domain:greyenlightenment.com
SSCReader
21hr ago
In the cupboard as opposed to out on the counter. Popularized by Derry Girls where a Catholic girls school and a Protestant Boys school are attempting to find commonalities.
self_made_human
Sajjano durjano bhūyāt, durjano badhyatāṃ sadā, baddho'nyān nibandhāyet
21hr ago
From morbid curiosity, I browse /r/redscarepodcast on a regular basis. Very interesting specimens on that sub.
That means I know as much about Cumtown as a well-adjusted person can through sheer cultural osmosis. I don't really do podcasts in general.
TwiceHuman
21hr ago
I think the only challenge with building a community around this is that you have too much nuance to fit into simple boxes, and people basically always put others into simple boxes. You're just assigned to whatever cluster you seem to be the closest to, even if your internal processes are entirely different.
A better solution would be for people to treat other people as more complex beings in general, rather than just slapping labels on them based on limited information.
That said, I do believe that all the important bits aren't in the facts but in how they're interpreted. In this case:
that they are something forever and always
This is just the tendency for people to model others, and a sort of laziness which makes them not want to update their beliefs about others. Perhaps they even get uncomfortable when people are more fluid than fixed, simply because we don't like changing out minds. You might be gay, you might not be gay, only you really know. Your experiences could be sexuality, they could also be fetishism, and they could be something else entirely. Theory has to fit reality, but reality has no need to conform to theory. There's zero needs to label yourself in any way, or even to be consistent. What I think you dislike is the fact that other people will judge you and put you in boxes which you do not fit into.
Edit: I relied as if your comment was a top-level post. I don't know if this makes any meaningful difference or not
HeimrArnadalr
English Supremacist
21hr ago
Without checking where someone keeps their toaster
Where do protestants keep their toasters?
Terracotta
21hr ago
So effectively you're using ChatGPT as... an ad blocker for spammy sites?
That's a pretty interesting development in the eternal war of consumer versus enshittification. It'll become still more so when all the wiki content is itself LLM-authored and the LLMs pivot to putting secret ad space in their system prompts, like Google's sponsored results.
quiet_NaN
21hr ago
Travelling to Switzerland to get MAID will impose much lower externalities on society than most other suicide methods.
Leaving aside obviously bad suicide methods like trains, you will in any case place your corpse in the way of people who did not sign up for this. EMTs. Loved ones. Police who break your front door after the neighbors complain about the smell. Random members of the public.
I have it on good authority that there are also other Swiss jobs than suicide assistant. They know what they signed up for, you pay them for handling your corpse and all the paperwork.
Terracotta
21hr ago
It still leaves unanswered questions, though, because however cursed bars and the internet may be, it's not like they actively interfere with developing relationships by more normal means (do they?).
Nobody needs another rape-culture/ perving-at-work debate, so let's set aside the decline in school and workplace relationships, but that chart also shows an approximately 35% drop in the proportion of people who met through friends and a 50% drop in the proportion who met through family. Say in 1995, Ann's cousin might have set her up with his cute pre-vetted army buddy Jim, or Cathy might have invited her friend Dave to a board game night with one of the single girls from her softball league. Well, cousins, army buddies, softball leagues, personally compatible humans still exist, so what's happening to interfere with those connections now? Do Ann and the army buddy still meet, but now he thinks she's too fat or she thinks he's too short compared with the hotties they shop online? Do Dave and the softball friend still do board games, but now they're under-socialized and both kind of self-absorbed, so neither of them makes a move while still feeling offended at the other sex's lack of interest? Or what?
TwiceHuman
21hr ago
I agree with this first claim, but I imagine that the "suicidal and paralyzed from the neck down" crowd is pretty small. My arguments so far have not accounted for that one situation, but I think a good rule is "Follow their instructions, even if they request something which will kill them". You cannot really implement this legally, so this should be one of those things which are technically illegal but which everyone pretends that they don't see when they happen.
There is an assumption that they also have the right to hire others to secure their rights.
This is basically the right to give away some of your agency, which could lead to consequences which harm your rights. Tricky situation, but I don't think it's bad from this direction. Having the right to ask somebody to end your life isn't the issue - the issue is that, if we make institutions which can legally end your life, then your environment could systemically pressure you to make this decision.
To give an example, you're not forced to marry anyone. Being able to marry is a freedom you have. But there may be economic benefits to marriage, and this is where the problem starts. Do you know why I'm not an organ donor? It's because it seem that some doctors don't really do their best to save you if you're an organ donor and they're short on whatever organs you have. I haven't looked into it much, but it's not hard to imagine how this incentive might come into being.
