domain:philippelemoine.com
odd_primes
3m ago
Markle is a bit of a stretch, her father is white and her mother has mixed ancestry. She's at the point where she could easily pass as Italian or Spanish.
iprayiam3
9m ago
You said you think they’re being deliberately provocative.
I can show countless examples of the fact that jeans makers make this pun on a regular basis. Your post suggests that making the pun, while also being white is deliberately provocative. Bullshit.
The picked a hot it girl, and made the same tired cliche wordplay every jeans manufacturer makes on repeat. The spotlight here is completely fabricated and it would have been removed with the same shrug this dumb line gets every other time
MonkeyWithAMachinegun
Dancing to Tom Paine's Bones
10m ago
Ahh, yeah I'm familiar with that graph. Thanks!
MonkeyWithAMachinegun
Dancing to Tom Paine's Bones
11m ago
Obliged
odd_primes
13m ago
The study most people reference is a 2018 study by Denmark's finance ministry:
It's in Danish, but there are plenty of secondary sources discussing it in English, eg. the linked article in The Economist.
Mantergeistmann
20m ago
(Still not quite as ridiculous a take as the 20-something who complained about "anti-Semitic microaggressions" in a Mel Brooks movie.)
Is that more or less ridiculous a take than the people who complained that Blazing Saddles was racist?
erwgv3g34
22m ago
erwgv3g34
26m ago
The mainstream. It's @covfefeAnon's catchphrase.
chooky
30m ago
Having read the article and looked at the pictures you linked about the "MAGA themed party", I completely disagree with your quoted description. It is very clear to me that this was a country-themed birthday party for her mom and that the supposedly MAGA comes from hats that read "Make Sixty Great Again". This is a play on pop culture, not a theme. If anything, MAGA-adjacent paraphenalia seems more likely to have been worn as a satire of rural rubes who genuinely support the idea.
Are the people who criticized her for it extremely ridiculous? Was Sweeney's tweeted, purposefully vague response absolutely delicious in its commitment to nonspecificity? Is the ridiculousness of the online reaction an exhibit for my theory that Sweeney is especially a target of women haters due to the prominence of her boobs? Yes, yes and probably.
Lewis2
31m ago
People thought they defeated Political Correctness in the 90s too. Just give it a generation.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
39m ago
Please, feel free! I've received some very bad news while on vacation, and having more places to visit would take my mind off things. Thank you.
In exchange, please tell me something useful about places to visit in London today.
Why not visit some lesser known historic sites like St. Bartholomew’s Church and St. Etheldreda’s Church? They’re both close to St. Paul’s and get overshadowed by it (I assume you have already visited that, otherwise what tf are you doing on here asking for places to go). There are also some Roman ruins nearby. Just west of that there’s the St Mary Le Strand church, so they can all easily be visited together for a church-oriented outing.
If you get bored of all the religious sites and are interested in music at all there’s the George Handel House and Jimi Hendrix House, these musicians’ Georgian townhouses are adjoining. I’m a big armchair traveller; I could post a list of places to visit in and around London if you wanted (after I get off work). Let me know if you wanna take me up on that.
KingOfTheBailey
52m ago
https://www.economist.com/europe/2021/12/18/why-have-danes-turned-against-immigration (archive) might reference the study GP is talking about? Certainly, the graph of "Denmark, average net contribution to public finances, by age" (broken down by ethnicity) gets posted a fair bit on RW twitter.
KingOfTheBailey
59m ago
It's so bizarre. Many Golden Age web forums had a lifecycle involving the creation of an off-topic board, then the a politics (containment thread/containment subforum/topic ban) to try and keep things from getting out of hand, then the drama builds and builds until it dominates the whole thing.
But here we've had the reverse. We were the containment thread, which was then jettisoned into its own /r/, then escaped onto its own site, which has made room for more good "off-topic" discussion to grow.
self_made_human
Grippy socks, grippy box
1hr ago
Well yes, I'm not against the idea of generating counterfactuals! The specific example I raised was surrendering to the temptation of using them to vividly visualize the road not taken, and one that's likely impossible to take.
In this case, I nurse a great deal of regret over this past relationship. I still believe that the breakup was necessary and almost inevitable, so it brings nothing jut great pain to dwell on how things could have been otherwise. Everyone has their regrets, and seeing the alternatives fleshed out in such a realistic manner is likely painful. I suppose that, with time, it's possible to get used to it. If I did this again, it probably wouldn't hurt as much as the first time around.
Our brains just aren't built for this. It's one thing to wonder what life might be like if you'd chosen differently, it's another to be presented with imagery so true to life. That quantitative difference can become qualitative.
There are plenty of more general examples on the cards now. Setting up a chatbot with the personality and memories of an ex. Having your deceased mother's voice recordings used to train a model you can talk with. Generating plausible images of children you almost had.
Such techniques are not inherently bad, and in some cases, might bring real joy. I think technology is, in general, very good for us. Yet I do not deny the potential harms.
I think I am so thoroughly desensitized to my counterfactuals -- or I've never been in love -- that this kind of thing can't possibly make me more sad.
I don't know whether to be happy or sad for you, but I lean towards the latter. To love is to open yourself up to vulnerability, to the potential of being hurt. Being closed off to it might make things easier, but at the cost of never aspiring to more.
Pongalh
1hr ago
Apparently "woke is more correct" means that they see terrible social consequences from very mundane things, unlike liberals who think a cigar is just a cigar.
phailyoor
1hr ago
would had been funny if ChatGPT did the common AI thing of darkening all your skin tones
That's a Gemini thing not ChatGPT. But i think the AI race has gotten competitive enough that the SJWs are getting stonewalled when they try to kneecap the models.
