domain:forecasting.substack.com
TracingWoodgrains
6m ago
I appreciate the kind words. Looking forward to much more similar work moving forward.
2D3D
9m ago
Ideologically motivated historians have unearthed Azzam Pashas genocidal statements, Khaled Azm (president of Syria in 1949) said that the Arabs themselves exhorted the Palestinians to leave first, the Jordanian papers blamed Arab generals for making such declarations... all this evidence is dismissed by postmodernists because it is 'manipulated', with only Plan D (why D instead of earlier plans) being proof of the evil of Israel. I think it is far more likely that people panicked and left of their own volition in the face of an advancing enemy, like what is happening to Ukrainians and Masalit, than it is a deliberate strategy crafted by the adversary. A coincidental benefit, but hardly any more deliberate in intent compared to the more pressing objective of killing armed combatants.
Crowstep
13m ago
The only two anorexics I ever knew in real life were my grandmother in her final years and a boy I went to school with. The meme when I was growing up was that teenage girls caught anorexia from reading fashion magazines. It jarred so much with my own experience that I always figured there must be more to to disease than 'I wanna be skinny so boys will like me'.
SSCReader
24m ago
Sure, declasse perhaps. But that is because we give special dispensations to kids and historically to women, though these have been eroding. But legally, if you were struck first by a woman then she assaulted you.
But none of these apply to nations anyway. The UK didn't have to allow Argentina to invade just because their GDP was less. We don't really have the concept of child countries where they are not accountable.
2D3D
25m ago
Of all the arguments against Israel, the most 'sympathetic' one is 'let these fools fight why are my tax dollars going there'. I will ignore the fact that those tax dollars unspent on LockMart USA will not result in tax breaks following and simply focus on the presumed moral culpability of supplying Israel with weapons, as if the 1040 declares that '5 bucks here killed little Aisha, this is your fault'.
The specific reason this argument falls slightly short is that Israel has this thing called an economy, and plenty of means to build its own weapons and buy from others. The first suppliers of Israeli arms were communist Czechs, and literally anyone who sold weapons found Israel a willing buyer. American involvement in Israeli arms exports is more a function of balancing Saudi and even modern Iraqi interests: a fully unrestrained Israel is far more dangerous to the region than one which is constrained by a paltry few billion in aid. General Dynamic is the preferred supplier for Israeli munitions now, but Hanhwa and even Roketsan is in the background ready to backstop inventories at a moments notice, much less entities farther afield like Avibras and even Norinco. US aid to Israel is ultimately a state department containment operation, not an AIPAC invention.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
31m ago
I'm not sure that anyone is denying that such Telegram groups exist here. However, the history is full of examples of states in struggle against each other fomenting literally genocidal levels of fury aimed at each other turn, only for all of that to be turned to a much cooler variant of mutual distaste or even eventual careful friendship once a peace has been achieved and been in force for some years. Israel supporters tend to treat it as obvious that that couldn't happen with Palestine, that even a mere suggestion that it could happen is some sort of a gross form of la-la-land naivete, even though Israel and Jordan - the "state of Palestine that already exists", according to Zionists - are close enough currently for Jordanians to shoot down drones aimed at Israel.
yunyun333
32m ago
morris's view is basically the same as yours - Both sides did awful things, which is what happens in wars. The Arabs were the losing side and my view is that if people commit major mistakes in history they pay for them and perhaps that’s how it should work out. The Palestinians should have agreed to a two-state solution.
jkf
33m ago
If a weaker person punches you as hard as they can and you deck them as hard as you can in return and break their jaw, then you didn't escalate, you just retaliated proportionally.
If you are a bodybuilder, and a woman/child punches you as hard as they can, breaking her jaw would be declasse, to say the least.
yunyun333
34m ago
i don't know what postmodernism has to do with this. it seems entirely possible to determine what in fact happened in 1948, whether arabs left because arab leadership told them to leave, or because they were afraid of being massacred, or because they were forcefully expelled by jewish soldiers, or for any other reason. motivations are more nebulous but you can look into official idf documents (plan D) and what leaders such as ben gurion wrote.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
36m ago
Eh, the Arab expulsion of jews from the greater middle east and the Algerian civil war don't elide much irredentism.
Why would it? It was basically a jackpot for the Zionist movement, insofar as getting the settlement of Israel properly going went.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
36m ago
The Persians did, in fact, ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ in the Battle of Thermopylae.
No_one
36m ago
https://reason.com/volokh/2024/05/15/congress-is-preparing-to-restore-quotas-in-college-admissions/
Apparently, there's a new privacy bill in congress, with a maximally bad attachment to it, and quite likely to pass. (what kind of monster would be against privacy? )
Almost all kinds of decision making (anything that involves computers seems like) are classed as an algorithm.
If your 'algorithm' causes disparate impact, it's bad and you must change it or you're open to lawsuits. Yearly review of the 'algorithm' is mandatory, first review in 2 years after bill is passed..
Covers: every bigger business (iirc 750 employees+), all social networks and...??all nonprofits using computers to process 'personal data' to submit yearly evaluations if they're not causing 'disparate impact'. Excepted: the entire finance industry, government contractors.