There is little society can do to deter them
This is how it should be. For instance, I could grab a hammer right now, run out of my apartment, and start bashing random people with it. I won't make this choice, but you cannot deprive me of the ability to make it without depriving me of my fundamental human freedom (the ability to use tools, the ability to open my front door, the ability to move my body, and the ability to interact with other people). My neighbour has the same freedom. This is exactly how it should be, every alternative is worse.
I'm alright with temporarily putting suicidal people under watch, since they might be acting on impulse. But if they continue being suicidal for longer periods of time, it becomes apparent that it's their genuine will.
I would prefer legalized but regulated suicides
Here's what will happen: Millions of old people will be considered a drain on society and made to kill themselves. There's a million paths leading to this, and number 13215 is "Accidentally give older people medicine which has the side-effect of increased risk of suicide". An AI will A/B test medicine, and then look at the results. Would you look at that, medicine X leads to greener numbers: Lower costs, and less complaints about pains. The reason you don't see: The lower costs are due to less old people remaining alive, and the lowered complaints are because those who suffered the most have died. Another possibility is that they're given medicine which is stronger but accelerates their death, this also leads to less pain, and thus less complains, and it also makes other numbers on the spreadsheet look green in that more deaths mean lower costs. Did you know that "we don't know" how most modern algorithms actually work? It's just a blackbox with an input and output. Well, that's why we won't see that we're just killing old people faster, all our metrics will show "improvements".
quiet_NaN
21hr ago
If she brought forged legal documents that can't be checked, they can have a policy that treats patients who show up with uncheckable documents as patients who have no documents.
I hate to break it to you, but most legal documents are basically uncheckable. Even a notarized document can likely be faked without too much trouble. Government-issued documents (id cards, passports, banknotes) are certainly harder to forge, but also require someone who is familiar with the safety features.
If legal documents are even an issue, the whole point of having them instead of taking someone at their word is so that they can be checked; if they cannot, they are useless.
That is not at all the point. The point is that verbal statements reported by third parties are notoriously unreliable. If Susan says: "Bob said I can sell his car", that is bound to create a he-said-she-said situation. Nobody will ever untangle if it was a honest misunderstanding or if one of them was lying.
This is why Susan needs a signed document to sell Bob's car. Can she easily forge Bob's signature? Sure. But that is now a serious criminal offense! If it is found that Bob never signed the paperwork, she is looking at jail time, and can not claim that she just misunderstood Bob's intention.
With assisted suicides, the difference is that nobody is going to put Susan's urn into jail.
I am sure that for every such sob story, there is also a sob story where someone could not get their next-of-kin to sign a paper stating that they were aware of the patient's intention to opt for MAID. A patient in Ireland would be hard-pressed to compel a relative to sign such a document through the court system. Likely, they would get themselves committed.
So I can totally understand that Swiss law does not require patients to provide a notarized genealogy with all the relevant death certificates to prove that whom they say is their next of kin is that.
wemptronics
21hr ago
How poor would you need to be to enjoy money and opportunity at little cost?
Strategic Indo-Pacific military base home values are looking up. Mauritius has a GDP of ~15 billion USD. Put one and one together and the question becomes why wouldn't they want the islands? I wonder if the Chagos Islands might now be the single most lucrative asset for Mauritius. On top of the strategic value, Chagos adds a yuge additional Exclusive Economic Zone away from home. Surfers eagerly await imperialist eviction.
Did they or did they not modify the gun for testing?
Don't whine about "dismissed." Either debate the point or accept it.
I will continue to support Sig as much as I view appropriate. I certainly will push back on illogical fearmongering from haters with motivated reasoning jumping on the bandwagon of the moment.
iprayiam3
22hr ago
Ok here’s an example. My kids got real into Pokémon this summer. I am a touch old to have ever really been into it but close enough that their interest peeked some passing interest in learning more / remembering certain things. But I’m not trying to deep dive here like a book.
So instead of browsing bulbapedia or whatever, I ask chat gpt stuff like:
What was the difference between red and blue version? Is mewtwo the most powerful Pokémon? Did ash ever fight Giovanni? Do people generally like or dislike all the extra Pokémon bloat?
And various branching follow up questions. It’s quicker than trying to google the answer then read ad-riddled slow loading pages or just seeing the AI summaries at the top. Then regoogling the follow up.
So it’s nice when ChatGPT gives me a little article light history of Pokémon red and blue.
It’s annoying when it does stuff like following up with saying ‘Would you like me to write a little song to help you remember the difference’ or other stuff to provoke its own directional prompts.
Or when it starts with sychophantic commentary. Like “is mewtwo the most powerful Pokémon” gets a response that start like:
“Now you’re getting to the real heart of the Pokémon phenomenon!..” And then continues in an overly eager conversational tone.
Just give a fucking article like answer.
