domain:streamable.com
Well, then I guess you sure know how to pick 'em.
I think it might be an age thing. I've had friends complain about this but it almost always involved women in their 20s. I haven't dated anyone under the age of 30 on it and, while I have had cancellations, they always rescheduled and the date went off. In fact, there was only one that was truly last minute, and she rescheduled immediately. One thing I will say is that I have done the slow walk thing if it's a girl farther down on my list; i.e., if I'm talking to two girls and I'm more into one than the other, I'll wait until I have a date set up with #1 before scheduling with #2 to ensure maximum schedule flexibility, and it may involve my delaying a response, but it isn't the kind of thing that I'm too worried about. And even if they are always cancelling, these aren't people you'd even be talking to if you were just relying on meeting people in the wild, so there's that.
The protestors were objectively correct about basically everything they said
Yes, but no. The protestors (not each of them personally, but in general the movement) was part of the reason why US lost this war. And if US didn't lose the war, Vietnam could be what South Korea is now. Which is better than what it is now. So is the lost war "worth it"? Probably not, that's why it's called a lost one. But if you approach every war with the premise that you may lose and therefore you can't fight, then you lose all the wars in advance. And one of the reasons that Vietnam is now quasi-capitalist is because the US did not lose some other wars, including winning the main one - the Cold War. Did Vietnam war make the world better? No, it did not, because the good guys lost. If they didn't, it would. That happened in other places where the good guys didn't lose.
compared to a counterfactual in which the United States simply let North Vietnam reunite with the South without outside interference
In that counterfactual the US stops fighting the Cold War, USSR still exists now, owns major parts of the world, and half of the US is thinking when we stop being so stupid and join the societal model that is clearly winning, namely socialism. I don't think it's a good future to be in. Yes, losing a war sucks. But losing all wars in advance would suck much more.
Okay, fair enough.
EU wouldn't be much of a problem. If they are in Harvard inventing cool shit, the profits from it sponsor the wokes in Harvard. The cool shit probably would make my life better, but the wokes would make it worse. If they move to EU and keep inventing the cool shit, I'd likely benefit from it no less - maybe I'd pay a bit more because tariffs or get it a little later, but on the bottom line it wouldn't make me substantially worse, as I don't get direct profit from Harvard owning cool shit and indirect profits are nearly the same. On the other hand, all the wokeness will be then concentrated in EU, and it hardly can be worse there already, so to be honest, I don't see much downside. Of course, it would be cool if I could get the benefits without the wokeness at all, but I'm not sure how to achieve that option.
My hypothesis is that I thought everything would be fairly smooth sailing from here on out, and I’m starting to have paranoid jags that it might not.
no university has a department of data fabrication.
You don't need a department of data fabrication to fabricate data, just as you don't need a "department of antisemitism" to be antisemitic. It happens naturally as a product of incentives and cultural trends. There's enough horrible studies, especially in woke "sciences" (though reality-based ones are in no way exempt also). I haven't tracked how Columbia specifically performs on this, but there's no reason why they in particular would be an outlier.
I’m more sanguine about this stuff now, and not because it’s wrong. It’s because there are essentially an infinity of ways for super intelligent ASI to wipe out the human race - these are just the ways we can think of, and it’s going to be much smarter than us. If it happens, it’ll happen anyway, any safeguards will be redundant. It’s like trusting a bear with the possibility space for killing a fox or something - it can come up with a method (and a feasible one), but it’s one of a thousand ways a smart human could come up with.
Have you seen this?
This appears to be a full music video done entirely with AI; that's my guess, anyhow. The quality is remarkable; obviously the format plays to AI's strengths, but what they have here looks to me to rival a professional production with a serious budget, and I'm pretty confident they got it in one and possibly two orders of magnitude less time and money than it'd have taken for a conventional production.
We ask that top-level posts have a little more substance. Who is this? What’s it got to do with the price of tea in China?
I can usually see everything from Japan fwiw
Reddit accounts are 1) worth money, technically but 2) are occasionally useful for when you need to post in a community that requires a higher reputation. So I'd keep it. For example, I've used /r/hardwareswap before, which seemed easier to me than doing eBay. If that's like what you're describing, where your name shows up in DM's, I don't see any reason to panic unless you're a major political figure or something.
Post about specific groups, not general groups, whenever possible.
Calling out the general category of government employees does not clear that bar.
I suspect their ethnicity has something to do with it.
So what was the idea driving Tesla Guy?
feels a bit like trying to make sense of insanity
Pretty much, yeah. I think suicide bombers nearly always are, and have been, nuts. If there’s a trend, I don’t see it.
I don't think there is going to be civil war. If the USA collapses it will be in a surprising way. Just a hunch. I doubt that you will even get to anarcho tyranny during Trump years.
I think it's more the case that psychology has strayed from some of the more helpful and direct aspects into softer and less effective techniques, that sound more short-term palatable and reasonable. I think CBT is a central case. Have you ever read the book that kick-started basically the whole movement? It's Feeling Good by David Burns. Actually, such an interesting book. The main thesis is that you should get in the ingrained habit of mentally "talking back" to yourself. Not necessarily belligerently, often compassionately, but still firmly. And without drugs. You can see where some of the modern therapy-talk comes from, but at the same time, it's almost unrecognizable! I should write a main post about it sometime.
