domain:cspicenter.com
Silverdawn
I wake up đ There's another psyop
17m ago
Yeah it seems to be aimed at women which is why itâs strange, because most women know all this.
I dunno how to tell you this without offending you but I think you're wrong and possibly living inside a bubble. There are a huge number of women around me who seem to legitimately have no idea what men actually want. I base this on their clothes, their makeup and their idea of what "fit/fat" means.
Their behaviour seems to be very much based on social/cultural cues rather than objective truth. And I've even had experiences where I very gently suggested something along the lines of "nono, you should do X instead" and got a very harsh lecture or hate-filled glare in return.
Currently disparate impact has a carve-out for business critical reasons (which is why Google canât be successfully sued for the fact that fewer than 15% of software engineers are black, for example). If that is maintained, then a college could argue that, say, only 5% of qualified candidates for an English literature professor job are Republicans and so they donât actually do anything wrong if 95% of the English faculty are Democrats.
2rafa
53m ago
Yes, itâs a contradictory law because being âequalâ in terms of political vote is going to unequally favor, say, white men for many jobs that are mostly done by liberals, since for example almost all potential Republican college professors (if political party is part of disparate impact) will be white males, and so correcting that would have a disparate impact on women/poc.
BurdensomeCount
Singapore is the only country that learned the correct lessons from the British Empire.
55m ago
I'm beyond blessed with the many talents God has given me, but it cannot be overstated that all of my success is made possible because a girl I met in band class back in middle school would convert to the faith, become my wife, and embrace one of the most important titles of all: homemaker.
Based and C.S. Lewis pilled:
âI think I can understand that feeling about a housewifeâs work being like that of Sisyphus. But it is surely, in reality, the most important work in the world. What do ships, railways, mines, cars, government etc exist for except that people may be fed, warmed, and safe in their own homes? As Dr Johnson said, âTo be happy at home is the end of all human endeavourâ. We wage war in order to have peace, we work in order to have leisure, we produce food in order to eat it. So your job is the one for which all others exist.â - Narnia dude.
2rafa
59m ago
Private equity is just the corporate raiding/hostile takeover meme of the 1980s updated for the 21st century. Most medium and large private companies are very poorly run, the same way most major corporations were until the late 1980s. A combination of M&A and MBB consulting (mock them freely, but the sad thing is they were once necessary) dealt with most of the low hanging fruit in public markets, and takeover defense is now much better anyway, but in private companies things are still bad. PE is not typically a bad thing, and makes for more successful businesses that do more business and employ more people more often than not. Purely extractive moves still happen, but theyâre disproportionately subjects of reporting and PE is now so well developed that (especially with higher rates) an extract what you can, sell-for-parts approach is less and less of a viable way to invest clientsâ capital.
That said, selling corporate owned real-estate is a good thing for most businesses. Thereâs a reason why almost no major corporations other than super rich tech companies in the suburbs own their own corporate headquarters; when you own your premises, youâre a real estate company in addition to doing whatever else you do. Conglomerates are almost always undervalued by markets, it makes more sense for most companies to sign long leases, to focus on their core business as a pure play, and to leave real estate to asset managers and real estate developers who are valued on that basis and have expertise in that market.
benjaminikuta
1hr ago
I mean, that seems like it actually does matter pretty significantly? Like if the rates are so low you don't meet someone until very late in life, I would consider that quite bad indeed.
MaiqTheTrue
Zensunni Wanderer
1hr ago
What Iâve never understood is why exactly this sort of thing makes sense to the left. The man is a kicker on a football team. He doesnât really get paid to be a spokesman for anything beyond the usual shilling for products. I donât understand why a person isnât allowed to hold contrary opinions especially when those opinions have absolutely nothing to do with his actual job and he doesnât seem to be much of an activist at all.
6tjk
1hr ago
Was it this, by any chance?
https://www.themotte.org/post/592/wellness-wednesday-for-july-19-2023/121681?context=8#context
shakenvac
1hr ago
I am trying to understand your position, so please let me know if I have got this right:
⢠Israel is inherently bad/unjust, by the nature of it's creation.
