domain:gurwinder.substack.com
You've just made it clear that even if I were to produce any figures, you wouldn't believe them. Which isn't even the wrong approach, since crime stats from the Third World are notoriously unreliable, and this isn't as cut and dry as murder.
That being said, the gold standard for comparative statistics when comparing crime rates between jurisdictions is the murder rate. Because, well, murder is a pretty big deal, hard to hide, and the cops, even if lazy and incompetent, are usually not that awful.
India, according to UNODC figures, had a murder rate of 2.94/100,000 in 2021.
The global average is 5.19 in 2023.
The World Bank claims 11 for "low income countries". 10.9 for all of Africa.
The United States? 5.9
I'm not bold enough to immediately jump to claims that the same ratio holds for other forms of crime, but yes, you are far less likely to be murdered as the average person in India compared to the global or third world average. We even beat the States, which is unusually awful by Western standards.
I have no objections if you wish to consider my claims to be entirely anecdotal. I stand by them regardless.
I really should get back to playing M:RF. I liked it a lot but dropped it while upgrading my GPU, months ago. I think I'm like 1/3 or 1/2 through it. Played around 33 hours.
Please help re-kindle my interest without spoiling anything. :) I assume there are good reasons why you are playing it not just once but twice.
The British were pushing for a .280 cartridge in late '40s but Americans insisted on .308.
The US was trivially correct to reject this cartridge and the British were out of their fucking minds here. In fairness, the fact they had lost WW2 [and their Empire with it] hadn't really dawned on their people yet and wouldn't come to a head until the Suez crisis.
The thing about .280 is that it's not a good GPMG round (and it's also slightly too heavy to be that intermediate- its initial loadings were more powerful than 7.62x39 is too). 6.5 Japanese had similar ballistics to what .280 would eventually have and would be ultimately replaced on the grounds of insufficient GPMG performance- and for a US-led alliance that needed to have a logistics train that much poorer countries could support (read: one caliber for everything) the infantry rifles would need to remain in the same caliber as the machine guns.
Hence a full-power cartridge, that could be retrofit to replace both .303 and 8 Mauser (7.5 French was too fat, wouldn't have worked), was required. Yes, it'd compromise the infantry rifles somewhat, but infantry rifles weren't expected to win a war with Russia whereas American logistics was.
Note also that the Russians didn't really figure the AK out until the early 1960s, and the SKS is not better from a tactical standpoint than a Garand (or M14, or FAL) is anyway. The Russians didn't need to hurry, since they already had plenty of quasi-intermediate SMGs in inventory (the PPS-43); neither did the Americans, who used the M1 Carbine for that.
they proceeded to compromise their entire's bloc small arms procurement for the next 30 years
30 years is an acceptable timeframe over which to replace equipment. And it really didn't hold the [mostly useless] allies back: remember, the bloc consisted of Britain (who never fought a war -> didn't matter), other militarily insignificant European nations (a good chunk of whom stuck with Garands), Britain's soon-to-be-dispossessed colonies (never fought a war beyond the ones the US also fought with 7.62x51 -> didn't matter), West Germany (conquered), and France (who stuck with 7.5 French).
I wish there were a reliable site where you could bet a lot of money on absolutely degenerate, unique markets like the outcomes of stuff like this.
It's a fool's errand to trade anecdotal evidence. I'm not claiming that kind of crime happens at all, I'm stating that the amount of crime that happens is lower than it would be, because of the fear of extrajudicial punishment.
You would absolutely face more risk if you were a super-crowded environment, or if you were an obvious tourist. That's true just about everywhere where pickpocketing happens at all.
India is a very big country. I don't know anyone in my friends or extended family who was robbed or pickpocketed in maybe the last 3-5 years. That included both urbanites living in desirable neighborhoods, and family who live in villages and small towns. The latter had burglars rob them multiple times, but the last instance I can remember was at least 15 years ago, and it hasn't happened since.
