domain:cspicenter.com
there342
34m ago
I really wish he will win. And I really wish he succeeds in implementing his program, just so that USA will see first hand the results of those policies.
I thought this too at first, but let's be honest. It's really, really difficult to reason one's way into socialism, and that says all there is to say about the prospects of reasoning them out of it by adding one more stone to the mountain of its failures. We are not half a century from the collapse of the USSR and yet its example is not a factor in any of the socialist's consideration. Every failure can be decried as either not real communism or a result of treacherous interference from outside influences - we'll succeed if only we conquer those, too. I really don't think a bad example will teach anyone a lesson on this kind of thing. All they hear is "Free public transit" and they think "That sounds so cool!" without the slightest consideration of where the money comes from.
Owlify
1m ago
Oh is that so? It's the first time I am hearing this view. I thought the typical view is that men don't put as much effort into socialisation since they are not raised to do that and their social lives are enriched by their female partners, so they are happy to have their wives handle all the busy work required like doing all the planning, etc. I thought "happy wife, happy life" was a saying for other minor disagreements. I know that I certainly will be happy to let someone else put the effort in for me as someone who doesn't socialise much.
Tree
10m ago
Yeah that’s what I’m saying, intrasexual competition, gossip, envy and jealousy have always fueled human conflict. Religions then built on and justified that primal pettyness, look at the behaviour of the gods in greek mythology. Christianity is particularly attuned to women’s petty intrasexual concerns, with its emphasis on female promiscuity.
it_is_so_weird_to_be
30m ago
This is honestly the most convincing theory.
it_is_so_weird_to_be
30m ago
There's paranoia and then there's simply asking what a man would get out of it, and in particular a billionaire in his 60s.
charlesf
49m ago
The anti-cheat services compile quite a bit of data but its generally not released to the public beyond limited disclosures to try to sell their services to game studios. Valve anti cheat is one of the bigger ones. Its expensive, but customers will get access to the "rap sheets" as it were for various online credentials. IPs, UBID, steam installs, accounts related by payment method, hardware IDs etc. You don't get large data sets to just browse, but you can see the history or reports and flags for clients that connect to your game, substantiated or otherwise. You can set up auto-bans for known cheat engines or bad actors.
charlesf
56m ago
I can't speak to academic cheating with confidence, but I can about videogames. First, there are more opportunities as time passes as more and more players get into online games so the whole number is going to go up. This matters b/c these are all potential customers of the next part of the problem. Its never been easier to cheat at online games. Used to be, back on the 00s, it was much harder. You either needed to be a programmer yourself with knowledge of the game engine and build your own hacks, or you needed to know the right people or be part of fairly insular online communities, the Warez scene probably being the most prolific. There was a lot of overlap between the game cracking/piracy scene and the online game cheats scene, both of which were almost never just stumbled upon by normies. Now that much larger numbers of people play these very competitive games, they are large enough to constitute a customer base worth trying to get the attention of. People are also much more comfortable with paying over various apps now, so its much easier to sell to them. Prices are wildly variable with the specific game, but for anywhere from $10 to $200 you can get a download link to a fully contained .exe that you run with the game, there is a relatively user friendly interface, and you money buys not just the download of the exe, but also updates as the sellers of the cheat engines try to stay one step ahead of the game devs and other anti-cheat service providers like VAC. In addition, the people using the engines are much, much sloppier with using them, not even bothering to try to hide it most of the time. To accommodate this the same groups that sell the cheats also sell various ban-evasion packages, helping you make new accounts, teaching you how to use a VPN etc, or in many cases just selling you a pre-made, clean account to get right back at it. A few more infamous ones over the years have also had inside people at the game studio who would just remove the bans for money. Money changed everything with videogame cheating. I don't think any of this applies to online chess, which is its own strange world.
RenOS
something is wrong
8m ago
Absolutely! I have had exactly one partner, who is now my wife & mother of my children, and the only thing we intend to change about this arrangement is increasing the number of kids. I have very little understanding for breaking up after being a family for so long.
But the people critizing Bezos aren't even better on that front; The journalist writing the article broke up her own marriage with an affair.
Supah_Schmendrick
58m ago
What, does the recent repeal of Roe v. Wade not count? The “Blue Tribe” had pinned a huge policy platform of abortion on it, and it was totally undone
So in this giant Red win meant...that Blues no longer got to unilaterally dominate national policy. This is not comparable to Obergefell (or Roe in the original instance). Blue wins mean they get to override Red preferences everywhere. Red wins mean they get plausible cover to try and eake out a separate existence in some places. These are not the same.
It sounds like what you actually want is not the freedom to do as you wish, but the power to coerce others, and particularly to deny the other what they want.
Yes, this is what Blue tribe gets when they "win."
But wanting specifically to exert your power over another is something different. Its envy, or at least, is rooted in the same. Envy is seeing what someone else has, hating them for it, and wanting to destroy it. It’s bringing someone low because you can’t stand seeing them up.
What a coincidentally perfect distillation of major leftist legal doctrine.
but plenty of civilized countries like to play that game.
"So there I was in a pub in Belfast enjoying a lovely Imperial pint and watching the local match, when my accountant back in Boston called asking about retirement contributions. I got lots of weird looks at the bar when I said 'I want to contribute as much as I can to the IRA', and you'd think the room went cold."
Their opinion is not the deciding factor. Or rather, their acquiescence was paid for. If their job was made more difficult by rov scam’s antics (hypothetically approved/forgiven by the gay billionaire), then the problem is merely that they did not realize what their job entailed and so were not paid enough.
More options
Context Copy link