CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
No bio...
User ID: 333
Probably just being exaggerated. Soldiers (and presumably sailors) love to whinge. It's their greatest pastime. I would guess the Sun has picked up on independent snippets and packaged them together and fed them to an amenable ex-navy source for the 'Horrific' quote. It wouldn't surprise me if all of the events happened on different trips and the 6 month patrol only happened once.
The minor points in the story are practically meaningless as independent issues. The big issue though is indeed having a 6 month patrol. No one signs up for that. It's telling that even this story is worried about food, but not focused on the psychological toll on the crew for being away from home for so long, while living in claustrophobic conditions with censored communications. While the 6 month patrol was likely a one off, the govt should increase funding to get the maintenance situation under control.
I watched the whole thing. The first hour was a bit hard to get through due to Trump being Trump and 'weaving' some long monologues or rehashing the same tired material we've heard before.
After that though, there were quite a few pieces that I found interesting.
-
I really liked when Trump would bring up something that he was clearly knowledgeable about such as regulations and their effects on businesses. His explanation about how environmental consultants (and some lawyers) are incentivized to drag out Environmental Impact Statements and the like, reflects what I've seen about some of this in the real world.
-
He seemed to be pro-nuclear and particularly pushing for Small Modular Reactors over (more complex) Large Nuclear Reactors.
-
He's clearly got a Principal level understanding of the building industry. Actually it was his aside into how building commissioners would ask him to tear something down if it wasn't built to spec that did this (as well as how he stopped himself going into detail about modern construction materials like reinforced concrete). All this knowledge is great when you want new infrastructure to be built. He can sniff out bullshit when people tell him what can and can't be done.
-
I found it amazing that Trump was really nonplussed when Rogan emphatically described how the media and deep state elements had unfairly crucified him. He reacted like he'd been told the sky is blue. He really must just have that baked into his world view by now.
-
He really doesn't care about aliens. At all. He seemed to find them so boring it was palpable, while Rogan was wild eyed talking about them.
-
It was hilarious how they pretended they haven't been trash talking each other in the past. Bridges have been mended it seems.
-
The message is the medium. I mean that in the sense that Trumps ability to do an unscripted 3hr conversation will stand well in comparison to Harris who couldn't do Rogan due to 'scheduling conflicts'.
-
I don't know how many new voters this will win over. To be honest I can't see a lot of normies making it through the full 3 hours. The bite sized clips of the interesting parts (JRE clips) will likely be a lot more influential.
After the McDonalds something-burger (heh), this podcast and Kamala's recent lackluster performance, I'm predicting a Trump win at around 55-60% certainty.
Generational financial security first. Secondly, technological advancement for the benefit of humanity.
I'd probably figure out batteries or energy storage in general. Then energy generation. Energy is basically a huge choke point for all sorts of things. Luxury gay space communism social technologies after.
Wish I was more creative, but this is pretty much it.
Don't forget the other October surprise of ex-model Stacy Williams accusing Trump of groping her back in 1993. That one seemed to fizzle out real quick.
lmao, thanks for this.
I second that his gaffes will be bad though.
This really is Trump's to lose. He should prepare for it as much as he did for the debate. Good or bad, anything coming out of this interview will be signal boosted to the heavens.
CNN and the New York Times can only dream of having the sort of veiwership, and cross-cultural appeal that The Joe Rogan Experience enjoys.
Events like this are just another nail in the coffin for the mainstream media. Could you imagine a single man having more political influence and ability to be a 'kingmaker' than an entire news network a couple of decades ago? Just amazing.
Apologies if this has already been covered, but is everyone aware that Trump is recording an interview with Joe Rogan this Friday?
There's bound to be some zingers to fill the news cycle coming out during an interview this big. We have no idea if the questions are vetted, but Rogan is normally pretty adamant about having freeform interviews where he can ask anything.
Some other points:
- Rogan historically has been anti-Trump and Trump has been anti-Rogan. In July 2022, Rogan said "I've had the opportunity to have him on my show more than once—I've said no every time. I don't want to help him. I'm not interested in helping him,". Trump for his part has been taking swipes at Rogan as recently as August.
- Their views on each other have seemingly softened over the past 6 months, with many podcasters recently asking Trump if he'd go on Rogan and him being lukewarm in his response (as compared to negative). Rogan has been evasive about any Trump interview for years, but has been pretty vocal about the mainstream media being coordinated to criticise Trump in the wake of the first assassination attempt.
- Musk hinted the interview would happen a couple of weeks ago.
- There's rumours Harris will also have an interview with Rogan. I can't see her performing well with Rogan's target audience (around 80% male, around 56% under 35yo) as everything she has done is moderated and controlled. That wouldn't work with Rogan's format.
I really think that the deal for this interview was sealed anytime in the last couple of months and its timing was coordinated for maximum effect. You couldn't drop this interview at a better time to affect the election.