I agree that the story buries the lede here, but I don't think that the "criminals" aspect is the red herring, it's obviously the part that makes it interesting; unfaithful spouses are sadly rather commonplace in this day and age. The buried lede is the pictures of children related to her, which strongly suggests, IMO, that something more sinister is going on than "mere" rampant infidelity, and casts light on the depths of the hybristophilia: she's actually trying to create as terrible of a problem as possible.
Assuming, of course, that the story's real, which is a pretty bad assumption. It could also be the storyteller trying to create as terrible of an imaginary problem as possible. But taken at face value it is the character's doing.
Strongly B.
I have no stance one way or the other on whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. Sure, it’s a bit implausible that we’re the first, but also someone has to be so why not us? It’s just unknowable at the moment.
If there is intelligent life and it developed further away than Mars, I think it is impossible for it to have the means and desire to reach Earth, and then spend the last 80 to 8000 years apparently mostly focused on pranking us. They would have conquered us to work in the unobtanium mines, or coldly and amorally reshaped the planet to their liking, or just moved on, or something.
what you mean by that? Out of lets say 25 people you know - how many were pick-pocketed within last year? How many were robbed?
Zero. And zero. As far as I'm aware, no one I know has been pickpocketed or robbed in the last, uh, maybe 3 to 5 years?
and while petty crime is annoying - what about more serious crime? Lets say that woman goes alone during night though city - is it likely that something bad will happen to her?
Depends on when and where. In just about every major city in India, as is the case for most of the world, there are "good" and "bad" neighborhoods. I can think of a dozen places where I'd be unconcerned about being a woman wandering around after dark, and more where I would be.
There's a reason why I was careful to only talk about petty crime, and mostly property crime within that range, because, as I've elaborated in another comment, this doesn't hold nearly as true for sex crimes.
Add "c) would reveal its existence solely through slightly weird bogeys" to that list.
If 50% tariffs have been painless
Most global trade is via ocean freight, which is fairly slow. Domestic supply chains and inventory turnaround time delay the impact further. I would consider most data on final prices to very much still be pre-tariff, especially since headline series like the CPI/PCE are still only through May. The big data tests for the tariffs implemented in April will probably be for June and July data over the coming weeks, but even then the metals tariff increases to 50% didn't take effect until June.
7.62x39 is a WW2 round. Every single non-vestigial military has moved on to rounds similar to .223 (which, by the way, didn't pioneer those ballistics). The British were pushing for a .280 cartridge in late '40s but Americans insisted on .308.
It's remarkable how bad Federal Americans are when it comes to guns. After WW2, it should've been obvious intermediate is the way to go, but not only did Feds refuse to that, or failed to copy the MG42 despite trying to, they proceeded to compromise their entire's bloc small arms procurement for the next 30 years.
Do you think there's no alien life anywhere, or do you just believe that it's implausible that it's a) intelligent and b) has the means and desire to get here?
5.56 out of a 20" barrel can defeat level IV plates
No it can't, by the definition of what level IV plates are.
Actual pedophilia is being attracted to underage girls.
I wish I could bet money against anything happening on this front. I guess that’s just normal investing.
They used AR-15s, which are not, despite years of anti-gun campaigning, particularly good rifles for waging war (or insurgency).
They're cheap, good, and half the world's nations actively use them to wage war in some capacity. If that is not a good rifle I'm not sure what is.
This theory of 'more bullets = better' is not actually better in general
Yes it is[1].
that the slower rate forces better shooting fundamentals for reliability per shot
But when we're actually fighting- we're shooting at targets that are actively trying to avoid being shot at, and trying not to be shot ourselves- and not just trying to score bullseyes on a static range, we want it to be as easy as possible for us to make hits. So we're going to use the lightest feasible caliber that will defeat the target over the distances at which we expect to engage (usually less than 100 yards), and carry the most bullets both in the gun and on the person in extra magazines (traditional rifle ammunition is quite heavy and is quickly self-limiting in how much you can carry).
