FCfromSSC
Nuclear levels of sour
No bio...
User ID: 675
I don't see how a court packing does not signal the beginning of the end of the US
We have pretty clearly initiated the beginning of the end of the US some years ago, arguably with the election of Trump in 2016.
The Dems would have to lock out the Reps from power for at least a generation or face a retaliatory court pack the second the Reps return to power
Obviously, and this is pretty clearly the plan, at least arguably on both sides. Blues and Reds do not share sufficient compatibility of values to make cooperation possible, so the only remaining options are separation or war. Legacy social institutions obstruct these natural solutions, and so we observe the culture war blastwave striking, bending, and blowing out those institutions in sequence as it propagates through society. SCOTUS won't be able to hold it back any more than Free Speech Principles or Liberalism or the Courts or Academia was; things made by humans can be unmade by other humans.
Could you elaborate your point? Is it that they've tried and failed, and so are likely to try more in future, or that they've tried and failed, and so are unlikely to succeed in the future?
This is true, and as a consequence Trump is currently President. This does not mean that a decisive Blue Tribe victory is not possible, nor that significant effort will not be expended (and norms/cohesion burned) in pursuit of such a victory.
It does not appear to me that we are off the escalation spiral.
Interesting that you can see the case for the collapse of SpaceX, but not the implosion of the Democratic Party as a nationally competitive entity. The national party is losing the fundraising race badly
- fundraising does not determine the outcome of elections.
- Measurements of formal political fundraising foes not capture partisan political cashflows or their effects. Sizable portions of the federal budget and national GDP are locked up in explicit or implicit subsidies to partisan Blue Tribe institutions and populations, and this seems unlikely to change in at least the short to medium term.
- The Democratic party is large, entrenched and diversified to an incredible degree, and is quite lindy besides.
I am fairly confident that our current democratic party is well-positioned to outlive America as a coherent sociopolitical entity.
"harder" is not "impossible" or even "sufficiently hard to successfully deter the motivated", and it seems to me that the Democrats and Blue Tribe generally are at this point highly motivated.
Packing the court is likely to happen soon in any case.
Loss of actual capabilities is not a significant obstacle; the federal government is very comfortable wallowing in infrastructure and technology mediocrity for indefinite periods of time.
I would not be comfortable betting my freedom and well-being on Presidential Pardons being the norm that shall forever stand, but I'll grant that a pardon is likely and should offer at least some protection short-term.
What would be the obstacle to a federal wealth tax aimed exclusively at trillionaires?
And of course, straightforward murder is always an option.
High on hype? Come on, make an argument. My argument is bounded by the theory that the US Government will bail out SpaceX in the worst case because it's important to a generation of American military power, and that SpaceX will be extremely economically productive in the medium case
The democrats are going to get back in office at some point, and they are almost certainly going to try to permanently remove Musk's access to anything resembling wealth or power when they do so. This creates an obvious avenue for generating a fiscal crisis for SpaceX correlated with an obvious obstacle for the sort of bailout you're suggesting. At a minimum, I would expect a "bailout" under such conditions to require the removal of Musk and all Musk loyalists from the company's leadership, and the installation of people deemed politically reliable. I would expect such a "bailout" to effectively destroy the company.
Ms. Reade’s accusation was taken very seriously and thoroughly investigated. One deep investigation concluded the “rape”, as described by Ms. Reade, was not feasible.
Do you agree with that investigation's conclusions? Could you quote the parts of the linked article that you consider authoritative?
Whether it was necessary to go to that depth to prove Biden’s innocence is another question for another day.
What standard of evidence do you believe an investigation of such accusations against someone of Biden's stature should have applied? What do you think of prominent proposals for other standards, or the people championing them?
Yeah. When I heard that the jury in Karmelo Anthony's case was 'all white' I could only imagine 12 obese Mexicans in buttoned up shirts with white cowboy hats sitting in the courtroom sweating profusely under the Texas sun.
It had no black people, but it did have asians, hispanics, etc, as was frequently pointed out. The people claiming it was "all white" were lying for their immediate social advantage; this proves nothing about how assimilation operates in the general context.
high-res photo of a bunch of stamps on mail
3d-model the stamp's shape
3d-print the stamp in a rubbery material with a resin printer, so no layer lines.
gently weather/age the stamp.
