@No_one's banner p

No_one


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 7 users  
joined 2022 September 08 22:22:12 UTC

Underemployed Slav. Likes playing Factorio.

Verified Email

				

User ID: 1042

No_one


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 7 users   joined 2022 September 08 22:22:12 UTC

					

Underemployed Slav. Likes playing Factorio.


					

User ID: 1042

Verified Email

Disparate impact is only an Anglo thing. It's almost completely ignored in Europe, where we only have to contend with environmental laws and bureaucratic bullshit.

Also you made my heart rate spike to cca 150 for a sec. In other thread I posted a photo of a girl calling herself 'Pasha'. I log back in, what do I see. Uff.

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).

The funniest thing would be, if they truly wanted to address 'disparate impact' meaning proportional representation in everything desirable, that'd de facto be a return of the Jewish quota too. Despite falling off a bit due to intermarriage Jews are still over-achieving quite a bit over basic whites, so any legislation that'd truly remove disparate impact would be in essence also a quote on Jews, if they chose to identify as such, no ?

but when we look at potential mates we want the thin one

Not the thin one. The curvy one..

Link goes to one of the most stunning examples of 'autism' out there, and it's making everyone from arch-hater 0hp Lovecraft to bog standard SJWs and boomers mad.

I think you're typical minding. You're not a median woman, very far from it, furthermore you're old enough to have used your vastly superior mental tools to get a whole lot of experience.

What does a median 18-22 woman know about these things? Women are conformist, they 'read the room'. If media and society keep putting out a message "being chubby is bad etc" a young woman might have spent years as deluded about male preferences as some guys are deluded about female ones (the so called 'nice guy' ). Sure that's not very applicable now with the obesity epidemic, nevertheless..

Also, there's a whole bunch of research that found women don't really know what men want, body shape wise.

It would appear, therefore, that using this new law to reimplement affirmative action would not be legal.

Is there no way for Democrats to make the court more favorable ? E.g. by say, packing it with wise latinas?

Lot of people are lying now, especially in the US, but if you look at the original link "slim" isn't what you'd describe the typical sexy ancient sculpture, nor the most popular images in large databases.

Thinking about the past, it makes me smile how much it was common to hear, until twenty years ago, that women are very uninterested in politics, unlike men. For my generation, this idea looks absurd. Men do not care about politics at all.

Yeah, well, look how it's working out for 'The West'.

Absolute shambles. In the 'Great Game' of global hegemony, the 'West' is the drunk guy who thinks he's playing checkers, but he's so drunk he doesn't understand he's actually playing chess, against a guy who's perfectly sober.

Meanwhile, in China, you're only supposed to care about politics if it's literally your job. Any random civilian caring about politics is viewed (rightly) with suspicion, perhaps partly genetic due to the millenia of rebels getting executed.

So, you had an absolutely typically female hysterical reaction to Ukraine war, with sanctions that resulted in exports to Russia crashing, and exports to Russian neighbors booming. Russia is still chugging along with the war, meanwhile European economy doesn't look too hot.

But a less well known example: 1 million 244: The 40 year long rare earth mineral boondoggle.

TL;DW:

  • rare earths are crucial for renewables (wind turbine magnets etc) and nice for electric cars.

  • processing them is very hard, harder than uranium enrichment actually to be cost-effective at it. It's a whole bunch of chemically very similar elements that occur together.

  • China having little energy has a strategic interest in energy production and e-cars that actually makes sense. They went into this in early 1980s

  • 'The West' gimped rare earth processing companies in 1980s with a nonsensical rule change that put 'thorium', byproduct of RE processing on par with uranium. I'd love to know whether this preceded the Chinese strategic decision to aim for e-cars and so on.

  • all the processing was outsourced to China. China stole and improved upon all the IP. They also subsidize RE processing and control the market. RE processing, thanks to their subsidies, is unprofitable everywhere. IF you try to set up your own industry, they'll tank prices just to make every startup go bankrupt.

This is all very funny because:

  • rest of the world doesn't really need most RE. Renewables are a scam. Chinese mandate electric cars ( you won't even get a car plate) unless the car is electric, in preparation for WW3 and the naval blockades.

  • e-cars don't really need them, but it's apparently mildly easier to make them good if you have ample RE.

Funny, short video from the province of Airstrip one. Savage in that breathtaking way only those people are capable of.

One of the observations about anorexia is that before modernity it also existed but those women claimed they were fasting for religious reasons. There might even be a saint who starved herself to death rather than suffer some indignity like forced marriage. (not sure)-

It looks more like something broken and the sufferers confabulating reasons for wanting to be that way.