⢠Because of this, there is nothing that Israel can do that would be good/just, excepting perhaps to dissolve itself.
â˘Similarly, there is nothing that Palestinians could possibly do to Israel that would be bad/unjust, and no Israeli response to any Palestinian action (excepting perhaps to just take a bloody nose) could be good/just
â˘You do not implore Israel to stop. I think this is not because you think Israel is justified in any moral sense, (i.e. blood feud) but because you acknowledge that asking Israel to behave justly under your model would be asking the impossible. You simply ask that uninvolved actors act according to the 'Israel is inherently bad' idea
Is this fair? If so, what separates Israel from all previous historical colonisations, or even conquests? Why don't the Turks have to give Istanbul back to the Greeks? Would Aborigines in Australia/Canada/America be justified in waging war against their colonisers? Would their colonisers be justified in defending themselves?
If not, what actions could Israel take, short of dissolving itself or losing its identity as a Jewish state, that would allow it to achieve the status of a state which is allowed to defend itself, in your eyes?
practical_romantic
1hr ago
I spoke with him on my first days here on ssc in 2019 jan where I was depressed af as I was giving the most important exams of my life, college. Really nice guy, thanks for the upload op.
2rafa
2hr ago
GTA could never have been made by Americans, itâs inherently a pastiche of America by foreigners. Also, while itâs made in Scotland, itâs written by Englishmen.
fmaa
2hr ago
I wanted to correct you, but I suppose the very fact that a Scottish game series symbolizes American superiority in your mind reinforces your point, if in a different way than intended.
Pasha
Defend Kebab
2hr ago
If they botch GTA6 then I will completely lose any faith in western civilisation. It started with a relative passing me a CD of GTA3 when I was 4 and it always symbolised the total superiority of American cultural production for me.
fishtwanger
2hr ago
Adding political party registration as a protected class
I'm unclear on how "political party registration status" will be interpreted. Does it mean that they "can't create" "have to pay attention to" a disparate impact on Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Greens, etc.? Or does it merely mean that they "can't create" "have to pay attention to" a disparate impact on people who are registered and people who aren't registered?
"Original public meaning" is failing my poor spectrum-y brain.
Pasha
Defend Kebab
2hr ago
Now after Bernankeâs central bank we can basically achieve the end of recessions (and inflation
What? how?
2D3D
2hr ago
Young men, like most young people, are self centered idiots. The train of thought is 'I am impressed by people who are good at X so if I am good at X people will be impressed by me'. That other people are in fact individuals with their own preferences takes time to learn: kids still insist that I love cocomelon as much as they do, despite repeated attempts to convince them of the contrary.
sliders1234
3hr ago
Is midtwit leftist Twitter that bad?
They âmadeâ $2 billion. No the had revenue of $2 billion.
Itâs just looks like a constant gotcha with no desire to understand what is going on.
The real estate deal had nothing to do with Georgism. If you google the deal itâs just as sale-leaseback. A sale lease-back is much more like taking out a mortgage on your real estate than a true sale. For various reasons corporations like to do these things. Red Lobster took property they owned and then sold it to someone else but then had to make rent payments and usually these type of deals would have RL paying most operating costs and property taxes. A sale leaseback is a little bit like debt most of the time for the buyer of the real estate and occasionally turns into owner real estate (like if Red Lobster goes bankrupt then the buyer of the sale-leaseback suddenly own a bunch of real estate without a tenant they need to figure out how to reposition). Basically a corporate bond collateralized with real estate.
If the leases have actual value as in the real estate went up in value and someone would rent it for a higher price you occasionally see the leases resold for profit to (Red Lobster in this case) a new business (in this case an expanding restaurant chain) but most of the time the landlord takes a big L and has a pain point of figuring out what to do with the property.
My opinion would be reading those tweets actively makes you less intelligence and gives you zero information on what is actually going on.
confuciuscorndog
3hr ago
Low male employment, antiwork, and the rise of NEET-dom has nothing to do with trust, but selfishness adequately describes the motivations for the ideological positions they hold.