...would be one obvious and probably undetectable method. You could use this to match an existing stamp's "unique" flaws/weathering, or use it to create a plausible stamp that doesn't match known stamps, whichever is more useful.
Another layer is that Jonah himself is not destroyed. Even after doing as God commanded, he still wishes to see Nineveh destroyed, and is angry when it is not. The story ends with God attempting to reason with him, rather than simply smiting him for his rebellious attitude.
The comment above yours is still filtered.
Fixed.
That's one of the fundamental questions on the American right at present: Does classical liberalism necessarily produce a level of pluralism it cannot survive?
Speaking for myself, straightforwardly, obviously, unavoidably, yes.
Classical liberalism as it is commonly understood and described is built on axiomatic assumptions about the possible range of human values, and those assumptions are observably wrong because the observable range of human values is significantly wider. You can track the obvious cross-sectional ways in which those assumptions have decayed by degrees across our entire society over time, and how our institutions and social structures have decayed with them.
Classical Liberalism increases tolerance. Increased tolerance creates values-diversity, and then values-incoherence. Values incoherence creates conflict, which reduces tolerance. Perhaps this cycle can be retarded or bypassed in some ways or in some circumstances, but certainly classical liberalism cannot do it because it cannot even begin to adequately frame the problem. It believes tolerance is a moral precept, axiomatically, but Tolerance Is Not A Moral Precept.
....I think one of us is misunderstanding something here.
My understanding is that algae eat phosphate to grow, and therefore an algae bloom should reduce phosphate levels, not elevate them. Algae do not need elevated phosphate to bloom, but will bloom a lot more in the presence of elevated phosphate. further, my understanding is that the most common source of elevated phosphate in water is from fertilizer runoff.
Again, this seems like a pretty straightforward question of fact to me. CNN is reporting elevated phosphate levels in the pool; it seems a reasonable inference that these levels are elevated versus the water that's being pumped into the pool, but if I'm wrong about that, I welcome correction. If the water in the pool has more phosphate than the water being added to the pool, then phosphate is being added to the pool somehow. Given that there is an ongoing vandalism campaign being conducted with relation to the pool and its surroundings, it seems logical to me that the phosphate is being added by the vandals.
Why do we need a conspiracy here? Hasn't there been algae in this pool all the time?
Because it's not just the algae, it's the water having elevated phosphate levels feeding the algae, per CNN, at the same time that people are definitely intentionally vandalizing the nearby green, and also definitely intentionally damaging the new liner material. Again, I'm open to other explanations, but those explanations really ought to account for the observable evidence.
what's the first worst?
It's actually worse than that.
Aztec blood sacrifice is a legitimate religion. How should freedom of religion operate for people who wish to adhere to that religion? The answer, speaking plainly, is that it doesn't and can't, right here and now, not in some hypothetical "someday" far in the future. If we have a significant population that wants to seize outsiders and rip their hearts out, there's no way we're going to be able to coexist with that population long-term. Nor is there any principled distinction between their claim to toleration of religious practice or mine; there is, in fact, no objective definition of "harm", and yet there is no way to maintain society without enforcement against those inflicting harm; this enforcement will be both necessarily subjective and entirely indispensable.
The logic of the First Amendment assumes that the range of religions is much narrower than the observable range of religions, just as it assumes that the range of ideologies and of values is much narrower than the observable range of ideologies and values. When you get out past the borders of the range it was built for, the logic it runs on simply stops working. The fact is that you cannot actually run even a minimally-cohesive society if your population is too values-diverse to cooperate.
Is that how the water system in question works? If so, I'd have thought I'd have heard of it by now, but again, I'm willing to be corrected if there's clear facts available.
I'm entirely willing to accept that interpretation, and in fact this is my interpretation of the culture war as a whole: we no longer have a cohesive society, and so attempting to pool resources or coordinate effort or share institutions in any way cannot be expected to work. You cannot build or even maintain memorials in a society that fundamentally cannot agree on what should be memorialized. Ditto for public schools, public libraries, public justice systems...
State bans on CNC aren't preventing the import of auto-sears for criminals by the containerload, and they can't prevent me from constructing a functional bump-stock out of cardboard and hot glue. The law, at this point, mostly functions in an attempt to keep people from talking about what a failure it is to actually exert meaningful control in the real world.
