domain:youtu.be
netstack
Texas is freedom land
6hr ago
I would hesitate to use targeted advertising as evidence for any particular trend.
Does Mr. Boyle have some special insight into the art world?
ToaKraka
Dislikes you
6hr ago
anti_dan
7hr ago
How would you explain to an autistic teenage boy the differences between boy people and girl people? In a way that provides useful guidance and doesn't make T seem like a normal thing for any boy who isn't obsessed with sports? In a way that let's them successfully navigate the differences?
Well, #1 I'd make him do some sports. That's the easiest way for any teen to get on the path of appreciating the differences between men and woman. That girl who was good at tag? Guess what, when you both at 15 shes no good anymore. Even the slow boys are beating her. And physical activities involving even a modicum of contact like basketball? Forget it. Its not just that she can barely jump by comparison, its that any man that does even a little physical activity can just move her. And, its actually scary in many ways, because you will be afraid that you are going to break her. Which you could easily do on accident.
Eupraxia
Shut up and quantify
7hr ago
…Where are you getting your numbers from? I simply cannot believe that support for criminalization of homosexuality approaches 1 in 5, let alone support for construction crane conversion therapy. By my observation, the anti-LGBT crowd generally don’t desire to go on the offensive, they just want to be left alone.
self_made_human
C'est la vie
7hr ago
I fed your comment into Gemini 2.5 Pro, and it came up with an incredibly insightful answer meant to be shared with these supposedly struggling men. Unfortunately, the majority opinion here frowns on reproducing AI output, so I'll be uncharacteristically catty and keep it to myself. Anyone curious can copy and paste for the same result, I'd presume.
self_made_human
C'est la vie
7hr ago
Alongside a re-read of Reverend Insanity, at o3's suggestion, I'm halfway through The Outside by Ada Hoffman.
The core conceit of the novel should be like crack to me. AI Gods? Said Gods fighting against eldritch abominations? Sign me the fuck up, I had independently considered writing my own novel along those lines before finding this one.
Unfortunately, the real deal is incredibly mid. The protagonist is a capital-A Autistic genius woman, written by an autistic female author, who hasn't heard of "show, don't tell".
If I have to read another line about her sensory issues and inability to function in normal or posthuman society, I'll lose it.
Beyond that, the pace is achingly slow, and the prose not very tight for the most part.
I'd call it a 6/10 novel, barely worth reading. I'm just out of the kind of hard scifi I normally enjoy, they just don't write those fast enough.
Grant_us_eyes
7hr ago
I was about to say that I've never used AI, but then I realized that would be a lie - I've used AI before to put together a long string of fluffy bullshit for work in order to save myself the aggravation of putting together said fluffy bullshit.
...and I will likely use it again this week to, yet again, put together a few paragraphs of fluffy bullshit to appease the MBA types in my office.
netstack
Texas is freedom land
7hr ago
Anyone know any games, roleplaying or otherwise, which end up encouraging real/historical tactics? Or generalize those tactics to the magic or tech or whatever makes the setting unique.
I was playing D:OS2 this weekend and found myself thinking, "wow, all these spear-wielding magisters have zero incentive to form up and fight in ranks." It's a chaotic free-for-all.
Quantumfreakonomics
7hr ago
I'm currently reading a deposition where the head of safety at the facility freely admitted that he had never actually looked at 29 CFR 1910.119.
I also really appreciate the one victim's mother who hired her own lawyer seperate from the ones representing the other plaintiffs just so he could ask if they knew that one victim in particular and to berate them especially hard for their failures.
sockpuppet2
7hr ago
When the FTX thing happened recently and people argued about consequentialist justifications for lying, I realised Scotts theory of categories literally cant tell the difference between the truth and the highest-utility-thing-to-say.
How is that supported by anything Scott has written? My interpretation is "categories are an example of 'all models are wrong, but some models are useful' and [I can't remember if this is in that specific essay, but it doesn't really matter] reaching a shared vocabulary for categories is a coordination problem." Scott knows what noble lies are and has written about them:
What if all this stuff about sexism driving away women is all a big hoax? And so after we make women feel safer, stamp out prejudice, enforce common decency, and encourage everyone to treat each other with compassion – darn it, we created a better world for nothing! If the goal is “eliminate malignant sexism” – and surely it should be – why be so upset about one argument for eliminating malignant sexism which might not be entirely accurate?
First, because I’m a heartless thing-oriented systematizer, and I despise bad arguments on principle, and I don’t care if you people-oriented empathizers think they serve a prosocial community-building function.
But second, because this gives fuzzy-empathizing-humanities types a giant hammer with which to beat all sciency-systematizing-utilitarian types forever.
(Don't be shocked that this does not become a call for consequentialists to use noble lies.)
Glad you liked it. Simak was so far ahead of his time. Particularly the part where
A few years ago I was up in Seattle on business and found a first edition in fantastic shape at Twice Sold Tales. Very happy with it.
Meanwhile I'm on book 2 of 12 Miles Below. So far it feels not quite as good as the first but definitely willing to give it time. Thanks again for the rec.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν
7hr ago
First, police stations are state property. They are of a lesser legal status than federal property when it comes to crimes against them, is my understanding.
Furthermore you've got specific laws against obstruction of Congressional proceedings, and threatening officials. Not sure if the J6 people were charged with those in particular.
Either way the major argument I'm making is more symbolic - I think the legal points are relevant but not going to fight to defend them if it's not the case.
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν
7hr ago
So you're just going to say it's obvious and not actually explain why? Come on.
Is it mere geographic proximity? Are you saying one is more likely to work? What?
