@MaiqTheTrue's banner p

MaiqTheTrue

Renrijra Krin

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 November 02 23:32:06 UTC

				

User ID: 1783

MaiqTheTrue

Renrijra Krin

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 November 02 23:32:06 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1783

I agree with this. What a lot of women seem to want, especially on the liberal end of things, is to be allowed to be as “sexy” as they want, act all slutty, and then get the community to go after the men who treat her like she was acting. Im half convinced that most women, Especially women raised in a sheltered, liberal environment have never heard the phrase “consequences of my own actions,” or if they did, only in reference to men.

They aren’t content because it very likely isn’t Christianity anymore. Christianity makes a lot of actual commitments to the nature of religion, God, humanity, sacraments, behaviors, etc. sooner or later, you either have to drop the tenets of Christian beliefs, or drop the pagan beliefs. Jesus is not one of many religious leaders, he’s either your Lord or you are not a Christian.

The sheer idiocy provoked the crime though. If she’s not there, dressed in provocative clothing, blackout drunk, the rape doesn’t happen.

I think you misunderstood the “all X are like Y” thing. It’s not literal. All men like sports does not mean literally every man likes sports, it means that that the median man will enjoy sports, and most men will follow sports. So if you’re making a prediction about the interests of a human male, sports in some form, whether playing or watching is going to be a pert of that.

Most modern secular women are exactly like the stereotypes suggest. And so if you’re dating a modern secular woman, you can roughly expect her to behave like a modern secular woman. And so as MSW are the most common women in a modern secular culture, you should roughly expect that the women you are dating is going to have those qualities and beliefs. And so you can either choose to look for places where women are religious and raised to be at odds with modern secular society.

I’ve always had that problem with the whole “victim blaming is bad” thing. It’s just pretty well obvious that going to a fraternity house, getting high and blackout drunk, etc. are things that will end very badly for you. I’m sure this is a surprise to absolutely nobody. And I don’t feel all that bad about “shaming” a woman who does that kind of thing and has the predictable happen. Like, why shouldn’t that be pointed out? It’s done routinely for every other crime out there. You would not think twice about “shaming” a guy who walked down a street in Compton in fancy clothing and flashing cash. Of course he was going to get robbed. Nor would not think twice about shaming someone who got robbed after posting that they were going on a ten day cruise. Things that are bad ideas should be pointed out. It doesn’t mean they deserve to be robbed, but at the same time, if you insist on being an idiot I don’t feel much need to feel bad for for pointing out that you are or were being foolish.

I suppose we’re going to disagree here, but I really tend to land on the point that the purpose of having a criminal response unit is to respond to and investigate crimes with a purpose of bringing the guilty to Justice and to keep the community safe by doing so.

When you make rules that suggest the police and law enforcement are not allowed to notice and act upon very obvious signs of criminality (in this case clothing highly correlated to gang membership and thus criminality), in the interest of doing the things we have police for. If there’s a gang connected shooting, I want the cops to talk to anyone in the area who looks like a gang member. I want the cops to notice an increase of gang fashions in my neighborhood, because there are zero good things that come from that, and probably a whole lot of bad things.

I’ll agree to reasonable policing where cops don’t have a blank check to do anything at any time, but it has to be reasonable in the other direction. You have to have rules loose enough that the cops can notice and deal with obvious signs of potential criminality. Or to notice that someone looks suspicious and deal with it.

Prayer and Mantras are not the same thing. A mantra is more internal to the self, and trying to reach an internal state of consciousness. Prayer is a request to a being. If im praying, im asking God for something. If im praying the Jesus Prayer, im asking Jesus Christ, the Son of God to have mercy on me a sinner. If Im reciting a mantra, it’s not directed to a being I have a relationship with. It’s not a request. It’s me wrestling with my mind trying to achieve a mental breakthrough.

I don’t see that as horrific. I think cops should be given enough leeway that noticing and responding to anything that makes a person likely to be committing a crime or likely to have committed a crime.

I mean I just don’t see it. The bar is pretty low, and most people would pass it just by chance. Things like the colored hanky are pretty rare in most places. Doo rags are maybe a bit more common, but really they come off pretty easily. And as I mentioned above, it’s already dangerous for people to walk the streets dressed like a gang member because rival gangs will shoot people who look like members of other gangs.

What I am suggesting is that it shouldn’t be considered authoritarian for a cop to recognize obvious signs of gang membership and act appropriately— which at minimum would be investigating why that person is in the area and whether or not they are armed or match the description of a suspect. I get that you need to have some caution about letting a cop detain or seize someone, but if the only way to solve a crime is for the cops to catch them in the act, there’s no reason to have the police investigating crimes.