ZanarkandAbesFan
1hr ago
You can't tell me that making this pun while happening to also be white is a knowing dog whistle.
I didn't.
PutAHelmetOn
Recovering Quokka
1hr ago
Rendering counterfactuals is how I make decisions. How else am I supposed to know if it is a good idea to marry a girl, if I do not imagine our future? Unless, by "render" you literally mean visually generate an image? I admit perhaps seeing AI-generated counterfactuals could move me in a way reading your post didn't.
I think I am so thoroughly desensitized to my counterfactuals -- or I've never been in love -- that this kind of thing can't possibly make me more sad.
I did realize years ago though that this kind of reasoning is why -- I think -- I listen to edgy divorced dad rock. People project their own personality onto me and ask "doesn't that make you sad? You should listen to [pop-slop about lust, love, and status]." No, on the contrary, listening to Taylor Swift would just depress me.
It's also implied that they didn't copy the data files from the DVR, but rather played them on their terminal and used a screen recorder app to create the video file that they ultimately used in what they distributed. Why? Probably they couldn't figure out how to access the raw data file.
So probably they began playing the first day, started recording, then it reached the end and they didn't notice for a few minutes so they just had black screen or desktop background at the end, which they had to trim off.
For the second day they could start and hit record it at the same time and could stop recording when they felt they had enough boring part after the commotion of finding his dead body was over.
This is consistent with my beliefs about how normies working in government would struggle with computers.
gattsuru
1hr ago
The UK's Office of Communications has become an international problem.
I've mentioned the UK's 'oi, bruv, can I see your porn loiscence'. Recently, I also admitted that the US beat them to it, and pondered if perhaps this was one place where the UK might not end up the embarrassingly backassward one.
We have an answer. Politico reports:
The UK’s Online Safety Act took effect Friday to shield minors from “harmful” content — not just pornography, but also material that is hateful, promotes substance abuse or depicts “serious violence.” The rules apply to any site accessible in the UK, even those based in the U.S. This means sites like Reddit, Bluesky and even Grindr now have to abide by the OSA’s speech regulations to stay online in the country.
Over the weekend, major U.S.-based platforms implemented measures to comply with the law, and promptly became harder to access. By using a VPN to simulate UK web browsing, DFD was able to confirm reports that content relating to Gaza on X and cigars on Reddit was more restricted in the UK than in the U.S. Some required verification checks necessitating a photo ID or a selfie to verify age. Other content was blocked entirely, though some X posts on Gaza were later restored. The UK law may not strictly apply to such content, but social media companies apparently aren’t chancing it. Gab, a U.S.-based platform that hosts Nazi and other extremist content, has gone completely dark in the UK to avoid financial and criminal penalties under the safety act.
Ostensibly, the law has a relatively constrained set of content service providers must block, and a larger-but-still-defined section that providers must keep away from minors. In practice, the paperwork and overhead costs are significant even if the UK never enforces the law other than to demand reports and just circular-bins them, and the banned content ranges from the steelman (CSAM) to the marginal (choking porn?) to the are we the baddies (sales of knives), and very little is well-defined ('foreign disinformation'). Media coverage of several police actions by the UK have already been restricted.
In turn, Gab (and some other targets) have provided those notices to reporters:
I attach a formal request (‘Notice’) for information under Section 100 of the Act addressed to Gab AI Inc. The Notice includes further details on the background to this information request, and Annex 1 to the Notice sets out the information we require from you. The deadline for providing the information is 11:00 GMT on 29 April 2025[...]
We acknowledge your legal representatives’ email of 26 March 2025 setting out your view that your service is not subject to the Act as you have no presence outside of the United States. We also note your intention not to respond to future correspondence from Ofcom. We would like to bring it to your attention that wherever in the world a service is based, if it has ‘links to the UK’, it now has duties to protect UK users. This includes if a service has a significant number of UK users, or UK users are a target market. These rules will also apply to services that are capable of being used by individuals in the UK and which pose a material risk of significant harm to them. As noted above, the Act only requires that services take action to protect users based in the UK – it does not require them to take action in relation to users based anywhere else in the world.
What are the penalties?
Failure to comply with this Notice may result in Ofcom taking enforcement action against you, such as requiring you to take certain steps to comply and/or imposing a financial penalty. The financial penalty could be up to whichever is greater of £18 million or, in certain circumstances, 10% of the person’s qualifying worldwide revenue. A daily rate penalty may also be applied in addition to a fixed rate penalty[...]
Other offences in relation to the Notices include: knowingly providing information that is false in a material respect; providing the information in an encrypted form so that Ofcom cannot understand it, with the intention of preventing Ofcom from understanding the information; or suppressing, destroying or altering information that is required under the Notice, to prevent Ofcom from obtaining the information or obtaining the information in the unaltered form. A person who is convicted of any of these offences may face imprisonment for a term of up to two years, or a fine (or both).
The British defense has revolved around saying that this isn't a free speech matter. Which, in turns, tells you about as much as you need to know about that 'foreign disinformation'.
This probably isn't the only reason that YouTube, Spotify, and a wide variety of other sites are spinning out age verification approaches of varying levels of credibility. But that's only because Australia's gone nuts, too.
07mk
1hr ago
The aesthetics by themselves are an existential enemy to the woke? Could you expand on this? Is the idea that these aeathetics are so obviously superior to the aesthetics of the woke, as shown by revealed preference, that people will just reject their demands to subvert and deconstruct everything that past generations considered good or beautiful?
Maybe large, natural breasts are conservative now?
More options
Context Copy link