Fruck
Lacks all conviction
Fruck is just this guy, you know?
User ID: 889
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
19hr ago
I know you are responding to a post that is identical to another and I believe it is valuable to use the same format to highlight the problem, so I don't mean to target you but I feel like I have a brain injury while reading the motte now.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
22hr ago
Note not Carmelo Anthony, even though Google autofill will try to change it to that if you type in 'karm' and otherwise refuse to guess.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
1d ago
Yeah when you write features you get a set amount of time you work out with your editor based on the estimate of the amount of time and work you'll have to put in. It can range from anywhere from 24 hours (usually a group project) to years (although that's more for when a publisher wants to hire a well respected author so they'll go to to their dinner party). When you write copy, you slam it out as fast as you can. Copy used to be a path to feature writing or correspondence, but nowadays it's just a molochian devourer.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
Yep this is it exactly on the journos behalf. Except change half to 90% - and that's being charitable. The publishers could change this but don't however, because they don't want people leaving their site for any reason ever. What if they don't come back!? They are often right to be afraid - after all why continue reading some moron's interpretation of a study when you can just read the study itself? Or why listen to a journo's memory of a politician's policies when you can check out their website and discover them for yourself?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
I do appreciate the strategy involved in using an article about a vibe shift to attempt to shift the vibe here though.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
I think it would have turned out ok if he'd stuck with them though, or at least not backed down the way he did.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
2d ago
That example works for me because I understand the underlying principle then - only you live inside your brain - but it absolutely works, I wouldn't be able to hang out on the motte if it didn't, because despite having no trouble on chans and lolcow farms, opinions on the motte hurt more because they matter to me. And on the motte the labels and attacks that hurt me aren't even meant as attacks it seems, or at any rate are never insulting enough to regular people to merit any mod action.
If an ad hominem feels accurate, step back a little and reassess - @urquan says we see many ad hom attacks based on success with the opposite sex allowing malicious actors to exploit a vaccum, and he's absolutely right, but it's not just pure maliciousness motivating them, it is also deep insecurity. (insult threads blur the line though, not everyone engaged is serious). You don't need to aggressively attack others when you are happy with yourself.
It all circles back to only you live in your head though. You can't be sure your attacker did it out of insecurity, but inside your head that makes as much sense as anything else. If it doesn't, find something else. What good are rationalisations if you can't use them to get out of a funk?
One thing that really upsets me (and I really hope me telling you this doesn't backfire on me, although that is what I expect) is when people use schizo or schizophrenic to mean violently insane or stupid. It used to make me so angry when people did it that I would burn with rage, because it affects me personally. But nothing ever happened if I reported it and me slinging a bunch of insults at the person who said it didn't do much except make people dislike me. But then I remembered I already had the answer, I'd had it for decades, since the days when I would get the shit kicked out of me on a daily basis - the only person who lives inside your head is you. Now when someone uses schizophrenic insultingly, or when one of our wealthier members casually insinuates something despicable about the working class I can respond in good humour.
The fact that you doubt your beliefs is a cool aspect of your personality you should be proud of, and it's probably looking like the biggest stumbling block for this method to work, but as a recovered schizophrenic I doubt my beliefs more than anyone. But beliefs inside your own head, beliefs with no outward facing elements about fleeting interactions with strangers, those you don't need to doubt, because they fundamentally don't matter. That's probably the one good thing about schizophrenia, the way it helps you delineate the difference between internal thoughts and thoughts that interact with reality, and see how your core thoughts remain distinctly internal at all times. But as I said, I have been using this technique for decades, schizophrenia is not a prerequisite.
You can prove it to yourself actually, by engaging in a bit of light trolling. Next time someone throws an ad hominem at you (I can't see the picture you linked or I would try to give you a better example) take what they said and instead of dismissing it amplify it. They say "you look like an incel" you say "and I fuck like one too". They call you a manlet you say "yeah my mum smoked when she was pregnant because she's fucking cool as shit." Or more universally, they say something about your appearance and you reply "yea that's true but my grandma says my dick makes up for it."
The only people you will be insulting will be yourself and your own family, and yet it almost always defuses the situation entirely, because you immediately demonstrate supremacy over your own mind.