The symbolic and indeed legal status of say, Pittsburgh downtown versus the Capitol of the United States are indeed quite different, and I do think it's obviously true. There are specific laws about threatening Congress, crimes on federal land, etc. Even if there weren't, the implicit statement the rioters are making is vastly different. One is random wanton destruction, one is destruction aimed specifically at the ruling body of a nation.
I could understand if congressmen were assaulted. Hell, going to people's homes might actually be an escalation. But it's just rioting on some official building we're talking about.
Congressmen were in the building that was raided. That counts as attempted assault at least, in my book. If the rioters had gotten to the elected officials, I don't doubt there would've been some violence.
All I see is people with no power breaking things to make themselves look more intimidating than they actually are. I think your degrees are more aligned to the targets of the intimidation or the symbolism thereof than its actual severity or destabilizing effect.
Not sure what you're saying here. I agree that rioters with no power are breaking things - I see it more as a sort of mob pressure release rather than an actual plan to become intimidating, but don't think that is a big deal.
What do you mean my degrees are more aligned to the targets? Are you saying the BLM riots were more severe and destabilizing than J6?
ThomasdelVasto
Κύριε Ἰησοῦ Χριστέ, Υἱέ τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἐλέησόν με τὸν ἁμαρτωλόν
7hr ago
Violence committed on federal property is a bigger issue. Violence or threats of violence against Congress is a bigger issue than property destruction, legally.
gattsuru
7hr ago
CSB reports are pretty fun, if morbid reads, especially since they're a lot more willing to point fingers (contrast NTSB).
I will caution that they tend to put a pretty heavy thumb on the scales to favor as wide-ranging a possible conclusion as available from the evidence: even their own videos make it sound more like BP (or Amaco's) process engineering played a much bigger role than the page count would. The report notes that there were previous incidents involving the blowdown system, but most of these were from before the 2004 budget cuts, and some were from before the merger. Counterfactuals are hard, but with that bad a process design, and that level of normalization of deviance, I'm not sure better trained or less tired staff would have done much more than changed the body count for whatever inevitable incident happened.
hydroacetylene
8hr ago
I haven’t and I don’t know what I would use it for.
hydroacetylene
8hr ago
It falls in the same category of ‘not something they can do much about’ as housing wealth.
ChickenOverlord
8hr ago
Heck if anything I've always considered Freddy Got Fingered to be a Gen X comedy. The movie came out in 2001 when the oldest millennials would have only been 20 and Tom Green himself is Gen X.
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
8hr ago
I’m not entirely convinced that anyone can know the internal experience of any group that you are not a member of. You can approximate, sure, but my question to anyone claiming to be having the internal experience of being the opposite sex is “what does being that gender feel like exactly?” Like, im a woman and im not sure I could explain the feeling of femaleness to another person. And I’m certain I could never understand the internal experience of maleness. I could approximate, but my thought of what maleness feels like (interest in competition, visual based sexuality, practicality, and disinterest in arts) would likely offend males much like any other stereotype even if true in other areas.
So I am a little confused what you actually want if it's not "Assume everyone is in defect mode and loot what we can.
I am rejecting the Russell's Conjugation of "My entitlement spending is investing in the future of the American people, your entitlement spending is defection and looting." Notably, I'm rejecting it both ways, and precommitting to accept whichever half you or others prefer. If you believe that Entitlement/Defense spending has heretofore been defection and looting, than I am willing to agree that I am endorsing defection and looting of the exact sort that has been the bipartisan norm for my entire life. If you believe Entitlement/Defense spending has heretofore been investment in the future of the American people, then I agree that I am endorsing that my party should make such investments also. In neither case do I believe my faction should act unilaterally as the "adult in the room" who imposes hard-nosed, unpopular restraint on spending. The purse is common. Its benefits and costs should be common as well.
This is prompted by repeated claims here by a number of posters that MAGA should disapprove of Trump due to his fiscal irresponsibility and the fact that his budget bill results in considerable deficit spending. I understand that the Republican Party has previous held opposition to deficit spending as a shibboleth. The Republican Party has also held foreign interventionism as a shibboleth. Things change, and it seems to me that this change is preferable to the alternatives.
JarJarJedi
8hr ago
I feel like I am being gaslit.
You are. It's not a theory, conspiracy or otherwise. It's not a political argument. It's the reality. There's a war going on - an informational war. The one side is the governments, the deep state (of any nation), the "elites", the press, the academia, the entertainment complex, the "opinion makers", the "fact checkers", all that crowd. On the other side, there are people who want to take informed decisions by themselves, based on their own values, desired and goals. They former do not want to allow the latter to do that. For their own good, of course, because they consider themselves smarter, more educated, more moral, more progressive, more... everything good, so it's only natural that they would take the decision making power from the rubes. This is what you are witnessing. It's for your own good. If you disagree, well, welcome to the other side.
Bartender_Venator
8hr ago
trans women in women's sports, endorsing childhood intervention or nearly any other culture war hot point
Yep that's the bailey. I'm not trying to speak for the other poster, and it's not my position, but it seems reasonable to me that people who believe the motte but not the bailey can still pick their side based on whether they think it's more important to avoid being caught out in the bailey, or whether defending the motte from people who are 100% anti-trans is still worth it.
I made my response multiple choice. Pick as you please:
A) Magic. The gathering, I mean. The cards speak to me in tongues man has forgotten - but our genes remember. And my neighbour Gene is happy to translate for me.
B) Because human perception of time is linear so things aren't ruined until they are?
C) Are you hoping that disproving my jovial rebuttal of the 'gaslighting kids is funny' argument will convince me transing kids is a good idea? Because it won't.
D) All of the above.
More options
Context Copy link