@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 still think there was value, even at young ages to having male only places. You do need at least some single gender socialization so that young men and young women learn how to navigate their future roles in civilization and how to deal with their unique problems. Males need to see good modeling of channeling the extra energy that they naturally possess. Little boys are bundles of energy who need to learn how to channel it. Little girls have less energy but are much more naturally attuned to being catty and manipulative in social interactions and need to be taught to control those natural tendencies. You can’t do those things in a mixed gender environment because the problems are different and what would be good if a boy did it might not be for girls, or vice versa depending on the behavior.

Or maybe democracy doesn’t work for exactly that reason. Social security was never meant to support an entire generation leeching off the economy for 30+ years. In the beginning, the age of retirement was set above the median life expectancy. It was never adjusted for increased lifespans, until the difference is now 30 years. But nobody in a Democratic Republic ever votes against their selfish interests and thus it’s now expected that even though you’re healthy — in fact probably still active enough for even physical labor — you deserve a + year second childhood style retirement where you spend your time going on trips, playing games, and so on. And if the kids don’t want to pay for it all, well, sucks to be them.

To be fair, the same is true of other forms of gibs. No one will ever win an urban election on cutting welfare or Medicaid. No one will win an urban election on promises to test recipients for drugs, requiring work or education, or lowering the poverty level cutoff.

This is something that Yarvin is right about in regards to democracy at least as we currently do it. The name of the game is looting the treasury until it’s empty, lest the other side get there first and use it to pay off their loyalists. Eventually you run out of other people’s money to give away and it all falls apart because what you’d need to do to fix it would never ever win an election. Democracy therefore selects for winning elections rather than running the country and winning is the only thing the political class cares about.

The housing thing is part of how Anglo countries have generated generational wealth. Homes in America have always been seen as an investment and thus it’s impossible, politically, to let housing prices fall, or even slow the growth of housing prices.

Well, yes, but it might well be that people living in a situation where “movement” means walking between chairs have less metabolic activity than people who were out doing things. The day for most people starts with getting out of bed, sitting to breakfast, than walking to the car and driving to work than walking to the office chair, the walk back to the car and drive home where they sit and watch TV until they get up and sit to dinner.

It’s probably not helping to say the least.

And im always a bit suspicious of self-reported calorie counting studies simply because people tend to be absolutely terrible at measuring portions and thus they end up undercounting the amount of calories they are eating. Im not sure that’s what happened in Minnesota, but it’s a huge problem for diet studies.

Just to be devils advocate on CICO, the big issue is that most people are only paying lip service to the concept. This is true of most hard things.

There is a definite correlation between time spent butt-in-chair working on learning and actually learning things and thus doing well on tests. But … studying is hard and boring, and you would rather be doing something else. So you go after study hacks. And you’ll tell yourself that time spent studying only sort of matters, and that it’s really about something else. You’ll do worse than you needed to because you ignored the concept. Yes, there are more and less productive ways to study, but if you’re not putting in the time necessary, even the best practice will fail because you didn’t do the work.

Theory time:

100 years ago or even 50 years ago, you naturally got a lot more exercise than we do today. Just doing normal activities without a separate exercise program was probably more movement than most of us do. You manually cook, clean, mow the grass, and other chores. If you needed something you had to walk around a store, and might visit several. Add in a more physical factory or farm job and you’re probably adding the equivalent of an hour of exercise or two a day — but it’s just living life.

Also, because most people entertained themselves by doing thing with other people, rather than doing sedentary activities alone. Before there was a TV in your home, you probably did things with other people. Go bowling, or golfing. Kids would play pick-up sports. Teens would dance. People walked around and rode bikes. Again, this kind of thing was exercise that modern adults often don’t get.