I know I'm not very good at explaining myself, so if you have any questions I am happy to answer them. Or if you want to give it a go and someone insults you and you don't know how to handle it shoot me a pm and I can give you a new perspective on it.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
No government – regardless of which party is in power – should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue
(Garber quote from the first article)
Harvard struck a blow for academic freedom today when they stood steadfast against the civil rights act. Asked for comment on the matter, Harvard president Alan Garber replied "there is not a single value I hold I wouldn't throw away to make Trump look bad on CNN."
Harvard struck a blow for academic freedom today when they refused to stop asking the JQ, despite threats from the Trump administration. Asked for comment on the matter, Harvard president Alan Garber replied "according to the studies we've been doing over the past few weeks we won't need as much federal funding anyway without ALL THESE MISERLY KIKES around."
Harvard struck a blow for academic freedom today when they refused to allow the Trump administration to dictate policy, despite the threat of a freeze on federal funding. Asked for comment on the matter, Harvard president Alan Garber replied "I originally thought maybe we could moderate a little, but I have been reliably informed that this is the only path that still gets me invited to parties."
Jokes aside this is a negotiating tactic, just like Trump's overbearing demands.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
3d ago
Yeah that's fair and pretty sensible really. This is the motte though so I thought I'd better check.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
I agree, but it's like a slap vs a bullet. Your perspective of it seems highly susceptible to anarcho-tyranny. How do you repair a system that punishes you for trying to repair it? That's usually how this kind of thing starts - the unscrupulous don't give a shit about laws of course, but to get the scrupulous to ignore the law you need an already corrupted system.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
What I'm saying though is that it isn't the people who are wrong, it's the system.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Perhaps, but the issue here isn't everyone else doing it, it is specifically the government and system that enacts and enforces the rules. If that system doesn't play by its own rules, then playing by those rules will only hurt you. You can not expect a system without enforced rules to produce any other result, because even if you play by the rules others will not.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Whether the US will cut its current deficits is up to the electorate. I'm not particularly hopeful about the prospect given that the current electorate is full of populist idiots that would punish politicians for making the correct long-term decisions vis-a-vis deficit reduction, but it's certainly theoretically achievable.
Lmao yep I agree one hundred percent. Except for the populist modifier, that's just your nail. Unless 95% of the country are populists now. Or are you suggesting that the democrats (who think populists are evil) would cut ss Medicare or welfare were they in power?
You call me excessively fatalistic, but I think you are being naive. Trump is a symptom, not the cause of our leaders' incompetence. (After all if the universities could fix the economy, why didn't they when Biden was in charge?) I am actually not completely blackpilled by that realisation however, because there is a silver lining to learning that our elite human capital are just idiot narcissists - it means you can let go of the idea that there could be a society of people who don't punish politicians for making the correct long-term decisions. Due to the confluence of unintended second order effects, perverse incentives and incompetence, our society is fucking atrocious at producing people who won't punish politicians for making the correct long term decisions, but it's even worse at producing politicians who will make the correct long term decisions.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
what they were created for! Only a pendant (maybe with extremely nerdy glasses) would nasally insist 'it was made with the best of intentions! that should matter!'
Ahem, did you actually mean to say pedant?
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
5d ago
Sorry it took me so long to reply, I started writing one last night but I was being lazy and writing it in the website and brave refreshed and I lost it.
And no, I want both parties to get serious about tackling the deficit. It'll likely require a compromise of both some tax increases and spending cuts, and by virtue of how the budget currently is, some of those cuts will almost certainly have to come from elder care. The best time to stop kicking that can was 30 years ago. The second best time to do so is right now.
You know it's not going to happen though no matter who is in charge though so why would you want him to try it if he's just going to fuck it up? I can tell you my reasoning - I don't know if tariffs would work, they seem crazy to me but so does printing infinite money and that's the only other option I ever see offered! To be fair, this isn't my wheelhouse, maybe in economist circles everyone knows a way to fix it that isn't either tariff negotiations or 'hum loudly enough that you are distracted from the topic', but in the msm I only hear about how crazy and destructive Trump is, and no alternatives except shit like 'do a vat instead' and other solutions that amount to maintain the status quo.