5.56 is special in that the cartridge weighs about the same as 9mm does (as in, the standard pistol cartridge), recoils the same as 9mm loaded to its maximum potential, but is significantly more effective than 9mm is at longer ranges because ballistics magic[2]. And its magazines are shorter so you can have more bullets in the gun without making it unwieldly.
This is in contrast to, say, 7.62x39 (the AK round), where it weighs twice as much as 9mm, recoils twice as much, magazines with comparable ammunition quantity to a 9mm rifle make the gun relatively unwieldly, and isn't appreciably more effective than 5.56 given those things because of a lack of said ballistics magic.
Note that hunting doesn't have these constraints. Neither do specialized military applications like sniping. You want overkill in those circumstances because you're not going to get another shot- the fewer holes you put in the animal the more of its tasty body is preserved (in the hunting case), and for both of them, the ranges over which you need to shoot a target that's going to spook and disappear after the first shot mean you want something that's going to give you the easiest time of that at ranges further than those typical for combat (200-400 yards).
[1] The US Army's take on "we need a rifle to shoot 800 yards" reminds me of the time the British did that. Both nations invaded Afghanistan (and lost) before adopting a rifle like this- a nation whose geography lends itself to long-range ambush-style engagements will proceed to teach militaries that fight there they need weapons with that kind of range to be standard-issue.
And to be fair to the Brits, just like the Americans, perhaps they envision future conflicts against Near/Middle Eastern or African nations will benefit from a rifle like this- places that are scarcely urbanized, with an enemy whose dominant form of mechanization is the Toyota Hilux. Against peer nations in urban warfare, though, this is not a great plan. Of course, the Americans tend to be very good at expedient engineering; the AR-15 got issued in record time while the US was at war so if they need a new rifle they'll have one quick.
[2] The faster a bullet is going the more likely it's going to fragment or change course sharply when it hits the target. Getting a similar ballistic effect from a large cartridge means a heavier projectile [not getting into why] means a heavier cartridge means heavier recoil, so you get less of the things that make the rifle good in typical combat distances.
Every Indian woman I've met seems to have a story about getting groped in public and the offender never gets beaten by the upstanding citizens that you claim inhabit the subcontinent.
Notice that I was very careful not to make this claim about sexual harassment.
Because that wouldn't be true. But why the difference?
Because a pinched ass is not a smoking gun! If someone gropes you up, there's usually no evidence a crime was committed at all, unlike most forms of theft, where you can, at least some of the time, show that the culprit is carrying your wallet or phone. The worst they can do is try and drop the evidence, which is usually not the same as destroying the evidence. My wallet lying ten feet away from you is, shall we say, suggestive.
Also, and I hope this is obvious, being groped is far more embarrassing than being robbed. This is just as true in India than is in the West. How many women cat-called by construction workers in NYC go on to file a complaint for sexual harassment?
Another important factor is that, because of the lack of evidence, it often boils down to a he-said-she-said situation, which bystanders are usually quite loathe to become involved in.
You're the only Indian I've met who claims that people would get beaten in the street for various transgressions and I really find it hard to believe.
My man, did you bother to do something as simple as Google the phrase thief beaten up India?
Or did you look up "man beaten for groping woman India"? Because yes, that has happened.
Here is a vicesplainer on the career trajectory of one Delhi pickpocket. He joins a gang that has so much opportunity for larceny that they're pickpocketing around the clock in shifts. He certainly doesn't fear retaliation from honorable bystanders, the only thing he seems to fear is the gang after he tells them he's out.
I don't have the time to watch the video right now, but my expectation is that they're preying on tourists primarily, which would be easily true in Delhi. They could also, more tentatively, simply be lying about the risks of being caught, or too dumb to care.
I want to believe, but also there are no aliens in the classical “beings from outer space” sense.
I rate this news 5 Nothings out of 5 Ever Happens.
You are correct that Comic Sans is the appropriate font for this.
Adoption is an even worse offender if you take this line of thinking.
No significant argument here. The kind of adoption process that involves traveling the world to find the perfect orphan is straight-up child buying, and has some moral similarities to eugenic embryo modification.