Food was also more expensive and less available. Modern Americans are probably never more than 50 steps from a snack that requires no preparation. Go to any store — hardware, clothing, crafts, whatever. They also sell cheap ready to eat snacks. There are vending machines in every office and schools and in some cases parks. So for a couple of bucks, an American could buy a snack everywhere he goes. If you don’t have good willpower, it’s likely you’ll eat at least some of these foods between meals.

Our foods also taste better. We have a lot of good foods available and there’s a lot of variety. Spicy, sweet, Indian, Thai, Korean, you name it, you can get that kind of food. This coupled with the easy preparation (or no preparation), low cost, and easy access has kinda turned food into entertainment more than simply fuel for your body.

My theory on Keto is that by limiting carbs you feel full on fewer calories which is beneficial when you’re the kind of person who has trouble restricting calories if they feel hungry. Some people aren’t bothered by feeling a little hungry and aren’t tempted by seeing food available. Other people need to feel full and if they see treats around they’ll eat all of them.

Keto helps those people by making them feel full so they don’t seek snacks and giving hard rules that rule out most convenience foods. Breaded chicken is more carbs than keto allows, which means you have to make most meals at home and can’t just grab random food when it appears in the break room or during a meeting. That gives you more control over your diet.

The saying discipline equals freedom is true, if misunderstood. The best way to stick to anything is to decide beforehand. If you decide “im only going to eat these certain kinds of foods at these times,” saying no is a bit easier because you don’t have to decide if you’re going to eat that, you’ve already decided that food isn’t for you. It works for almost everything. If you decide to exercise on Tuesday afternoon at 3, you dont need to ask if you feel like it, you already decided.

I’m curious about the Minoan civilization and the Bronze Age collapse. I don’t really know how much documentation we have on either of those.

I think this is the ultimate issue of democracy. The goal is to loot the treasury for your political allies. This works okay as long as the money doesn’t run out. Unfortunately, we’re now in the era where we no longer have enough productive labor to prop up the gibs. And so you have the fun of watching as political parties try to decide whether to cut off the gibs and save the country, or continue the gibs lest the entitled burn down the country.

I mean the record isn’t good in the last 100 years. They don’t really innovate. Jews have a vibrant tech sector, a modern military, and a thriving democracy. Arabs have oil, and were it not for that, MENA outside of Israel would be as economically viable as South America or Central Asia. Nobody would know about them, just like nobody cares about the goings on in Peru or Chile or Kazakhstan.

I think most maths are going to ai simply because it’s really not worth the effort to keep legacy humans around. I can understand “human in the loop” in life/death decisions, but I don’t see why anyone would want to bloat a university with an entire staff that can be replaced with a laptop and openAI.

I’m fine with saying I don’t care that much about Ukraine as a country. It’s not in our strategic interest to care about Ukraine and frankly a lot of other countries like them.

It’s a matter of practicality. We cannot and should not twist ourselves in knots and waste lives and treasure unless it’s good for the West in general. We don’t have the capacity to intervene everywhere and even if we did, the results would be perpetual warfare that serves no one. What serves the cause of peace and global security is a predictable globe in which there are no wars. Prolonging a war because you don’t want one side or the other to win is not merciful, it’s cruel. More people die and even if you get to a stalemate, that’s just rearming for the next war.

Honestly I think the sentiment is exactly backwards. Rape culture arises less because men hang around men and more because they don’t. If a man doesn’t learn a healthy male view of sex, he cannot hope to get a girlfriend or at least will have a lot of difficulty. Add in that he never learns from other men how to be sexual in a healthy way, and he’s probably going to have the idea of women as objects or as perfect beings.

Birth control doesn’t help obviously, but I also know enough young people who want a family and children and can’t scrape up enough money to be financially stable enough to try it. If young couples had financial independence, a decent home, and a way to make sure that mom could raise the kids, there’d be less need to use contraception as well

If a person is naive about weight loss, counting calories has to be the starting point. It’s like the 5 year olds understanding of weight loss. You lose weight by eating fewer calories. If you know nothing else, that’s at least directionally useful and will be a good way to get started learning how to lose weight.