TwiceHuman
22hr ago
Tech is making it more feasible, but keep in mind that these ideas have not been promoted to the extent that they've become feasible. There's forces pushing back against them. What are these forces if not competent people?
Second point makes social norms and systematic censorship into the same thing. The second one can be automated, and it only requires following strict rules. The problem with this is that one can follow rules for so long that they stop considering the reasons behind them, and also that rules are rigid - they lack the flexibility that people have, they cannot take context into account. In short, "Seeing like a State" is a great book.
You cannot really outsource trust. Here's my reasoning: If you're more intelligent than the person you're outsourcing your trust to, then you don't need them to judge for you. If you're less intelligent than them, then you cannot reliably assess whether or not you can trust them. They could just be lying to you.
So, how did you decide that Trump was actually lying? You likely updated your belief over time based on things you couldn't verify. Don't get me wrong, Trump does lie a lot, but if they compared Trump's inauguration crowd to somebody elses, they'd take pictures of his at the time of the day where the least people arrive, and then find pictures of the other crowd which makes it look at flattering as possible. People who support Trump experienced the opposite, they saw the flattering image of Trumps crowd, and the unflattering images of the other. And who told you that Haitians don't eat cats? I don't read the news, this is one of the reasons I'm so clear sighted.
Populists have increasingly told the public laughable lies
The "fact-checkers" are the same people as the liars. Every original fact-checking website is propaganda. The term might have caught on, leading to independent people having "fact checking" blogs online or whatever, but the concept is still ridiculous. Plus, no meaningful conversation can be had about any modern events, it's just people throwing sources at eachother that the other party already considers completely untrustworthy. If you ask me, nothing but raw evidence is worth anything, and people should use just that (and if they can't, then they're not competent enough for truth-seeking in the first place)
Again, people have been lying for 1000s of years, it's an ancient problem, so why have there been no "fact checkers" until now? It's simply because the modern world is retarded.
You make a good point about the family traditionally being one unit, but being judged by your family is still way different than being held responsible for how people (edit: ones who are complete strangers) use the things that you've sold them.
Foreign-born
The problem is not immigration itself, but the mass import of people who are incompetent, culturally incompatible, 10 times more likely to commit crime, or otherwise a net drain for the destination. Again, only the modern world is too stupid to realize this.
A Jewish man is walking through Belfast one night when he gets stopped by two men in balaclavas with Armalites.
One of the men asks in a thick Belfast accent "Prod or Taig?" The Jewish man looks confused. "What?" "Are you a Protestant or are you a Catholic?" the other man asks in an even thicker accent. The Jewish man says "Well, I'm a Jew". The first paramilitary gives a long suffering sigh. "Yes, but are you a Protestant Jew or a Catholic Jew?"
That's the joke.
I have heard a different version which plays off it:
A man is walking home late at night in Belfast. Suddenly he's pulled into a dark alley and feels a knife at his throat! A hoarse voice whispers into his ear, "Are ye Protestant or Catholic?" Thinking quickly, wondering how to answer to save his life, the man has an inspiration. "Neither! I'm Jewish!" he says. "Well now, I'm the luckiest Arab in Belfast, so I am!" says the attacker.
Edit: I see my near namesake beat me to it!
Edit Edit: There is also a version where it's an atheist and the final question is: "Yes but is it the Protestant God or the Catholic God that you don't believe in?"
Rov_Scam
22hr ago
Great question. Yes, the existence of a recall, while not a tacit admission of guilt, can be used as evidence that a product is defective. But part of taking prudent legal action is knowing when you're beat. On the one side you have a victim, possibly a law enforcement officer, who is seriously injured or worse because a gun went off when it shouldn't have. On the other side you have a company with millions of dollars in military and police contracts insisting that the product is perfectly safe even though the exact same thing has happened several times before and the plaintiff has an expert who can describe the defect and explain to the jury exactly how the accident occurred. Make that argument to the right jury and a 5 million dollar wrongful death verdict balloons into 50 million in punitive damages. If the company hasn't figured it out yet, the jury will help them, and they will keep helping them until they either fix the problem or go out of business.
Do a recall now and it will cost a bundle, but a certain percentage of people will take advantage of the recall (especially considering that a large number of guns are owned by institutional customers), preventing some suits from being filed, and accidents that do result in suits net them some advantages. First, punitive damages are much less of a risk since they took affirmative steps to mitigate the problem. Second, it may reduce the liability if the company can prove that the user was on notice that the product was dangerous and should be modified or discarded, and neglected to take advantage of the recall program, based on a theory of comparative negligence or voluntary assumption of the risk. The downside is that it would cost a hell of a lot of money, but they could theoretically have to do it anyway. If a police department bought a bunch of these and was apprehensive about using them, they could try to sue on a theory of breach of implied warranty. This wouldn't be an easy case, though.
