site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 196974 results for

domain:anarchonomicon.com

I think the self domestication is clear in history. In Europe, interactions were tightly controlled, free speech and action were often curtailed by elites and power structures that could kill those who went to far out of line. The Church killed heretics and the state killed the non compliant for centuries leaving behind a population that had survived both. And thus knew how to behave. Asia has a similar history of social control via Confucian culture— your actions were tightly controlled and outliers didn’t make it very far.

This is coarse, and based on racism. The nuanced argument is that IQ is > 50% determined by genetics, and that distributions between groups differ.

Maybe we have different methods of thinking about things but when I hear the statement

different races have different IQs

I immediately think that it's the distribution for the two things which is different, not that all people from the first group are smarter/dumber than all people from the second group. It's the same sort of statement as "men and women have different heights" and nobody sensible would ever take that to mean all men are taller than all women, they'd correctly see it as a claim about distributions. So why why should they interpret the IQ statement in this way?

Yes, Kierkegaard mentions that asterisk and notes that it doesn't significantly change the conclusions one should draw. It's rather hard to get a high sample size for white on black rape if it doesn't exist.

I think you meant rape is largely intraracial, which it is.

On that note, the problem with "evil" runs in video games is that it basically just handicaps you, removes content from the game, and slowly makes your experience worse with very little to actually show for it and very little external motivation other than "for the evilz".

Yes. Most games get this wrong. They try to make good and evil completely equivalent options that only differ in flavour, rather than recognising the nature of evil as a temptation. The evil options need to be the ones that provide the most immediate material gain to the player, not just "you can be a jerk if you want to, I guess." Bioshock almost manages it, and then walks it back at the last moment; the per-choice resource reward for good vs evil has a difference of double the rate, 80 for good vs 160 for evil. This would be great, making the player make do with less resources for the satisfaction of doing the right thing, or forcing the player to commit evil acts if they are struggling... only the game then undermines its own choice system by having the good route provide the player with additional resource gifts such that the overall difference between playthroughs is a mere 280 as opposed to the 1680 it would otherwise have been. Plus some other (exclusive to good route!) goodies on top that more than account for that difference. Now there's basically no reason not to be good all the time.

To make evil options worth taking, imo, they need to provide immediate and overwhelmingly lucrative rewards that you can't get any other way. Taking the Megaton example, I struggle to think of what could be offered that would be enough to make me blow up the town; maybe something on the level of New Vegas' Euclid's C-Finder, plus ten thousand caps and a unique companion who is extremely good. But that would also undermine the point of the Tenpenny quest; he's destroying an entire town for a trivial reason, doesn't think it's a big deal, and therefore probably shouldn't reward you so highly. So one can argue that the point of the quest is not to be able to complete it in an evil way at all; you're supposed to refuse, it's all a vehicle to make you hate Tenpenny.

Btw, any chance this capability will be available for offline, open source models anytime soon?

They can always go to a black country.

"Murphy marries bush bitch"? The idea's what, almost 40 years old now?

Why not just solve the related problems? Do practice exercises until you perform well consistently.

Irish nationalism has been broadly leftist for a long time. Sinn Fein is an explicitly socialist party, and advocated quasi-revolutionary socialism until relatively recently. Ireland’s pro-Palestinian activism is based on perceived shared oppression by Anglo imperialists, it is inherently quite leftist (much like other European separatist movements, eg. in Catalonia). I would guess that if you polled the Irish, extreme pro-Palestinian sentiment would be highly correlated with political leftism.

Then say that instead of pretending to be shocked

So OpenAI's big Monday reveal was basically 'Her' (if you've seen the movie).

It's called gpt-4 omni. It's not smarter than the already existing gpt-4, but it is much faster and can interpret live video and audio and respond with a pretty human sounding voice with almost no delay.

https://v.redd.it/k2mrmyhfi80d1

They're going to mine so much valuable data from people with this thing.

Also it's pretty impressive and cool. Could see this being of help to lonely people. But then after getting into a dependent relationship with AI they'll be even more stuck in their own bubble than before, as far as actual human contact is concerned.

Despite making up 13% of the population, 53% of NFL players are black

???

This is a complete non-sequitur. NFL players are in no way selected purely for how physically imposing they are, and the person you're replying to was actually correct - whites have a higher average height than blacks as well as a lower level of obesity.

Yes, there's a whole twitter account of commercials that go out of their way to make white men look like fools: https://twitter.com/StupidWhiteAds

https://twitter.com/StupidWhiteAds/status/1781491226354585957

"Why yes, we at Doritos imagine our customers as impulsive white manchildren who are treated with contempt by their despairing (white) girlfriends"

Even Joe Biden is talking about it:

“I challenge you: Find today, when you turn on the stations, sit on one station for two hours. And I don’t know how many commercials you’ll see, eight to five, two to three out of five have mixed-race couples in them. That’s not by accident. They’re selling soap, man,” Biden said to a laughing crowd in Tulsa, Oklahoma. “Not a joke,” he added.

There's more at the below link. Sure, sometimes they're reaching for anti-white animus where there is none. But there's certainly something happening in the Netflix 'viewshaming' ad, you'd have to be pretty dumb to mix the subtext. Or the British anti-grooming film that was rejected because it dared feature a South Asian man grooming a white girl, it needed to be replaced with a white teen grooming other whites (and one African-Carribbean girl).

https://twitter.com/Unashamed366/status/1770066802749657489

Well done, the stuff's become awfully expensive these days. 50rd boxes of 60s era surplus were less than twenty bucks at one point, so I'm well stocked also.

