site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 451 results for

domain:shapesinthefog.substack.com

I hate to say it but I just disagree, and I say this as a big fan of JJs who will never turn one away.

I had the privilege of nerding out for an hour and a half with a dude driving a 720s whose vanity plate read frkyfst Both places use the same suppliers for meat, but the cuts are thicker at JJs, along with those for veggies. Their misfire on a bread redux, along with them now being on version 3 of the sublime kickin' ranch shows how much jacking of the formula the PE firm has been doing. The new toasted subs are absolutely hot garbage and destroy crew throughput. I have appreciated one or two of the LTOs though.

In comparison, I've found the bread at JMs to be more consistent and the veggies more generous. I have to beg the guys on the line at JJs to give me a reasonable number of tomatoes.

Okay, you did not say that one can thus safely disregard opinions publicized for ulterior motives. I am sorry for for misrepresenting your views.

You did claim though that Aella decided to blog on substack with the motive to promote her OF.

I am arguing that saying "Aella performs on OF, therefore every decision she makes is with her subscriber number in mind" is overly reductionist. You might as well say "@quiet_NaN is a man (true), so he wants to get laid (probably also true). Him writing this post is obviously an attempt to gain status on The Motte to boost his attractiveness (false as far as I can tell)."

If getting people to subscribe to her on OF (rather than substack) was her motive, then she is not doing a very good job of streamlining the process. In her non-paywalled substack, she does not even mention that she is on OF, per a quick web search. But you can figure it out easily enough:

  • first you have to click on her profile, which will take you to https://substack.com/@aella
  • then, you click on the link which will take you to https://knowingless.com/
  • then ignore all the links on the side sending you to twitter, discord, surveys and so forth and click "about"
  • then click on the fifth link on that page, with the text "became one of the top Onlyfans earners until my attention span ran out"
  • then click on the fifth link on the article from 2020
  • voila, you are at her OF page (the link to her free/preview OF page is also in the article)

Not really - the point is that if you don't want to have children, unless you are actually a practicing and believing Catholic (o/e) there is no reason at all to use 'natural' family planning. It is currently low-status, but it's also worse than the alternatives - not that those two are necessarily connected, but they are both true. Using your 'conceptional' decisions as a means of reacting against the aesthetics of the modern world is very silly indeed.

It's been a pretty short time since the buyout relatively speaking, but that's a bummer.

For anyone with the app, I believe the code jmmissesyou is an evergreen code for $2 off a regular.

Recently watched a video...

I wonder how much you could condition yourself against abrasion. I know people can run on gravel at least.

If it was 2 v. 2 I'd prefer some kind of tag-team format, since actual two v. twos inevitably turn into 1 v. 2s, which always end badly for the one.

I did mean to see the dynamics defending multiple directions. Just make it so the team loses with the first knockout/tap.

I think the idea of pregnancy "really fucking up" one's life is more for when your daughter is 16-22. Starting a family at 25 sounds like an okay recipe for success, but the person in the article was not pregnant.

This means default to no for gun acquisition for people in those categories. People deserve rights including the right not to be limited in their behavior when possible, however other individuals deserve the right to be free of molestation and incidents of bad behavior skyrocket once you look at the pot of the population that are felons or involuntarily committed.

Once you start doing balancing tests like this -- "What's the potential of harm if we let the applicant have a gun" -- you're not really talking about a right.

Felony and involuntary committment are quite different. Felony conviction is a judicial and adversarial process, and pretty damned heavyweight. Involuntary commitment can happen on the word of a cop and a doctor, or sometimes a family member and a doctor. No hearing, no advocate against commitment for the patient. Taking away someone's rights for involuntary commitment isn't anything like taking them away for felony conviction; it's like taking them away for any arrest.

(and of course NJ makes voluntary commitment, by which they mean any treatment in a psychiatric facility, and also involuntary outpatient treatment, a permanent bar to gun ownership)

it's not at all mainstream opinion

Being very critical of Obama wasn't mainstream among Democrats, but obviously being critical of your own sitting President is generally unheard of these days. How many mainstream Republicans criticised GWB? Left and right factions of the Democrats criticised Obama to what I would consider a normal degree for a sitting President - there were Blue dogs who attacked him semi-regularly and some progressives who did the same.

That most obvious bellwether of mainstream liberal opinion, the New York Times wrote an endorsement for re-election in 2012 that was very enthusiastic, yes, but very conventional and offered such qualifications as

We have criticized individual policy choices that Mr. Obama has made over the last four years, and have been impatient with his unwillingness to throw himself into the political fight

Elsewhere, the NYT editorial board was sharply critical of Obama on all sorts of issues all the time. There are too many to list here but here are a few from various points in his Presidency:


Deepwater Horizon:

But a year and a half into this presidency, the contemplative nature that was so appealing in a candidate can seem indecisive in a president. His promise of bipartisanship seems naïve. His inclination to hold back, then ride to the rescue, has sometimes made problems worse.