He replies "she could lose some weight" or "you could lose some weight" to any picture of a woman he comes across, with the exception of actually anorexic or very thin ones where he'll say "you should gain some weight".

I'd say the only constant is that it makes women mad.

Unless my memory is playing tricks on me, yes.

I don’t think any straight women are unaware of this fact

It's not aimed at men.

She started out with a narrow face, though make up is doing some work. Although, it's possible she had fat remove from under the jaw. Women do that these days.

They're also apparently getting fat transfers into boobs, though that's very expensive compared to implants, and a bit riskier.

You'e talking as if developing replicator technology and getting as far and as fast off from the rest of you humanity wasn't the default position of every person with an ounce of self preservation.

People are insane these days due to being disconnected from actual material reality. It's going to get far, far worse with more wealth. Either we get thought control and become some weird hive mind, or people will be getting ever more insane because they can and because our minds were not designed or evolved to cope with modernity.

Africa is the exception, really. Sub-Saharan Africa has several attested cultures where being fat was seen as attractive, such also existed in Arab countries at times.

Even today, bigger body size is seen as desirable in US black culture, at least if we go by this NYT opinion piece where a woman is complaining how black men don't want them to lose weight..

Not sure if we can judge by her - she's been selling erotic, non nude photos for pocket money for years.

People don't want to talk about the war because

  1. by and large, the west is losing it because of bad procurement, industrial output and planning

  2. despite their skepticism about particulars -wokism, governance, I'm betting most people here are in favor of US hegemony and see the countries involved as somehow 'theirs' - something like the nationalist delusion. No, they aren't. The countries belong to people who have power and influence in them - and that ain't you unless you're a billionaire with an entire department of lobbyists and a prominent position in CFR etc.

  3. it's a rather gnarly affair, entirely possible there's been up to half a milion dead by now, 3/4 of that Ukrainian. I'm basing that claim on the estimates of amputees being 25-50k according to press quoting charities, and the amputee/KIA ratio being certainly somewhere between 6 (GWOT) to cca 30 (WW1).

So, it's perfectly clear why we aren't talking about it.

So we agree women are just clueless about male preferences, and likely to believe stuff such as that men find women like Kate Moss on average as sexually attractive as women of the type of say, Bellucci or Hayek ?

There's some men who find fat people attractive - I mean, genuinely fat, not the fat but 'built like a brick shithouse' body type that is attractive to maybe half men even if the BMI is firmly in the 'overweight' range. (the girl in picture is actually obese, BMI wise, weighing 90 kg at 1.68m).

But it's a small amount of men, very small. Impossible to gauge how small really, as none of the porn databases are well marked. I believe it's even smaller than the % of homosexual men. Nevertheless, they exist.

I remember being stunned a decade ago seeing a guy bring his huge girlfriend or maybe wife to a cyclist restaurant right at the city limit. They drove there ofc. She was at least twice as heavy as he was and wearing tight fitting clothing.

/images/1716038666871458.webp

replica at one’s mercy, an infinite horizon of choice without responsibility or constraint.

What % of people find those games appealing ? That does get incredibly boring, fast.

from a young age I always preferred linear, narrative-driven games as opposed to open world sandboxes. My favorite games were games that were devoid of choice, games that robbed you of the ability to make a choice

I have, at times, suffered what seemed to me like episodes of minor existential horror contemplating the 'world' of narrative driven games like say, Half-Life 2. The protagonist exists in what is, essentially a linear corridor, and he can only move forward. Whatever he may want to do, there's nothing he can do but move forward.

Fuck your art. Games are older than art, and good games are the difference between life and death. Philosophy, meanwhile, is mostly confusion.

But I can’t say I ever expected Ukraine to come out on top.

Given the pushback I've been getting here over the last years, there's a good few people who expected it. One would think so, except it's apparent the entire military procurement sector in the West is vastly more corrupt than in Russia.

This is an unwarranted response, I think.

I'm generally suspicious of CS_CA but he's right here.

Is there any paper where women opine on male preferences ? I'm sure there is.

A guy in Kiev blews himself and the recruiter guy wrestling with him up with a grenade. It was a homemade one, looks like both survived.

At this point, I don't understand why Ukrainians simply refuse to move when 'recruited'. Unless they start killing them, getting a beating is preferable to getting blown up, and they can't maim recruits because that'd defeat the entire point.