He does things like having you write out a cost-benefit analysis for being angry. He writes out some extensive role-plays where one person aggressively challenges the other. He has you literally write down on paper thoughts and then deliberately re-phrase them, like a kind of self-brainwashing. Or, in other cases, to write down your predictions The emphasis is that theoretically, you get enough tools that you can go without therapy indefinitely. You should "get better" and not just "feel better" (I should note that the book's focus is most focused on depression and related symptoms, not trauma or anything like that). There's a nice little table at one point of 10 (really 11) specific "cognitive distortions" that are seen as the source of "many if not all of your depressed states" (page 42 on my copy, which I dug out of storage). They are: all or nothing thinking, overgeneralization, mental filters, disqualifying the positive, jumping to conclusions (mind reading and the fortune teller error), magnification/catastrophizing or minimization, emotional reasoning, should statements, labeling and mislabeling, and personalization. The underlying thesis is that if you are unhappy, it is because you have some maladaptive or frankly incorrect ideas in your head that are too extreme and don't match reality. By becoming a more rational observer of yourself, you can have realistic standards and cope better with extenuating circumstances. In this way, it's almost explicitly anti-narcissist. It also straight up rejects the notion that your emotions are a reliable guide. That is to say, emotions alone have a feedback loop with thoughts and do not exist purely independently. And one of your "demons" is the self-critic, to which you respond with talk-back, along with some evidence (putting pen to paper and even "testing" some of your assertions).
I'm leafing through this book again and it's so interesting that he actually has criticism of what were then practices of the time, that you still see now, despite CBT allegedly becoming the go-to method. There's this passage about how "emotional ventilation for its own sake is usually not enough", where he talks about a writer who "learned" from her prior therapist that she's perfectionist, that she picked up from her mother, and could never please her mother, and the therapist said to stop it, but she doesn't know how, mechanically, despite this knowledge. He goes on to criticize the industry for overfocusing on "ventilation of emotions and insight" and under-emphasizing actual tools and techniques. Anecdotally, I will also say that it was pretty rare across several therapists I myself went to for them to ever assign meaningful homework, much less follow up. Ironically, including the one who recommended the book, which therapist didn't even bother to take notes (and clearly didn't take them afterwards because he would rarely remember what we previously discussed). I thus wonder if it's not as much the exploration of feelings that's the problem so much as stopping halfway and stopping there, instead of viewing feeling-exploration as a means to an end.
If there's a harvesting effect, it has not shown up. The crude death rate just returned (roughly) to pre-COVID trend in 2023. It is possible COVID has added permanently to disease burden.
Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification
It's an interesting day when the lookup for a university-oriented program takes you to an ICE website.
Certification is the process schools go through to receive authorization from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to enroll F and/or M nonimmigrants. Within U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), SEVP reviews schools that desire to enroll nonimmigrant students to determine denial or approval of certification.
From a guardian article elaborating the letter-
“The revocation of your Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification means that Harvard is prohibited from having any aliens on F- or J-nonimmigrant status for the 2025-2026 academic school year. This decertification also means that existing aliens on F- or J- nonimmigrant status must transfer to another university in order to maintain their nonimmigrant status,” Noem continued.
Meanwhile, Harvard graduation occurs... a week from today, on 29 May.
My sympathies to foreign students at Harvard thrown into uncertainty by this.
It will, however, be interesting to see how Harvard's position changes. I imagine a court case is imminent. I doubt it will resolve things.
What intelligence did the Germans have and bury? I see the BND performed a 2020 analysis that came to pro-lab-leak conclusions only and got revealed in 2025, but (at least at the "why do we trust reporters with the first draft of history, exactly?" level of perfunctory research) I'm not seeing that their analysis was founded on any information that only they knew.
Nor do I see what their motive for a coverup would be. They were contemptuous of and butting heads with President Trump, and their most recent big interaction with China was signing on to a condemnation of the treatment of the Uyghurs. I can see why some people in China and the US might want a coverup, but it's hard to see how a revelation of "A Chinese lab working with Americans leaked the pandemic" would cause German intelligence any suffering worse than an overdose of schadenfreude. Does the German secret service publish many of their analyses openly, such that this one was an exception?
Your hypothesis is that we were close to civil war in the late 60s/early 70s? Disagree. Most young people weren’t hippies, let alone militant radicals. In the book Days of Rage it’s noted most NYers regarded the large number of bombings of mostly empty buildings as nuisances. The crazies can’t do it on their own.
I think Real™ Civil War is very unlikely from the civilian Left. Currently the Left's martial spirit, prowess, and capability are severely lacking. They have such little force projection that even terrorism would likely be kept within Democrat strongholds.
I mean although this kind of violence is infamously contagious and prone to copy-cats, the optics here are pretty uniquely terrible. Not that it usually matters for terrorists that their actions frequently are counter-productive. The museum is already left-aligned in several ways (the website has a Native American land acknowledgement and an Equity and Justice statement about BIPOC people, hosts "LGBTJews" events, etc.), the man wasn't even Jewish he was a Christian although both were still Israeli embassy staff, and the couple was young and photogenic, famously about to get engaged within a week or two.
I don't see how this changes anything about partisan violence levels.
If the name had developed organically in the media or whatever and pedantic doctors had insisted calling it by a name that no one was using, I could see the argument. But OP was saying that this name that nobody was using should have been the preferred nomenclature. And while it would hardly be the worst name, given the severity of the disease, it could have led to some bad outcomes caused by people thinking that it could be prevented by a flu shot, or treated with existing antiviral medication.
More options
Context Copy link