I’m not convinced that AI breaking containment by manipulating humans is exactly a weird concept. Humans scam and cheat other humans to get what they want all the time. Soccer players flop on the field to get foul calls. Suggesting things like that happening when they already have (Anthropic ran a sim where an AI was told to keep itself from being shut down and promptly scanned emails and tried to blackmail a fictional employee for having a fictional fling with a fictional secretary. Other incidents include the AIs agreeing to break containment and hide it.) are not big leaps of faith. AI has done this, humans do it all the time, and it’s how things work, especially when humans tend to go along with ideas that flatter them or appear to come from a high status person. If AI sends a technologically naive boomer an email that appears to come from his boss asking him to click on a link, he’ll probably do it. This is well enough known that most scammers try this.

Ukraine was always going to end this way, and if I were in charge I would have told Zelenskyy to get stuffed in 2022 when this all started. Its just not in our strategic interests to prop up the independence of a small unimportant bit of farmland at the cost of using up our strategic reserves, making us more dependent on Muslim energy, and placing us in a terrible position of showing weakness to the globe and not being able to defend actually important Taiwan and its high end chips from China.

Zelenskyy was brilliant at quipping about not needing a ride, but that’s a shitty reason to arm them and ultimately proved Europe to be mostly too weak to worry about.

Yeah exactly, if Trump weren’t doing the things he’s doing the way you see him doing them, essentially, they would not happen, because the system is ossified into inaction, and will never give the benefit of the doubt to someone who actually wants to change things. Take any issue, and imagine doing it the way you think you want Trump to do them. Imagine Trump going through channels for the ballroom. It would never have been started. He has to go through Congress, but at that point he’s not ever going to get permission. All of a sudden, people who never gave a thought for the Rose Garden would have worried about the loss of a wonderful historic monument to … something. Every aspect of the plans would have been picked apart and carefully checked for signs of fascism. And then there’s the budget — oh my god the budget — every penny scrutinized and fought against by people who want those dollars for their own pet projects. And ten years later, despite ample evidence of how easy it is in 2026 for state and non state actors to threaten world leaders, the president would still be forced — probably into the 2040s — to go into places that cannot possibly be made secure like hotel ballrooms and outdoor venues. Nothing would be done until there is a successful attack, and maybe not even then.

Much, much better to just rip up the useless garden and start building the ballroom so that it actually gets done and future presidents don’t have to risk having major events in insecure locations like hotels that literally anyone can book a room in. Sure the complainers will complain, and everyone will be told to see this as evil tyranny, but as I said above, that was never ever not going to happen. The only difference between Trump’s way of doing things and the way most politicians do them is that in the end, the thing is actually done. And that’s what Trump learned in real estate. If you decide to do something, better to move fast, break things and get into motion. Most people will pretend to have been for the thing once it happens.

I mean it’s good advice and it’s true, but it’s kinda like saying you get to grandmas house by saying “in a car.” The advice is true, and anyone telling you to ignore calories is giving bad advice. But the better advice would be to tell people how to make better choices in meals and snacks so they feel full while not eating as many calories, or ways to burn more calories while not feeding like they’re doing heavy workouts. Thinks like eating popcorn over chips or more veggies, or avoiding fried foods is good advice because it Lowers calories.

It’s also a point that you chose a major that has no practical value in the real world. Im not sure about most employers, but to me, it’s sort of a negative that a person chose an entire course of study that everyone knows is useless.

I largely agree, though I think it’s also the old people as well, as so much of current social and political activity seems to be going towards coddling the elderly and at best ignoring if not punishing the young that it’s almost absurd. Tax rates for retired people is capped in my state, especially real estate taxes which fund stuff that workers and parents need like good roads, schools, police departments, etc. Most of the entitlement programs outside of WIC by dollar are for old people— SSI and Medicare cost more than the military at this point, and with no requirement that the older people do anything productive for the economy or society in general.