Thoroughlygruntled
22hr ago
Even the shitty dive bar near me has a pride flag in the window. And practically every establishment claims to be "black/woman/lgbt owned" for social credit points. If you live in a Blue area, the gay bars really have to try to stand out.
JustAGuy0
Neo-Butlerian Jihad advocate
22hr ago
These two lectures by Haviv Rettig Gur for Shalem College are an excellent primer on Israeli-Palestinian relations, one each from the Jewish and Palestinian perspectives respectively (note that both Gur and Shalem College are very much Zionist, not just Jewish).
Israelis: The Jews Who Lived Through History
The Great Misinterpretation: How Palestinians View Israel
It's very much a historical series, talking about the Aliyah in it's first stages during the Ottoman Empire and the interwar period, along with the experiences of the European/American Jewry (and the contrast that extends to today in their responses to Palestinian nationalism)
ControlsFreak
22hr ago
Does anyone have a bead on the use of public (free?) LLMs for reasonably complex1 mathematics? Anything decent? Is there anyone writing on their personal use of it for that purpose somewhat regularly? Maybe some tips for structuring a prompt?
1 - Actually, I hope to keep this particular problem entirely real-valued.
TwiceHuman
22hr ago
That's likely due to the influence of Christianity being stronger than the influence of classic liberalism. But isn't this also explained by most people being stupid? I think most dumb ideas are prevented by a low ratio of the population (perhaps 10%) knowing that they're dumb ideas. When the ratio of knowledgeable people falls too low, bad things happen. This is especially true today, since the dumb average person has more decision power than ever, and since there's a lot of money in promoting dumb ideas (smarthomes, cars with internet access, useless LLMs in every product, etc). It's memetic warfare. Since most people are too dumb to think ahead, they will need to experience negative consequences first hand in order to learn. And these learned lessons are quickly forgotten. Online IDs are being now implimented in the UK, but this was actually tried before in the past, around year 2020. The idea was already shut down once before, and the arguments that people wrote against it online were a sort of vaccine, but like I said, insights disappear, and then people retry terrible ideas.
I can't answer your second question as I've never watched Fox News. I basically reject everything modern. How could anything I say be downstream of recent propaganda when I came to these conclusions more than 15 years ago?
FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
22hr ago
"Are you a Catholic or a Protestant?"
"Neither. I'm Jewish."
"Sure, sure, but are you Catholic Jewish or Protestant Jewish?"
netstack
Texas is freedom land
22hr ago
Care to tell the old joke? I’m not sure how I’d google it…
mrvanillasky
Indo Aryan Thot Leader
22hr ago
Hard being an incel in this Chad only world. Can't even cope in peace without foids texting me.
Gonna go off on a tangent here that's unrelated to what you were trying to say, but I'm just going to point out that this is largely down to their risk taking and greater aggressiveness within the public sphere, which also means that they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of acts of heroism (men are 90% of those who have received the Carnegie Hero Medal, for example). Of course, the negative aspects of these traits always get discussed so much more than the positive ones, and by virtually every political group in existence. Wonder why. Then there's also the reality of violence-by-proxy by women, which is yet another thing that fuels male-perpetrated violence. I wrote a longer comment about all of that here.
I wasn't so much advocating sexual liberalisation or disparaging sexual traditionalism as much as I was simply pointing out that if we're accepting a sexual framework, we need to fully accept all of its consequences. Sexual traditionalism doesn't just mean "shotgun weddings for men" and "penalties for cads for having deflowered a woman": it also means stigmatising and penalising women who have premarital sex or tart themselves up inappropriately or use sex/intimacy to wheedle money out of men, granting the men around them the power to vet and police who they can go out with (since they will have to defend any breach of their honour), and placing responsibilities on both husband and wife in a marriage to put out and provide sex to their spouse. The responsibility for maintaining a pro-social scenario was not placed only on one party.
Note I don't consider this to be the Handmaid's Tale either. I very much agree with you that that's basically feminist oppression porn and an unhinged caricature of traditional sexual mores which borders on the fantastical. I think all of these traditional strictures are just a consequence of accepting that entire framework of looking at things, and I don't like how we've basically adopted a chimera of sexual liberalism and traditionalism, having accepted only the parts of both worldviews that benefit women while discarding all the bits that may inconvenience them. Within this current context, I won't accept any more sexual strictures being placed on men; the system is already engineered to give women maximal choice while displacing maximal accountability onto men. If we're advocating a traditional society, the obligations of women that made it make sense need to be enforced. We need to pick a lane and stick with it, instead of relying on women's tears to help us shape our approach to everything regardless of how conflicted and schizophrenic things get.
More options
Context Copy link