DinoInNameOnly
Wow, imagine if this situation was reversed
I sometimes write about whatever I find interesting. Software Engineer by day. Rationalist-adjacent, I guess.
User ID: 873
Do you have any examples? I have not seen people arguing that people do not have natural differences in conscientiousness etc.
What's the limiting principle for this? Lots of people can be upset or offended by all sorts of things.
What if I find it offensive and upsetting when people censor words instead of spelling them out?
What is gained by censoring it? It's just letters arranged in a particular order, they can't hurt you. Treating words as though there mere utterance (even when just mentioning them) somehow causes harm is quasi-religious and stupid.
This seems plausible, but can you provide any evidence for this claim?
No, like I said itās 47% of younger Trump voters that are female.
Either Iām misreading you or youāre misreading me. The numbers I shared are for people under 30.
So why do young women hate conservative men?
Young women don't hate conservative men. Liberal young women hate conservative men (and conservative women), but conservative young women like conservative men. The majority of young women are liberal, as are the majority of young men. Conservative young men outnumber conservative young women, but not by very much. In 2020, 47% of people under 30 who voted for Trump were women.1 To the extent that this dating app is suffering from an imbalance of male and female users, it's probably for the same reasons that all dating apps suffer from that problem.
1 I calculated this number using exit polls. For men, there were 7,457 total respondents of whom 16% were under 30 and 41% of those voted Trump, for a total of 489. For women, there were 8,096 total respondents of whom 17% were under 30 and 32% of those voted Trump, for a total of 440. 440 / (489 + 440) = 47%.
If you Google "cheating scandal" right now, Google can't figure out which story you want. There's like six different things you could be looking for.
-
Pro Poker Rocked By Alleged Cheating Scandal Where Winner Repaid $269K To Loser
-
Chess Investigation Finds That U.S. Grandmaster āLikely Cheatedā More Than 100 Times
-
Fishermen nearly won a tournament. Then weights were found in the fish.
-
Nia Longās Fiance Ime Udoka Suspended From the Boston Celtics Amid Cheating Scandal
-
The Try Guys Release YouTube Video Laying Out Exact Timeline of Ned Fulmer Cheating Scandal
-
Adam Levine Returns to the Stage After Cheating Scandal With Support From Wife Behati Prinsloo
First of all, obviously these are two different kinds of cheating. The first three are people gaining unfair advantage in competitions and the latter are men having sex with women other than their wives. But I think it's defensible to discuss these together. After all, there's a reason we use the same word for both behaviors. Both are a major ethical breach where one person gains an unfair advantage at something by breaching an agreement.
(If we broaden the scope to "ethics-related controversy" we can throw in the recent chaos on Twitch over gambling and an alleged sexual assault coverup to this list.)
Is it schizophrenic to suggest that maybe it isn't a coincidence that this is happening at the same time? It kind of sounds insane, obviously it's a coincidence. But I don't know, sometimes it just feels like there's something "in the water" culturally and there are suddenly similar things happening in many places at once. An example of this is how sexual harassment/assault/etc. accusations tend to come in waves against many people all around the same time. Another example is just about everything that happened in June 2020. But in those cases I think the explanation is that a political movement that had been gaining steam for a long time is behind the phenomenon and the fact that the media is paying attention to it fuels more activism in a positive feedback loop. In this case there's no political movement and it's not clear how e.g. Magnus Carlsen withdrawing from a tournament over suspected would make it more likely for a fishing tournament organizer to decide to cut open some suspiciously heavy fish in the same sense that Harvey Weinstein getting canceled for rape makes more women share stories of sexual assault in Hollywood or one statue getting torn down leads to activists to try to tear more down.
Maybe this is actually normal, and there are always this many cheating scandals going on? If so, what were the ones from before? I heard of all of these stories, and I didn't hear about any from 2022 before September. Maybe this is a media phenomenon where cheating scandals are getting more attention now because there are no other major stories to take up the oxygen? If there were any cheating scandals coming out in, say, the month after Russia invaded Ukraine, or the beginning of the Covid pandemic, or the weeks before a presidential election, they probably wouldn't get much attention because there's just more important things to talk about. But none of that is happening now, so the media is free to focus on the Try Guys and it bubbles up to my awareness in a way it wouldn't otherwise. Maybe there's somehow a cultural energy towards exposing cheating, and for some reason people in many domains are turning their attention to it.
