even if 85% of the general population is using it in a more diffuse manner, especially if it involves emotionally charged words which are intentionally repurposed for clear political goals.
As another example (without a strict 1:1 correspondence), consider a (perhaps hypothetical) attempt to redefine "rape" as "any sex act perpetrated by a man which involved a woman who either did not consent or regretted consenting subsequently". (It is not entirely divorced from common usage, people have sex under the influence of voluntarily consumed drugs which would inhibit their legal ability to consent all the time, and end up in situations where they can decide on the next day that they were raped (and then decide to report it or not) or retroactively grant consent. (Perhaps not legally, but practically. Legally, "last night when I was dead drunk, I urged my hot husband to fuck my brains out and he did" might still be rape, but unless she bring that up in divorce proceedings eventually, nobody cares.)) Still, I would definitely argue against anyone here who would try to push such a new definition, because it hopelessly muddies the water by using the same term for different things which are not remotely morally equivalent.
ControlsFreak
14hr ago
There is significant interpretive difference between individual rights recognized in the Bill of Rights, due to the background of natural/retained rights tradition, as compared to enumerated, limited powers of government. In fact, much jurisprudence actually roots rights WRT television in the free speech clause. Whether or not that is accurate, and whether there should be more of a revival of the free press clause, is above my pay grade (though I have thoughts). But the entire interpretive framework is significantly different from the first step.
The founders did seem to think that there was a meaningful difference between Armies and Navies, naming them separately rather than some unified term and including entirely separate clauses addressing particulars of each. I also agree that if we called the Navy the Floating Army, it probably wouldn't turn the Navy into an Army for purposes of the Constitution. So, I guess my first question is... is the Air Force a Flying Army or a Flying Navy? Because I'm not sure which Constitutional clauses apply to it.
Those girls are damaged and they have already been steeped in a way of life that makes them cynical, mercenary, and not well suited for stable monogamous relationships. I am not even condemning them for it; it's a survival strategy for desperately poor women who have few other options.
I’m afraid I have to second this. I had a friend who married such a girl in another Asian country. He believed that she had retired and that since he was now providing for her she would not be tempted back into old habits that she clearly disliked.
It was not so. The habits of decades don’t fade so easily - she chafed at the lack of power she had as the demure receiver of her husband’s money and returned to prostitution behind his back to fund a secret drug habit and (I suspect) to get back some agency in her life. Then he lost his job and things blew up completely.
Have to agree with your conclusions, although I come at it from nearly the opposite valence. I want to own my phone on the hardware level, and NOT have it spying on me unless I choose to transmit certain info out.
I have all the extra Samsung AI features disabled on mine, and have yet to hear a single reason to turn them on.
If it is going to be spying on everything, it damn well better be able to figure out how to be a good little servant and satisfy my actual preferences.
This has been my ongoing annoyance with targeted advertising. I should never, ever be exposed to a digital ad that isn't at least somewhat enticing to me, or at least feels relevant to my interests. Yet 99% of the time, I'm simply nonplussed by the offerings that actual get served. Oh, I can see that they're taking educated guesses, they're not completely winging it, but whatever 'consumer profile' or equivalent they've got of me is laughably off base. I could see a me that was shorter on willpower and maybe 15-20 IQ points lower might be engaged with it.
Full disclosure though, I've also used the Firefox browser the entire time I've been on the internet, and I adblock every website by default, so it is just possible they can't get a good read on me.
After decades of data gathering, they aren't any better at predicting my preferences DESPITE ME BEING VERY CONSCIENTIOUS when feeding my preferences to them!
My end thought is "Look guys, if you want my hard-earned money you have to at least display things that are genuinely appealing at a price point I would be willing to consider. Otherwise, maybe leave me be." I can figure out what I want and how to buy it just fine on my own!
And that's kind of the meta-issue with AI products and their integration. "If you want me to opt-in to your digital surveillance panopticon, SHOW ME HOW IT WILL IMPROVE MY LIFE FROM BASELINE, I don't want parlor tricks and corporate marketing jargon, I want tangible improvements in the metrics that I care about with regards to my life quality. If you can't figure out how to do that, I literally do not trust you to run this system wisely."
EDIT: Although, I am waiting in trepidation/excitement for the day I log into one of my accounts and have a conversation with the AI and it becomes clear that the robot has me 100% pegged, it knows precisely what I want and it can offer a plausible plan on how to get those things/give them to me, and demonstrated capacity to assist in that goal. Then, I like to think that I'll have the willpower to put it down and think things over, and try to maintain enough sense of self that I do not just immediately empty my wallet and tell it to do whatever it takes to make my dreams come true.
Amadan
Enjoying my short-lived victory
15hr ago
The Hundred Years' War on Palestine, by Rashid Khalidi.
Unapologetic Palestinian perspective. Khalidi is highly educated and Westernized, so occasionally makes some obligatory noises about how terrorism is bad and it's unfortunate that Israeli civilians have been killed, but this is pretty clearly performative throat-clearing before getting into how everything is always Israel's fault (or the US's). That said, makes a good case for where Israel has gone wrong (and admits some of the areas where the Palestinians have). It won't change any minds but if you want the best-articulated Palestinian perspective you can get without academic faffing about "subaltern identities" and "Zionist colonial-settler projects" (e.g., Nur Masalha and Edward Said) this is probably it.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
15hr ago
Texans and Coloradans are annoyed by the influx of Commiefornians, is there a part of the country that actually likes its neighbors? Haha
Recently finished Rejection by Tony Tulathimutte after seeing it mentioned here. Good fun, entertaining.
Now reading Orwell's Down and Out in Paris and London. So far it's stuck to interesting reportage and avoided the Road To Wigan Pier trap of segueing into lengthy political rhetoric.
More options
Context Copy link