I love uncensored travelogues like this. Just random observations, like who is getting abnormal amounts of cosmetic procedures, who is engaging in petty theft by not tapping on when boarding public transport. I made that last one up, but you get my meaning. Otherwise you get boring Youtube clips that focus on politically correct, sanitised observations.
It's not really. The New York Times' investigative branch can only find hearsay and Snopes can't find anything. I am trying to steelman the argument that Harris was telling the truth and this is all I can come up with.
Fair enough.
The New York Times has now seemed to find a friend that got told second hand by Harris's deceased mother that Harris was working there.
Wouldn't the Harris campaign (who were contacted by Snopes) be highly motivated to provide some evidence for this if it were true? They couldn't find one childhood friend who said 'yeah we worked at Mickey D's together'? This has (at least for the next couple of days until the next cycle) blown up to be front and center in the presidential race.
Snopes tried their best to prove this true and still failed.
Aside from the above-mentioned news reports, there was no tangible evidence of Harris working at McDonald's as a college student. We reached out to Harris' campaign, as well as McDonald's headquarters, seeking tax records or other proof — which could include photos or videos of her working at the restaurant, employment records or physical items such as a uniform or name tag. We also reached out to Harris' sister, Maya, as well as a close friend from Howard University seeking comment, and looked for public interviews by friends or family members of Harris' to confirm the story, with no luck.
I don't think it happened.
He's definitely done the 'Boss swaps jobs with a worker' schtick before with good results.
The video of this was freely available until recently, but I've been trying to search for it in Youtube and it seemed to have been memory holed until I found it through external search engines.
Edit: Clip was from Oprah's show in 2011.
Men are at risk of being popped, not women.
If you extend getting 'popped' to the broader concept of social exclusion then women are absolutely susceptible to this. More so they would be more sensitive to the idea too.
To simplify, the message is 'if you don't sign up to vote (for kamala) then you will be socially rejected', but its sugarcoated with 'you have the power to do this to high status men' so it doesn't cause anxiety in the message's recipients.
Edit: There's also an element of 'thinking past the sale' where there is a presumption that the group consensus is already 'its low status not to sign up to vote (for kamala)'
I've seen some recent podcasts where Silver is a guest and he seems to think the blue tribe still underestimate Trump. If he is a Democrat, at least he's taken his blinkers off.
The surprising bit is that the Harris campaign isn't targeting men with this but women, as indicated by ad targeting spend.
This makes a lot more sense. If directed at men its hamfisted and counterproductive. If (in)directed at women though...
They can't directly attack a woman in the ad (without turning them off), but they can show a very attractive man getting his social status destroyed. The message could be 'if it could happen to HIM, what do you think would happen to YOU?', but it's sufficiently buried under the power fantasy of rejecting a high status man to not get rejected by the women consuming it.
Biggest issue is probably to make sure the ad doesn't get viewed by men, but even if they did see it, were high status 6 figure men going to vote Kamala anyway?
only drink in celebratory bonding social settings with benevolent peers.
This should be carved into stone.
I know right.
Raise your hand if you've heard 'You're not an introvert' after you've told them, just because you aren't socially awkward.
Social introvert energy is something I think a certain type of extrovert will mine for. They just can't leave you alone.
I just spent my Saturday doing a winery tour out in the countryside with close friends.
I'm an introvert, but sometimes I really appreciate extroverts dragging me out into the right environment. We actually managed to fit 5 adults into a sedan to get out there (to avoid drink driving). There was just the right amount of degenerate day drinking, which was kind of ok because two among us had Summer dresses.
I think there might be something to 'touching grass'.
For orchestrating the abduction and killing of two Israeli soldiers and four Palestinians he considered to be collaborators in 1989, Sinwar was sentenced to four life sentences by Israel, of which he served 22 years until his release among 1,026 others in a 2011 prisoner exchange for Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.
This was the gift that keeps on giving. I hope governments everywhere are taking notes.
When I saw Fortnite. I used to be a huge Counter Strike Source player when I was younger and then naturally moved away from the FPS genre (RTS's too) as I aged. I just really didn't see the appeal of Fortnite at all, but I realised it was me that had changed when I saw how popular it was on Twitch.
Also Star Trek Discovery after being a big Trekkie when I was younger (Deep Space 9 was peak Trek). This is probably the best example of a franchise where a small minority of creators decided that only people with their niche values are allowed to enjoy the show any more. Trek was always kind of progressive, but it really jumped the shark in recent years.
How does it compare to Helldivers 2?
Their culture would become radically different (rationalist community on crack?). Some of the downsides of high IQ such as anxiety, loneliness etc would be mitigated because they would not be 'outside the norm' any more when the norm is 180. TFR would plummet but that probably isn't huge deal over 16 years.
Interesting. I've always used it in the North American sense, which is weird because I'm usually a stickler for using the Queen's English.
More options
Context Copy link