[comic sans]UAP DISCLOSURE UPDATES[/comic sans]
The mood in the UFO community has been rather dour lately due to a string of disappointments and setbacks, but Rep. Eric Burlison of Missouri dropped some promising indications this week that Congress has not forgotten about the topic and full disclosure may very well still be in the works:
"We're pursuing a hearing date. We've got a list of people that we're looking at. We're actually looking at potentially doing two. One with some people that are direct whistleblowers, who have had direct, and when I say direct, they had eyes directly on or have personally encountered UAP. In their formal operations."
"Not somebody out and about like Joe Blow out there that saw something. There's thousands and thousands of people like that. We're talking about people that worked for the Pentagon, worked in a government program, where they worked in and around this technology. Whether it was through crash retrieval, or through reverse engineering, that's what we're pursuing right now."
"The next hearing after that, once we're able to get information, we're looking at doing some interrogatories, which is where you take some of the things that have been said in these briefings, in these open hearings under oath. And then we send a formal letter as a committee, asking for answers from, whether it's Tulsi Gabbard, or whomever it is that we need to be asking these questions of. And then which would send up the potential second hearing, which would hopefully be able to clear people like Tulsi Gabbard to come forward."
"And I've been told she's very... friendly when it comes to this topic. That she wants disclosure. She wants to help bring about disclosure on this topic."
-
You will lose muscle along with the weight, if you solely use it for weight loss without additional exercise. But the degree of muscle loss is about the same as going on a diet, fasting, or, if memory serves, bariatric surgery. If you exercise alongside, you can stave most of this off.
-
Indeed. You will regain roughly half the weight you lost in a year of use after a year of disuse. But no other negative effects, to the best of my knowledge.
(I take oral semaglutide, so I'm putting money pills where my mouth is.)
Scott, as always, has an excellent write up:
Adoption is an even worse offender if you take this line of thinking. At least with surrogacy the client is usually genetically related to the children.
I'm (still) playing Anno 1800, in between finishing FFVII rebirth, my NG+ of Metaphor: ReFantazio, and returning to low-level LotRO. My biggest takeaway is that the newer LoTRO writers are far, far worse than the original dev team.
My impression is that the numbers you are mention... aren't that high; Israel is probably willing to spend many more of its own lives in this conflict.
For reference, if we adjust the 150K to 500K deaths[^1] from Russia's war in Ukraine from Russia's population of 143M to Israel's population of 9.757M, we get 10K to 34K, and remember that we are talking about deaths here. So there is room for a 10x here easily.
This doesn't really speak to your point of whether Hamas' fighting capabilities have been degraded. But Israel has been fighting a war with many fronts, in which Iran has been taken out of the picture, Hezbollah has been disabled in Lebanon. Recently the Israeli army claimed that they had operational control of 65% of Gaza, which is congruent with your perspective.
[^1]: Recent reports say 1M dead or injured, but use the confusing term "casualties" for this, to make it look bigger.
I'm sure that I'm notorious enough that my own subjective likelihood of facing an ASI in my lifespan doesn't need elaboration, and I'll skip over my usual arguments.
I think that, compared to life as it is right now, accepting the rule and oversight of a benevolent superintelligence would be grossly superior, and beats rule by humans in just about every metric (barring your ability to rebel, should you have strong feelings on the matter). They are likely incorruptible, smarter than the average politician, and thus far better placed to consider the likely outcomes of their policies. They might even, at least theoretically, be democratic and defer to the opinions of us retarded humans. I'd hope so, at least, since we're the ones building them to fulfill our whims.
(If they're not benevolent, gg I guess)
That being said, that's not what I consider an ideal world. I'd much rather use the kind of technology available in a post-Singularity world to improve myself and rapidly bootstrap to the level of an ASI so I can exert agency and be treated as a peer. I'd rather not be beholden to anyone, no matter how kind and wise.
This is of course, a rather aspirational goal. About the same as me saying that utopia-with-free-blowjobs beats utopia-without.
More options
Context Copy link