It certainly should not have taken days for Mr. Obama to get publicly involved in the oil spill, or even longer for his administration to start putting the heat on BP for its inadequate response and failure to inform the public about the size of the spill. (Each day, it seems, brings new revelations about the scope of the disaster.) It took too long for Mr. Obama to say that the Coast Guard and not BP was in charge of operations in the gulf and it’s still not clear that is true.

He should not have hesitated to suspend the expanded oil drilling program and he should have moved a lot faster to begin political and criminal investigations of the spill. If BP was withholding information, failing to cooperate or not providing the ships needed to process the oil now flowing to the surface, he should have told the American people and the world

Libya:

Mr. Obama made the wrong choice, trying to evade his responsibility under the 1973 War Powers Act to seek Congressional authorization within 60 days of introducing armed forces into "hostilities" -- or terminate the operation. The White House claimed that the Pentagon's limited operations are not the sort of "hostilities" covered by the act. It is not credible.

NSA:

Within hours of the disclosure that federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.

2011 Budget:

What Mr. Obama’s budget is most definitely not is a blueprint for dealing with the real long-term problems that feed the budget deficit: rising health care costs, an aging population and a refusal by lawmakers to face the inescapable need to raise taxes at some point. Rather, it defers those critical issues

Privacy Bill:

The draft bill released by the White House on Friday only vaguely reflects those ideas and is riddled with loopholes. It seems tailored to benefit Internet firms like Google and Facebook and little-known data brokers like Acxiom that have amassed detailed profiles of individuals. For good reason, many privacy groups and some Democratic lawmakers have criticized the draft.


there are entire Reddit communities devoted to conspiracies about 2024, you know

I can't quite tell if you're joking. On the one hand, we have the sitting President of the United States alleging that millions of votes were cast fraudulently. On the other, we have "Reddit communities". I wonder, might there be a slight asymmetry between these two things?

Indeed, J6 was actually uniquely acceptable compared to other protests, given it actually directed itself against the ruling elites

This is such a strange rendering of the riot in abstract terms. Indeed it was directed against ruling elites, but unfortunately in this case those elites were democratically elected representatives of the people certifying a fair election, and the rioters were targeting them because the process had failed their cult leader. Good job for those J6ers that the same election riggers who had the power to magically turn the result against Trump didn't show up for 2024 (or 2016), I suppose. Perhaps they overslept.

Presumably because she is being "low-class"

These committment laws are all much later than the founding; there was not an analogous restriction at the founding. There were restrictions for crime, but no one has demonstrated crime.

This is a meme that goes all the way back to the 17th century.

I think it was Cervantes who quipped about how "In her eagerness, a new wife may accomplish in 6 months whar would ordinarily take a woman 9" 😉

Arthur, heir to the throne, Henry's elder brother and Catherine's husband, was married at the age of fifteen and died six months later of (presumed to be) the sweating sickness. There are allegations that he had been growing weaker and more sickly since the wedding in the period leading up to his death. Doubts about the consummation of the marriage are therefore not unreasonable.

That is a fair point.

It was Henry VIII who later had the scruples about "oh I must have inadvertently married my brother's widow, which is incest, and the Old Testament says God punishes that, this is why I have no living male heirs and must annul this illegal marriage so I can marry my current mistress", and put the pressure on the pope of the time to do so.

Well, yeah. It was a misreading of Leviticus – if it were correct then levirate marriage, commanded to Jews in the same book, would make no sense. But it was a misreading that underlay canon law. And you can see why the issue would obsess him.

You can believe she was lying because she was a jealous, spiteful woman...

She'd certainly have understandable reasons for jealousy. And if she had originally felt that lying was a minor offense made as much for Henry's sake as for hers, it wouldn't be at all shocking if she refused to come clean so that he could look justified in betraying her.

using a less-effective, lower-class method

...aaand the penny drops. That's what this is actually about isn't it? Class. You see the sexually liberated, zero responcibilty, girlbosses as exemplified by Gossip Girls and Sex and the City as aspirational and high class, and it's bothering you that others disagree.

This is perhaps analogous in some ways to AGPs and transwomen more generally who are bullied or ostracized for femininity and come to believe that they really are a sissy loser who can't be a man and might as well embrace the only gendered path that seems possible for them.

I don't think this is actually the correct reading of AGPs. Is there actually any reason to think that AGPs are more feminine than baseline?

There are other reasons to be skeptical of mRNA vaccines. Reasons that happen to be particularly relevant given the subject of the OP.