And sure, this allows people in blue areas to be oppressed, so long as the vast majority of people are willing to cooperate with maintaining the system. This balance is not stable, and cannot be maintained in the face of even a small number of people sincerely wishing otherwise. You are correct that neither I nor anyone else has a way to give you current society, only less oppression for you. But if you are willing to let go of current society, the oppression can also go, and speedily.
Here's CNN reporting that the water in the pool has elevated phosphate. My understanding is that one of the more straightforward ways you'd get elevated phosphate in the water is by dumping phosphate fertilizer into the water. Given the other evidence of deliberate vandalism, I'm not sure why incompetence or corruption are supposed to be the leading hypothesis here.
I'm open to being corrected if there's some other explanation.
My understanding, perhaps out of date, was that legal manufacture of new select-fire firearms was still banned by the 1986 act.
"Full-Auto" as a legal term means multiple shots fired with a single pull of the trigger. Forced-Reset Triggers force the trigger fully-forward again during the firing cycle, which is then immediately pulled again by the trigger finger in a distinct mechanical action. Legally, they are semi-auto, just semi-auto at 600-800 RPM. Semi-auto's legal viability has never depended on how fast the trigger is being pulled previously, and indeed many shooters have demonstrated the ability to fire semi-auto firearms and even revolvers at speeds equivalent to machine guns with no legal repercussion. Likewise, mechanical aids such as crank-fire have also been legally-permitted methods for generating rapid fire for roughly as long as we've had gun laws. FRTs merely make this easier to do. They are "select fire" in the sense that they have a selector switch with safe/semi/rapid fire settings. They are not "select fire" in the sense that they do not have a legally-recognized "full auto" setting, only a setting that allows the shooter to fire legally-semi-auto at a consistent rate of hundreds of rounds a minute with no significant effort.
I too dabble in necromancy.
Anyway, I don't think this is what Exhalation thinks its own point is: it spends about ten times as long explaining entropy.
That is not my recollection at all. Everything in the story converges on the scientist's exploration of his own brain, and that exploration terminates at the idea of a manufactured mechanical system that is nonetheless entirely intractable from within a given material frame.
Eh, is it really more inaccessible than a program running on ram without a disk installed? If ram loses power, whatever it stores is gone, just like their brains.
But the point isn't just that a destroyed brain is lost, but rather that an intact brain is nonetheless intractable. The scientist figures that his mind is a machine, and thus that he should be able to interact with it in machine-like ways; gears can be assembled, valves can be opened and closed. But in fact his mind is not the machine, it is the air moving through the machine, and the exponential complexity is intractable. RAM/disks and microscopic air currents are both intuition pumps, but the latter leads in a very different direction than the former.
Entropy as a theme circles back to the same idea: our control over ourselves and the world around us is limited, and almost certainly always will be, in ways that we are very bad at recognizing for reasons similar to those related in the story. This is, in my view, a really good message to communicate.
Or print/mill the parts yourself, that works too and requires no interaction with the legal system.
My understanding is that they're selling AR15 rifles with factory-installed and -tuned FRTs. Setting aside the legal arcana, it is not clear to me what the difference between these and "true select fire" is in any practical sense. I'd imagine they shoot a little rougher?
On the criminal side, my understanding is that it's just straight-up Chinese-manufactured auto-sears and auto-lockwork, no workaround at all.
fixed the link in the previous post. Here's a link to discussion of the new generation of belt-feds: https://youtube.com/watch?v=ZDFtgEVkaQY&t=3s
...You understand that "automatic guns" are already unregulatable, correct? As in, it is no longer possible in any practical sense to regulate the ownership of automatic weapons in the United States of America. You can purchase a legal, full-auto AR-15 from Palmetto State Armory for a reasonable sum. Several companies are producing belt-fed light machine guns for the unregulated civilian market. Criminals have been mass-importing high quality auto-sears and full-auto lockwork from China by the container-load for years now. The government is incapable of keeping full-auto weaponry out of the hands of anyone who wants it, and is almost entirely incapable of prosecuting even those who gain such weaponry illegally, or even simply those who commit crimes with such weaponry. They are at the point of prosecuting a small fraction of carefully selected cases in a vain attempt to maintain keyfabe that meaningful prohibitions still exist.
- Prev
- Next

Have you actually done the math on this, or has someone else? My understanding is that it's totally doable with relatively modest radiators; I'm open to this guy not knowing what he's talking about, but all I've seen from the other side is sneering.
More options
Context Copy link