I assumed the doge cuts were meant to be performative, meant to be bread and circuses in preparation for hard times. Because we aren't fixing the economy without hard times. But now he's rolled back the tariffs, which given how Trump operates likely means an internal pillar of support collapsed. And yet even still, the amount of effort his opposition had to deploy to disable him is insane! So I return to the hill I always die on - I think Trump plays up his buffoonery so people underestimate him, but maybe he is just a dummy. Whatever he is, his opposition aren't any better, they are just better at hiding their fuck ups. Either way it looks like we aren't getting the economy fixed without a proper disaster.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
6d ago
Yeah it's interesting actually - because of the way the motte is displayed on my phone, it placed "Does driving the truck not open up possibilities of non-" on the first line and "garbage truck driving?" on the second, and due to that separation I intuitively read it as non 'garbage truck driving', so same business, but not in a truck. But when I quoted your post after you explained what you meant it printed non-garbage truck driving on the same line, and it was obvious what you originally meant. Sorry for my confusion.
Anyway it does for sure, but council truck driving is nothing like private truck driving. Despite being the most precious person I know when it comes to smells, I'd be happy to get a job driving a garbage truck if I was out of work. But you'd never convince me to drive trucks interstate or for earthworking. The amount of money you get for the work and risk is completely out of whack.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
Ah I was thinking of advancement strictly within the same company.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
When I was doing IT for the council here it was the other way around - everyone started off in the tip or the depot and was trying to get a job in the trucks. Driving the truck waa the easiest job there, because you never had to do heavy lifting.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
I'm not happy about it, and agree it is unserious but the other unserious position in this fight is the idea that anyone actually thought Trump was going to cut Medicare, social security and welfare, regardless of how much waste him and Musk claimed they would take care of. And while I understand why people who support Trump or conservative goals would be annoyed, I can't imagine why anyone who thinks Trump is a buffoon would want him to go after Medicare and social security unless they wanted more outrage.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
This is such a fucking weird angle, I don't understand why progressives keep deploying it. No, they were explicitly what the people asked for - an end to stupid frivolous spending. Not an end to social security and Medicare. Nobody asked for that. They just wanted to stop the USG from spending American tax dollars to fund ridiculous frivolous bullshit like communist rap albums and teaching lesbian farmers about sustainability.
And considering your position on Trump, the idea of you wanting him to go after Medicare and social security is confusing. It's like you actually don't give a shit about the economy, you just want Trump to do more big things "where Trumpian buffoonishness is almost immediately apparent in a number of ways", because the only thing you care about is being outraged and outrage at trumpian buffoonishness often has a curious way of dying out with the start of a new media cycle.
Fruck
Lacks all conviction
7d ago
Psychological pain is like physical pain. You have to use willpower to push past it until it has happened so many times that your psychological nerves are dead and it no longer hurts.
But then you will either appear to be dead inside, or you will just be dead inside.
The way I do it is to think of it sort of like spheres of influence. You currently see the situation as that dude attacked your avatar and you felt hurt, but that's not actually the situation. The actual situation is that you are sitting at your computer or on your phone and you read a comment and the way you interpreted that comment hurt. Yes you interpreted the comment the way it was meant, but that doesn't matter, what matters is that all of it took place within your own head - influenced by others, but unaffected because only you have any impact on your thoughts. And when you read that comment, inside your brain you know that it is bait, and more importantly you know you are right, that's why you argued in the first place. That might change in the future, but right now you know your argument is correct, and the fact he replied with an ad hom is further evidence that you are right. So who cares what that idiot thinks? He doesn't live inside your head, you do. Brush that dirt off your shoulder.
Like training physical pain tolerance it will still hurt, until it doesn't. And it won't work all the time regardless, and if you are betrayed or attacked out of nowhere it can fail. But that method definitely helps even if you aren't planning on becoming dead inside.
They were more sensitive to the rights of prisoners 'in general' when we weren't forcing female inmates to bunk alongside male rapists. And plenty of people gave a shit about it and begged the government not to do it, and were told they were killing vulnerable trans women.
More options
Context Copy link