Or maybe I'm being crazy and it's a coincidence. I don't know. I'd be curious to read what other people think of all this.
As The_Nybbler pointed out, there is also a vaccine mandate for foreigners entering the US and Germany has mask a mandate on public transit, so there are mandates that apply to the "general population" too.
It's kind of hilarious reading all the Mottizens in this thread explain their interpretations of the term that are way more intelligent and charitable than the truth. It just means "women are a meme, lol".
Zorba explained it here: https://www.themotte.org/post/2/culture-war-roundup-for-the-week/778?context=8#context
Isn't that to be expected, though
I mean, yeah, that was kind of my point back in January.
Just got a RemindMe message from January and want to follow up on it. On January 3, one of @Highlandclearances's predictions for 2022 was that all mask and vaccine mandates in Western countries would be lifted by September. They said:
90% All mask and vaccine mandates in all Western countries will lift by September. 30% by June.
I said:
If youāre taking bets Iād take this one at even odds. This seems so extremely unlikely to me that itās hard to believe you mean it.
They said:
I do. I think the median voter in most countries has pivoted from concern about Covid to exhaustion fairly rapidly. Even the most risk-averse people I know personally now want full reopening. Eventually power hungry governments will deliver reopening especially once vaccines are approved for children under 5 and there is no further milestone to justify waiting for before the end state is reached.
That said, I have a charitable view that governments are not using Covid to arrogate permanent powers and restrictions. I think very soon, if not now, their incentives from the public will flip to normalize as fast as possible and away from being biased toward social desirability (being seen to do more rather than less).
It's true that many mandates have ended. But they said all mandates would be lifted, and the US still has a mandate for healthcare workers to be vaccinated against covid. The Pentagon also has a vaccine mandate. Many colleges also mandate covid vaccines. I think I was right. I'd be curious to hear what Highlandclearance thinks they got wrong in this prediction.
(This feels like a mean callout post, but that's not my intention. I greatly respect people who are willing to go out on a limb and make falsifiable predictions. I didn't have a list of a bunch of 2022 predictions, so I recognize that there is some unfair asymmetry here.)
I really hope calling women the "meme sex" doesn't become a thing here... It doesn't feel like the sort of thing you would do if you were trying to "write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion."
I agree that there are some people who treated it this way, but then why would Pai/Trump bother repealing it, if that's all it was? Why spend their political capital on this, if it doesn't make a difference?
So... What happened with net neutrality? It's been 5 years since the FCC voted to repeal it in 2017. Net neutrality supporters promised a dystopia where small businesses and individuals are throttled by ISPs, and consumers have to pay for each website separately.
As far as I can tell... That didn't happen? Nothing happened? Did it even matter? I must be missing something, why would anyone bother trying to repeal or keep net neutrality if it doesn't make a difference? Biden apparently made an executive order in July 2021 asking the FCC to restore net neutrality, but they haven't done it. The Wikipedia article doesn't have much on what happened after 2017 other than legal developments (on the national level, there were two failed congressional laws and a failed lawsuit by Mozilla to restore net neutrality).
I went ahead and created an issue for this: https://github.com/themotte/rDrama/issues/360
The report comment button is grayed out and clicking it doesn't do anything.
"Rape is about power, not sex" is not an attempt at a definition of rape, it's just a statement about rape.
Any attempt to project the current political-cultural divide further back than maybe like 1950 at the very earliest always seems like a tortured version of Whig history to me. The idea that the Protestant Reformation was somehow the same movement as the modern movement that supports same-sex marriage and gender theory as core values is so absurd that I'm not even sure how to respond.
I think it would be good to also mention that we have a long backlog of development tasks and we welcome volunteer developers who support our mission.
Iād be more comfortable contributing money if I was confident it would be spent responsibly. Some kind of regular financial report or other kind of transparency would go a long way towards that.
A difference between Gawker and Alex Jones is that Gawker is a company and Alex Jones is an individual. What that means is that Gawker can file for bankruptcy as a company and leave much the personal wealth of the individuals involved out of it. The individual who published Hogan's sex tape, A. J. Daulerio, did not have his life ruined and pretty much carried on as usual; He went on to found a website and newsletter called The Small Bow. The individual who founded Gawker, Nick Denton, was "only" on the hook for $10M personally (this sounds like a lot but remember it's 1% of what Alex Jones was fined for) and is apparently running a venture called Dialog Engineers.
More options
Context Copy link