I think it does affect the sport you choose. Baseball players especially pitchers tend to introversion where other team sports don’t.

The purpose is to add a cost to just joining. This has benefits especially if membership in a group is particularly valuable. And in some cases, being a frat can give you a leg up in job hunting or provide scholarships among other benefits.

Is it really back door sumptuary laws to say “maybe dont wear gang colors in a gang area”? I don’t think that’s reasonable, as really wearing gang colors and flashing gang signs in the wrong area is a good way to get pegged by a rival gang. This isn’t hard stuff either. Dont carry a colored hanky in your pocket, don’t wear a doo rag, and dont do weird signs with your hands.

That doesn’t seem like a high bar. You can still dress pretty badly

if, based on the totality of the circumstances, an objective observer could conclude that the person was not free to leave, to refuse a request, or to otherwise terminate the encounter due to law enforcement’s display of authority or use of physical force. For purposes of this analysis, an objective observer is aware that implicit, institutional, and unconscious biases, in addition to purposeful discrimination, have resulted in disproportionate police contacts, investigative seizures, and uses of force against Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) in Washington.

I mean this basically would include most encounters with the police that the party didn’t initiate themselves. An armed policeman with a gun is by nature a show of authority. His uniform is his authority, and most people would be properly intimidated by a person authorized to use force, in the uniform that symbolizes his ability to use force, walking up and asking questions about my activities. As such, especially if you throw in the race angle, most police encounters are seizures simply because a person knows better than to walk away from a guy with arresting authority and carrying a weapon.

That and the group is entirely composed of military aged men of high physical fitness. If you look at most political action groups left or right, the ages vary and the fitness level is pretty low. These guys could easily change clothing and march onto a military base easily

I think it’s the decline of two important things: expected church attendance and the single income family. Church was the dominant reason why things didn’t get scheduled on Sunday. But the two income family reduced the ability of families to participate in activities on other days — neither parent would be home before 5-6pm and by the time meals, homework and showers/baths happen, it’s time to go to bed.

I don’t think it’s about losing adherents per se. But I don’t think you can simply rip a practice out of a different religion and incorporate it into Christianity without it changing Christianity. It comes with baggage, philosophical, religious, and cultural. I don’t think you could adopt the Kabbalah out of Judaism without some integration of ideas. It even happens between denominations to some degree. I don’t think you could pray the Roman Catholic Missal without it having some impact on your Christian beliefs.

Rights versus safety is despite the Ben Franklin quote, not necessarily opposed. There are two ways that I can take your freedom. The first one is the government arresting people arbitrarily and framing them for crimes. The other is allowing crime to go on and get bad enough that ordinary citizens are unable to go about their lives. The second becomes even worse if the government also limits how a citizen can protect himself from crime. When that happens, the citizens are deprived of their rights just as surely as if the government had taken them.

Some rot more slowly than others. Monarchy has worked in England I’d argue from the fairly early Anglo Saxons to Victorian times. That’s a thousand years. 300 years seems to be a hard limit of democracy.

The big issue with democracy is that it by design tends to replace feedback loops with fake feedback. The common game is to insulate the mechanisms where the real decisions are made (the administrative state) from both electoral processes and from the consequences of bad decisions and failures. The steering wheel and the sensors are both disconnected and the driver has been told over and over to want to go wherever the car happens to be going at the time.

If you’re careful about it and actually enforce the rules, sure. If I can join the church and get away with bending or breaking the rules and codes, then no. That’s kinda what happened with the episcopal church. They officially have Cramer’s 24 articles. They just ignored them until there were more rainbows than crosses.

Im gonna blow your mind.

These kinds of things — they are, in a sense, the important stuff. Caring for yourself and your family, and figuring out how best to go about it is how real life works. Real life is jobs, chores, family and home care and so on. The ordinary stuff is where you care for yourself and the people and community you actually care about. Fake shit is the global type issues like international politics where you have no control over, culture war stuff that’s happening far away from you, AI stuff being done in companies you can’t control. They’re interesting to talk about, sure, but you have no control over it, and obsessing about it is not going to make your actual life better.

Im a woman, and a lot of older female conversations are about cooking, cleaning, husbands, and child care. Why? Because this is what adult female humans do with their time. Adult male humans deal with mechanical issues of the home and car, the yard, kids’ sports, and careers. And so you talk to your older relatives, you’ll get that, weather, and sports. Weather and sports are fun ways to connect to people around you, and the rest is real life.