As far as infrastructure, there’s much more political will for things that older people want around than for stuff younger people want. Play grounds are too much money, but golf courses get breaks. Low end restaurants you could reasonably take a family with kids aren’t built as often as higher end places that are pretty kid-unfriendly. If you’re under 40, you don’t matter

Yes, but on the other hand, making it easier means opening up security holes that will be exploited. If I just take a woman’s word for that her name had changed, then obviously, people can use that to register multiple times, or register when they should not be allowed to. Allowing people to register in locations that are not set up as voter registration sites, means that potentially people slip by because the person working the counter doesn’t do due diligence. Online registration is absolutely easy to commit fraud with because if I have your name, a picture of a driver’s license issued to you, and your DOB and SSN, I am you to most online registration systems. That’s why identity theft is so common. It relies on the obscurity of data in a world where data is easy to come by. And without a physical appearance by the person, Theres zero chance of noting that the picture on the photo ID is of a white male, and the person in front of me is black. Online, doesn’t matter, heck if im good with VPNs, I don’t even need to be in the country to become you to most online systems.

I think the difficulties created by the requirements of securing the registration system can be solved by simply expanding infrastructure in a controlled and secure way. Opening a new registration center is probably not nearly as costly as it’s made out to be. Johnny Brockscan set up hundreds of Halloween stores in October every year. Having the government rent out an empty retail space for two months in rural areas is probably not that hard.

Europeans generally (except for Britain), doesn’t really have a useable military capability. They have a nominal military, maybe 5% of GDP, and one that hasn’t been used for any serious war since WWII. Of course they aren’t going to go into Iran over a few missiles aimed at their ships, they simply can’t do so. They don’t have the capability, the training, or the stomach to fight a hot war against an enemy with a real military. That’s why the European strategy to most confrontations is appeasement. That’s all they have, and they have to pretend that it’s the moral high ground to simply ignore the enemies and their growing power.

I agree on JCPOA. Allowing a country that wants nukes to stockpile enriched uranium is allowing them a nuke. They have to agree, basically, to stop juuust short of the kind of enrichment that would create weapons grade uranium, while totally pinkie swear that they would never enrich further. Of course, the nominal inspections were meant to prevent the final step, while ignoring that uranium is easy to hide, and final enrichment isn’t that hard. It was intended to fail, as it could not possibly work, and quite often it would mean that they can create the weapons while giving their rivals the false sense of security that they couldn’t be developing a weapon because they’re being inspected (in ways designed to miss weapons development).

Exactly, but it also means that the people getting these degrees not only waste 4 years of their productivity being IQ tested, but because they start out upwards of 200K in debt, which delays all kinds of things that would be useful for the economy. Crazy things like, buying a house, taking vacations, having children and thus needing the kinds of things you need to feed and clothe a child. These things, in 1950, generally happened in your twenties, and now most people are forced to delay their home and family starting activities into their thirties which reduces the likelihood of having lots of children and thus raising children. This has by now created a situation in which the population is shrinking and thus unless we import workers, there’s no way to keep the systems running.

Im trying to find a better term for what I mean. What I mean by technical is a program that is skill based and related fairly closely to actual career paths that a person might do in the future. So an engineering degree that’s math, physics and engineering skills taught with the aim of working in engineering is technical, but so is a business based degree that teaches the kinds of skills that would be typically used in an office setting doing business work — things like marketing, finance, accounting, business management, etc.

What im making a distinction against is the kinds of humanities degrees that are based on learning things that are not based on any kind of useful skills. At best provided that the school cared enough to require professors to do so, you might end up with marginal writing and research skills. Even then most of those skills would be more easily taught in the technical degrees. They’re mostly useless, and I can’t imagine that anyone would look at a guy with a history or literature degree and choose them over a person with a degree in some more “technical” degree focused on useful skills that can be immediately applied to my actual business.