I'm much too young to have had access to the $5 Lee-Enfields in a barrel at the hardware store, but I do appreciate mine as well.

The standard HBD argument is that different races have different IQs, and that is the primary factor leads to all sorts of different outcomes.

This is coarse, and based on racism. The nuanced argument is that IQ is > 50% determined by genetics, and that distributions between groups differ. Notably, these groups need not correspond exactly, or at all to races. Not all Jewish groups have a 15 IQ advantage, it's the Ashkenazi. Big rich cities in big countries select for IQ, Indians in the US are a self selected subgroup, etc.

And east Asian women by contrast, a race widely considered more on the high end of genetics by HBDers, tend to be more neotonous, with smaller secondary characteristics and young looking faces

The ethnic group with the highest average IQ is, as far as I know, the Ashkenazi Jews. If the theory that intelligence was mainly driven by social competition holds, I'd guess smarts and neotony would be selected for by similar pressures.

Thank you, corrected

You up the ante in attacking white women in trying to censor negative criticism of black women. You should stop acting as if you are a mod for a reddit sub and trying to enforce left wing ideology on everyone. Unattractive is not equivalent to calling a group disgustingly fat which is more inflammatory. Plus, I won't interpret you choosing that rhetoric as just being a case of providing an example. It seems to me that you are deliberately want to get away with calling white women as disgustingly fat.

It is actually the case that white women are more attractive than black women. Less obese too. So it can't be applied to white women which aren't seen as unattractive.

Black women tend to be rated as less attractive than others.

To the drive-by unfounded claim that black people are genetically predisposed to not follow instructions? Sure, that's my objection.

I recall a far-right talking point 'black on white rape 20,000, white on black rape 0'.

This is almost certainly a reference to the infamous Table 42 from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. If one actually looks at the table, they'd find an asterisk next to to every percentage that clarifies "estimate is based on about 10 or fewer sample cases". In fact, the statistics, insofar as they hold any value, reveals that rape is largely interracial.

Personally I don't know why we'd need charts to show that black women are unattractive but they're there!

This kind of crude generalisation can be applied to white woman: "personally I don't know why we'd need charts to show that white American women are disgustingly fat".

The current SC is not exactly shy about overturning precedent, have they recently affirmed this position or is it an older decision?

Despite making up 13% of the population, 15% of NFL players are black

Typo. 53% are black.

Certain domesticated dog breeds are much better at complex pattern recognition and sequences than a wolf, like the border collie. This requires training beforehand, but so do humans (all socialization from infancy is training).

I never heard of him before, but I read a couple of his Palestine posts, and a couple on other topics. I wouldn't really call him rat-ty from what I've seen, he seems to really beat around the bush a lot and then not even offer clear conclusions and solutions when he's done. He follows the leftist intellectual playbook of pointing out something terrible, waxing poetic of how we really need to stop that terrible thing, but then not actually offer any alternatives or ways to implement a solution. He had a post where he used Fidel Castro's death as imagery for how the today's state of Cuba is the death of revolutionary socialism, since Cuba today is an example of how even best case scenario socialism has rather pathetic results compared to the average capitalist democracy. But he didn't seem to actually seem to stop being a leftist or start advocating for democratic capitalism, instead the piece was just mourning socialism's death without actually abandoning socialism.

I might be misunderstanding him, but I'd place that entirely on him for not being more clear, I shouldn't have to do literary analysis on a political commentator.

That was a beautiful and erudite post. Thank you for sharing.

As late as the 18th century, there was still a case to be made that China was the most powerful and prosperous nation on the planet

I believe that, excepting nuclear weapons, China is currently the most powerful nation on the planet. It's true that the western nations are in general more creative but this is offset by China's higher population, higher IQ, and higher diligence. In 2024, China produces most of the things that matter.

So, if China was ahead before, and they are ahead now, what happened in the meantime?

My answer: The Industrial Revolution was unique. Productivity increased at an extremely high pace for 200 years. In this brief, high-growth environment Western creativity dominated over Chinese diligence. But this period of history appears to have ended. Growth has slowed in the West, allowing China to catch and even surpass the West in many key areas.

Caveat: AI is a major wildcard.

I think there is an element of self-domestication somewhere in European prehistory. It’s noteworthy that blue eyes are unheard of among wild mammals yet are found in domesticated goat, dog, and fox breeds. (See: Morgan Worthy’s obscure 1970s writings). Similarly, blonde hair is uncommon but found in the amicable golden retriever. While Asians have neotenous features they lack other features that go with high-trust animal domestication like wide eyes. There’s even a study showing that when Asians are evaluating faces they don’t normally look at the eyes but the middle of the face, although this may have to do with default mode network differences

Sometimes violence is pre-planned and calculated, like a sniper watching carefully for the moment to take the shot

Re: Morgan Worthy mentioned above, in his “eye color: a key determinant in behavior” he talks about how light eyed hunters across species more often “lie in wait” before engaging in a ”self-starting” hunting action. Dark eyed animals are more likely to hunt by chasing and reacting. Worthy then looked at sports and found that blue eyed athletes performed better at non-reactive, self-regulated actions like free throws and golf (Tiger Woods an exception that did not exist yet).

everyone who cares about this stuff is ruled by men who hate them.

Indeed. The Supreme Court position on the right to keep and bear arms is "Sure, people have the right to keep and bear arms. That doesn't mean any particular person has the right to own or carry a gun." Very conservative position, actually.