It also explicitly allows discrimination on the basis of a protected characteristics (race, sex etc) for the purpose of
27 (ii) diversifying an applicant, participant, or customer pool;
Here's a bigger excerpt:
Here's how it works. APRA's quota provision, section 13 of APRA, says that any entity that "knowingly develops" an algorithm for its business must evaluate that algorithm "to reduce the risk of" harm. And it defines algorithmic "harm" to include causing a "disparate impact" on the basis of "race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability" (plus, weirdly, "political party registration status"). APRA Sec. 13(c)(1)(B)(vi)(IV)&(V).
At bottom, it's as simple as that. If you use an algorithm for any important decision about people—to hire, promote, advertise, or otherwise allocate goods and services—you must ensure that you've reduced the risk of disparate impact.
The closer one looks, however, the worse it gets. At every turn, APRA expands the sweep of quotas. For example, APRA does not confine itself to hiring and promotion. It provides that, within two years of the bill's enactment, institutions must reduce any disparate impact the algorithm causes in access to housing, education, employment, healthcare, insurance, or credit.
No one escapes. The quota mandate covers practically every business and nonprofit in the country, other than financial institutions. APRA sec. 2(10). And its regulatory sweep is not limited, as you might think, to sophisticated and mysterious artificial intelligence algorithms. A "covered algorithm" is broadly defined as any computational process that helps humans make a decision about providing goods or services or information. APRA, Section 2 (8). It covers everything from a ground-breaking AI model to an aging Chromebook running a spreadsheet. In order to call this a privacy provision, APRA says that a covered algorithm must process personal data, but that means pretty much every form of personal data that isn't deidentified, with the exception of employee data. APRA, Section 2 (9).
Amadan
"I would put a screwdriver through your eyeballs if I could"
37m ago
No one says this immediately today. The question is what is the statute of limitations on historical land grievances? We discourage conquest and colonization today, but we cannot roll back or atone for every conquest that ever happened.
(This is why I find the Israelis' argument that Israel was "theirs" 2000 years ago to be completely irrelevant.)
Sloot
37m ago
It cracks me up how chicks nowadays just instinctively turn to tilt their ass at the camera when one comes out.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
40m ago
How do you say "ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ" in modern Hebrew? The Arabs have tried that before; it did not go well for them.
2D3D
41m ago
Eh, the Arab expulsion of jews from the greater middle east and the Algerian civil war don't elide much irredentism. If the Arabs got good enough to unify and crush every jew, pearls may be clutched for a day, then it'll be forgotten. No one cared about the Armenians, no one cares about the Rohingya and Masalit, and no one will care about the Hazara Kurds or Uighur. If the Arabs git gud enough to kill every jew, we won't care either after the requisite pearl clutching.
Amadan
"I would put a screwdriver through your eyeballs if I could"
46m ago
I don't know of anyone claiming Israel is deescalating. Obviously they aren't.
And personally, I'd be fine with the US reducing its support for Israel. But that isn't what you were asking.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
51m ago
This is not some novel status; it happens every time some separatist movement becomes strong enough to hold territory. For another current example, there's Somaliland.
Not getting to whether the "de facto" actually means that much insofar as international law is concerned, the obvious difference would be that Hamas has never actually claimed Gaza to be an independent state, unlike the Somaliland government.
The proper response to the Hamas occupation of Gaza should be the Palestinian Authority, probably backed by an international coalition, asserting its de facto jurisdiction over Gaza, by force if needed. Of course there is a great variety of reasons why that's not happening, but the clear majority of those reasons are, when it gets to the roots, "Israel".
It is quite risible for Israel supporters to refer to confusion and chaos in Palestine when it's obvious that Israel isn't in any way willing to have the internationally recognized authority of the State of Palestine act as states normally attempt to do when some group is occupying a part of their territory, or have the armed forces that could even theoretically attempt it.
TIRM
52m ago
You could block them. I haven't blocked SS, but I also don't read their screeds about the Jews.
hydroacetylene
54m ago
Whatever happened to Heim theory? Did it get disproven?
hydroacetylene
55m ago
Don’t forget ‘can I make money off it’.
hydroacetylene
56m ago
How did America get to a point of total Catholic domination
Because Catholic schools like notre dame and Georgetown admit conservative students and feed into Ivy League law programs; colleges which admit conservative protestant students do not. The three liberal justices are affirmative action hires who claim to practice the religion appropriate for their ethnicity, and for Hispanics that’s Catholicism.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
56m ago
Jordan and Egypt renounced their claim to the territories when they recognized te State of Palestine, no?
zoink
57m ago
Butker seems to be almost perfect. I assume the media is desperately searching, so he's likely been faithful to his wife and probably hasn't said "nigger" within recording distance. As Nybbler points out, he's got literally a gigachad look. It might be cooler if he were a tight end, but he's arguably one of the best kickers in the game with three Super Bowls. He's not perfectly articulate, but articulate enough, and his speech avoided some of the pitfalls conservatives love to jump into. It was very digestible if anyone wanted to watch the whole thing and more coherent than Margery Taylor Greene or Trump can be. It also helps that he kept things straight Catholic; going all in against Catholicism is attacking a lot of Latinos.
Conservatives should spend a lot of time figuring out the things he got right.
Nah. So far as I’m aware it would have been prohibitively difficult to doxx me given the paucity of info about me online. I didn’t work too hard to hide my identity, all things considered, but no potential doxx was anywhere near my radar.
More options
Context Copy link