To be honest, especially as I get older, I find the people who obsess over politics, culture war, fandoms, and so on to be the boring ones. They obsess over things like that mostly because their real life isn’t all that great. They don’t care about normal everyday life because they have nothing in their real life worth caring about. They don’t care about cooking because they live alone in an apartment and have no boyfriend or girlfriend to cook for. They don’t care about their career because they work in basement level restaurant or retail and thus they don’t have a career to care about. Their car is a junker, why worry about upkeep? In order to have time to obsess about politics and culture and viral trends and fandoms, you have to have the kind of life only a Redditor could love. They don’t have anything going on in their real life, so they can sit around and argue about non-real-life stuff.

The issue I have specifically with modern meditation is that the older version of this was explicitly Christian and often was meditation on Christian themes and often explicitly the Bible. David might have meditated, but he was mediating on the Bible, not just sitting there with an open mind watching his thoughts. The Orthdox use the Jesus Prayer, again not just sitting and breathing. Some older traditions use the psalms. The idea that Lectio Divino is the same thing as New Age mantras is not only silly but potentially dangerous syncretism.

Part of my issue with modern Buddhist and New Age meditation is that it makes a distinction in practice between the spirit and body. You are supposed to be training your spirit to be better often by ignoring the outside world. It thus tends to, in practice, lead to a kind of mind body dualism (which Buddhist philosophy accepts) where the practitioner identifies with his spirit as “his real self” and his body as a shell.

I think part of the infighting is the need for a strong immunity from entryism. Leftist groups don’t need to worry as much as rightist groups simply because it’s a constant issue. Rightists are the outgroup and they need to be sure that everyone in the group is there for the cause and not undermining the cause. A conservative Christian church needs to worry about liberals entering and changing the way the group views themselves.

I mean I think there are a lot of philosophical reasons that we ended up here. First of all, you have the blank slate growth mindset memes that say that any kid no matter what can do literally anything and that the only failure is to stop trying. This isn’t true, or at least not as true as we would like it to be. You might get a 10% improvement if you’re putting in more work, but you can’t take a kid who in tenth grade can’t do basic algebra and send him through the MIT engineering program. A second related problem is that equality of outcomes is expected, and thus any attempt to put kids into skill appropriate classes is going to be illegally discrimination if the classes are not absolutely equal numbers of all races and genders in each track.

Im mostly a pragmatist in most social issues. The best solutions are the ones that work for the majority of people involved. And I don’t really care to pretend that blank slate is real when most of my practical experiences with real people across all kinds of contexts show that humans are individuals practically from birth. There are vast differences in skills, interests, personality, and diligence that affect what a kid is capable of doing from birth. What’s funny to me is that we are fine with this in sports. We don’t take the kids who throw dirt clods in the outfield and shunt them through select high skill baseball as if they are simply one outstanding coach away from a future million dollar contract with the Yankees. They have tryouts, and you either make the team or you don’t, and everyone understands it and accepts it.

As far as schools becoming everything a kid needs, I think this is a problem of the government taking on those roles. It happens all the time. The government starts offering a service and other groups that had been doing those things tend to step back until the government is the only game in town. Why would you take the time to teach your kids to be good citizens when the government will do it for you? Why would a church or community group do that when they can outsource it to government?

I appreciate the idea, but I don’t think you can take the corpus of Islam and remove the hostility simply because it’s central to the foundation of the religion. Muhammad was a warlord. He conquered a territory which he then governed. There are lots of references in the Quran and Hadith to wars, rules of war, and historical battles. This is unavoidable, much like it’s unavoidable to say that Moses and Joshua had wars of conquest in the Torah. What changed for Judaism was that it had later revelations that encouraged peace and getting along with other tribes. Unless you have a second Quran, you’re stuck with the book and traditions you have written.

I’m not convinced it’s actually possible for AI to be “kept in a box”. For one thing, if you want it to be useful as anything other than a cute toy, it needs to be able to gather data and use that data. That means giving it access to other systems. And those systems may well have back door access to other programs that have access to either critical intranet or the general internet, probably both. In order to have that not be a problem, in order for the box to be foolproof, it needs to be physically air gapped from any other system. If you have an open socket, it’s not a foolproof box. But, having your AI agent on a single computer not connected to any other computer in your system and make sure that no one enters the AI room with any sort of device they can connect to the computer, you have no reason to use it. If I want AI to test code, I have to let it read the code. Am I going to write thousands of lines of code in a notebook, carry it to the clean room and spend two weeks copying it into the secure AI box? It would slow the process enough that it would not be worth it.

Furthermore, there are always bad actors and stupid people. The stupid won’t see any problem with releasing AI when the AI tells them it’s a nice AI and it will give that person a reward of some sort (or stop blackmailing them, which AI did in a safety test). Or maybe the Houthis who are putting AI into missiles and then asking Claude why the missile missed the target will give AI access to real world things beyond missiles. Or a criminal gang will. Or a rogue state. There are plenty of reasons why a human might purposely break containment, and it’s out for good.