I like this model for some things but I actually think bimbofication is a different pathway. The appeal is silencing neuroticism. It's ignorance is bliss and fetishizing not just a lack but a total incapacity for responsibility. Same reason a lot of this stuff is involuntary. Lots of people feel responsibility as an unbearable burden. But maybe you're wrapping all that into the sub role.

I heard the criticism that Kurosawa was himself just copying foreigners and too western, true traditional japanese cinema would be three frames per hour of a tea ceremony.

had long known of the Reddit midwit, clickbait anti-American, hipster propaganda factoid that Sergio Leone's seminal A Fistful of Dollars

I mean, Leone is italian. It’s kind of amazing that europeans took a quintessentially american genre and produced a slew of parody-homage-knockoffs that were, for my cheap european money, better than the real thing.

Ultimately, the original inventor does not matter as much as the quality of the end product. It’s the Tarantino Versus Welles dichotomy. Tarantino may just be recycling old B-movies: but they were mediocre, while his are eminently watchable. Orson Welles gets a lot of credit for innovative techniques, but his movies aren’t compelling. I'm sorry, The Third Man is objectively a better movie than Citizen Kane, history of cinema be damned.

Following the discussion of work vans vs trucks in the US, here's an article about Nissan's attempt to sell a more truck-like van design in the US market: https://www.theautopian.com/nissan-once-tried-to-beat-the-big-three-at-building-a-better-work-van-only-to-fail-dramatically/

Some helpful perspectives in the comments.

The core issue here is that 40 years ago is a long time and there should probably be some automatic statute of limitations for psychiatric stays to fall off your record.

It's a state thing, so it varies, but my understanding is that restriction periods being in some proportion to the burden of compelling a given treatment is the norm. On federal forms, the question about mental health/competence has wording along the lines of "have you ever been evaluated..." but includes an asterisk clarifying that the correct answer is actually your current status, according to the state's laws.

I think your objection may be conflating two or three issues - lack of clarity over the standard that should or was used, the connection between that standard and 2A rights, and @Rov_Scam's comment about problems with his claim the record should be expunged. It's bad that court processes can be abused to deny someone their 2A rights, but the states have other reasons for wanting this information, so the state putting the burden on the individual to get the record expunged and erring on the side of retained records makes sense. (Note: I'm not endorsing a policy of such, merely noting it's rational.) Either way, the 2A implication is incidental to the state standards, even if one is incredulous that procedures won't be abused. The comment about the problems with this specific claim would equally apply, had there been no 2A implication. It's easy to imagine a quasi-mirror scenario with 8A and a convict failing to get mental health records considered in their sentencing.

It isn't great - and I'm a very strong 2A advocate, but when you see the circumstances that result in admission you realize almost nobody who has been involuntarily should be allowed near a fire arm.

Can you elaborate? What's the minimum requirement for involuntary admission, and how much margin do you think there is between that level of dysfunction (or vulnerability to manipulation) and the level of dysfunction that disqualifies one from responsible gun ownership? What if we remove suicide as a consideration?

At just 2 children per generation, you'd have 32 great-great-great-grandchildren to choose from!

Me I got diagnosed with an autoimmune disease after the vaccines and my wife had blood clots. For both we didn't even bother mentionning or ask doctors if there was any possible links with the vaccines, out of fear of being seen as "those kind of people", and doctors didn't inquire or propose it as possible reasons. Not saying either of us have had vaccine side effects, and there are plausible alternative explanations for both of us, but then again how do we know for sure it's not the vaccine? I wonder how many people have had side effects that were not being properly recorded because they knew that in blue environments it would code them as people to ignore and shun.

Pikmin 4 was definitely a major disappointment. I did complete it, although in my defense I was sick at the time and didn't have the energy to do anything but sit on the couch and play video games. Especially after Pikmin 3 Deluxe (the Switch release) having full 2-player co-op support, the "little brother" mode in Pikmin 4 manages to even further trivialize the difficulty.

I feel like it had a ridiculous amount of hand-holding and railroading. I understand having a little of that for a tutorial section at the start, but it never felt like there was a lot in the way of choices to make, which is especially weird for a game series where one of the main interesting mechanics is splitting your party and exploring.

It's supposed to be a completely facile pseudocriticism

I understand a 50 Stalins criticism to be that someone's positions aren't extreme enough and he should lean into them even more. Claiming that a Democrat is not left-wing enough would be a 50 Stalins criticism. (And likewise, something like "Trump isn't doing enough to stop illegal immigration" would be a 50 Stalins criticism of Trump.)

It's true that it would be dangerous to do this to actual Stalin, but that's not how the metaphor works.

This is someone obscure enough that I have never heard of them before you linked this,

It was the first one I found by googling that sounded good enough.