Does this also apply to women for embracing frivolous promiscuity (far more than men as statistics on how many men vs. women are sexless in a given year, partner numbers, propensity for infidelity, etc. show) and antagonistic notions of "equality", or is it only men who are expected to selflessly hold up the world like Atlas?
Obesity isn't a trust issue, it's a selfish issue, where people would rather eat themselves into oblivion instead of finding a healthy balance and self restraint.
And the CEOs who intentionally manufacture the cheapest, unhealthiest food possible that they've hired organic chemists to make as addictive as possible and market it in the most deceptive and manipulative ways possible that intentionally target the dumbest and most vulnerable people, so they can later sell them subscriptions in pill form to their own endocrine system? Selfish, or just the "freer markets" you prefer?
Pasha
Defend Kebab
3hr ago
I have shared this exact article with my girlfriend years ago when she was having a bit of a crisis about her body and it was quite a revelation to her. Sample of one of course
OliveTapenade
4hr ago
When was the last time a billionaire white nationalist or Nazi was punched? The infamous 'Nazi punch' was one guy and it set off a whole debate on the left about whether it was acceptable. Meanwhile of course Jews get attacked sometimes - the ADL (I know you may not trust them, but I doubt they're all completely fictional) cites 161 violent assaults in 2023.
But I guess beyond this I'm not particularly sure why you're focusing on white nationalism? Yes, white nationalism is an extremely hated and ostracised position in the US. I agree that white nationalism is more hated as a position than Zionism is. What is that meant to show? The fact that there exists an ideology more hated than Zionism does not mean that Zionism isn't hated.
Is your point just that you'd like for white nationalism to be at least as acceptable to argue for in public as Zionism?
In that case - great, good for you, but I hardly see how that reflects badly on Zionists. You can just advocate for white nationalism. No need to bring Zionism in at all.
(Unless the implication is that the reason white nationalism is widely hated is the Jewish conspiracy to destroy white culture and so on, but at that point we're just right back into the tiresome nonsense that I was sick of seeing in the first place.)
Wave_Existence
4hr ago
this already kinda exists : https://community.openai.com/t/vampire-game-where-you-convince-llm-to-let-you-in/604295
you talk into your mic to try and convince various AI characters to let you into their home. The AI doesnt judge you for your tone, but this is a pretty great proof of concept of how this tech could be implemented in a bigger game imo.
OliveTapenade
4hr ago
Yes, I think this is true. 'Catholic' can continue to function as an identity even in the near-total absence of believe. 'Jew' and 'Muslim' both do the same thing to an extent as well, where they come to denote an ethnic or cultural background or upbringing. Protestantism largely does not do this. If you stop believing, you are no longer a Protestant or even a Christian.
Thus anecdotally I do often run into Catholics whose response to anything about doctrine or practice is roughly, "Oh, no one pays attention to that, don't worry." Catholicism can be grounded in something other than genuine, sincere belief. Protestantism cannot be.
(As a Protestant I'm inclined to see this as good, or at least, as not wholly bad. But that's a value judgement that could certainly be argued.)
I wonder how the supreme court looks if you track it, not by formally stated religious identity, but by actual practice? If we trust NCR, Roberts, Thomas, Kavanaugh, and certainly Barrett all seem to be practicing Catholics. Kagan is Jewish but it doesn't sound like like she's practicing? Gorsuch attends an Episcopalian church, and Jackson is very reticent on the subject, so I don't think I can tell how pious she is. At a glance it sounds like maybe a bit over half of the supreme court is meaningfully religious, in terms of personal practice?
Then your position makes less sense, and holds even less moral sway, as it becomes even more divorced from any coherent ethical system regarding conflicts.
Why do you think that a fraction of the air strikes in retaliation for the thousands of rocket attacks, as opposed to the ground incursions that have occurred both historically and in most other contexts where one side bombarded another, isn't a de-escalation?
More options
Context Copy link