@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 think gambling can, like most other potentially addictive activities or consumables have large negatives for those who tend to get addicted, and as such you should ideally be careful about removing too much friction around those things.

Making people gamble only in person at carefully selected places is less likely to be a severe problem than a gambling app in your pocket. Having to go to a casino to gamble means that it’s going to require a series of choices and behaviors that pulling out your phone and opening an app doesn’t. You have to put on pants and shoes, get into your car, drive for 10-15 minutes to a casino, walk in the front door, walk to the sport betting room, wait in line, and place your bets. To do the same on a sports betting app, you pull up the app, click three times, and it’s on. And you can potentially be betting before your frontal cortex catches on that you just bet $100 on a baseball game while momentarily bored in line at the grocery store. There’s also the issue of other people catching on. If your spouse drives to the casino every day to bet on baseball, you’ll eventually find out, because a daily hour long trip to a casino is … kinda hard to hide. Other people can see your car parked at the casino as well, so even if you have a clueless spouse, it only takes one nosey neighbor to mention seeing you at the casino and everyone will know it. Apps lack any potential embarrassment, because they are private. Remove all of that friction and I think it’s a bigger problem.

I think the situation is part of the moral dilemmas in creating carve outs. Any way you try to do it, you will end up with the same outcome which is people who want to do the illegal but lucrative thing end up simply skirting whatever the definition is so they are getting the thing but have just enough cover that they’re not technically breaking the law.

I mean until recently the left was much better at branding. They have an image of themselves as aspirational, as the party of the cool people, the people who are knowledgeable and have the right ideas. And they’ve built an image especially in the last two decades of themselves as the arbiters of moral values to the point that most left leaning people see even listening to a heretic let alone agreeing with them on anything as evil. The right is now synonymous with the worst elements of humanity in the twentieth century.

The right has no similar branding. There’s certainly potential. The right could seek to be seen as counterculture, the cool kids who just don’t care what anyone thinks. The ones unafraid to stick a thumb into the eye of power, the ones who challenge the substitute teacher. The class clown or the punk. Instead, they mostly come off as angry boomers. They come off as paranoid school marms afraid of the world.

The groups that I find attractive are exactly what I’m describing. I find the ones that say “you know what, I am tired of pretending that I agree with these common conventions and im not going to go along anymore.

With early voting opening up soon for many states, what are the chances Iran has an October surprise in store for Trump? Trump has stated that the U.S. will not resume military strikes on Iran before the November 3, 2026 (midterm election). The U.S. military is deploying roughly 9,000 to 10,000 additional troops to the Middle East, including the USS Theodore Roosevelt carrier strike group and the USS Makin Island amphibious readiness group, which departed San Diego on October 4–5, 2026. This surge brings the total U.S. military presence in the region to over 60,000 personnel and establishes three aircraft carrier strike groups in the theater for the first time since April 2026

I think it’s about zero. The people, for the most part, who oppose the war are already against Trump. They would have voted against Trump even before the war started. Democrats refusing to vote Republican is not the October surprise.

The pause is weird, because it betrays a lack of confidence in the war. If you think you can win, why wait? Why give Iran weeks to harden targets, plan counterattacks, coordinate with allies and move assets into position? If he’d never stopped, honestly Iran would be over by now because toe to toe, they cannot hope to defeat the USA militarily as we have the biggest military on the planet and well trained military forces using top military equipment. All Iran can do is mobilize terrorist militants and close the straits. Which is what will happen after the war resumes.

I mean the government of most modern Democratic countries is whatever the collective electorate has decided at the present time. It by definition cannot be a singular principle other then vox populi suprema lex esto “the will of the people is the supreme law”.

My interest in watching is zero, but I don’t have much of a problem with the concept of public execution or public punishments. The current version of execution does little to deter crime, but I think this is more because of how we do them. It’s private, it takes decades to actually kill (or attempt to kill) the condemned, and we do so in a manner that looks like any surgery done in the United States (except that the condemned usually never wakes up). Of freaking course an execution that takes 25 years, is private, and looks like a surgery in almost every way won’t scare anyone straight or give people confidence in the system. Add in a recent fuckup in Tennessee and the current method is exactly the worst possible way to execute someone. You get none of the deterrent effects, you get all of the stupid legal wrangling, you get potential fuckups, and thus it benefits nobody.

In the old days like the old west when you’d hang a guy from a tall tree because he stole a horse, it had an immediate effects on local thieves. They know the guy and know he took a horse last week, and know that the state is deadly serious about protecting property. They know how much it sucks to be hung. And so they’re less likely to do it. For the public, Justice gets served and served quickly. They thus know that their local government is protecting them and their property from being destroyed or taken.

As far as Hassan getting what he wanted, im not sure. The Middle East is not stranger to public punishment. Public floggings and beheadings and so on happen in that region. They’re not squeamish like modern westerners who never see that stuff. If you think that is going to encourage more terrorists, I don’t see it.

That’s true too. But they’re hiding the conservative exodus by allowing more bots, allowing multiple accounts and so on. People seem to think it’s hard to get rid of bots, but I think it’s probably easy if you’re sufficiently motivated to do so. It’s just often not in the best interest of the bottom line that they appear to have lots of activity on their site.

My gestalt in any story where there’s supposedly a non consensual event is to look carefully at the behavior of the accusers in the immediate aftermath of the event. If they’re not acting like something negative happened, then there’s a problem. The story likely is at best exaggerated and at worst fictional.

I don’t see why I should take prognosticators seriously unless they have enough skin in the game to worry about being wrong. I don’t see that with most polling data, and thus nothing derived from that data is at least partly suspect. Especially if the pundits in question can get it wrong and face no serious consequences for failure.

Reddit likely doesn’t care about bots because its business model depends on impressions it can sell to advertisers. The bots are impressions, active users, even if they don’t react to ads. If they purge the bots, I suspect Reddit is probably much smaller than they appear.

I’m going to somewhat disagree. There are a lot of affordability issues, especially for young adults. That’s a bit harder to pick up on because when you aggregate everyone in the workforce, you capture the big raises that go to some sectors of the economy and not the stagnation in others. You also capture a COL that can miss that some things have gone up massively while others have not.

If you’re in your twenties, the things that have gone up in cost (for example homes) are things that matter a lot to you, and that take up a bigger chunk of your potential budget. In the case of homes, you also don’t have a home to sell to raise money for that home. If im trading a house for a bigger house, I only need to come up with the money to afford the increase, I already have a house to sell. If you move on to groceries, an increase of ten percent is going to be huge if groceries are 15% of the budget.

I’m not sure how seriously I take polymarket, polls and Nate Silver. Not that they’re certainly wrong, but there’s always the issue of motivated reasoning. Elections are something that almost everyone cares about the outcome of, and this is going to come out in what people predict. A lot of people really really want a blue wave, just like a lot of people wanted Trump to lose. This shows up in polling data and predictions because they’re all made by humans.

Conservatives on X are crowing about how this shows that USAID was propping up leftist governments in Latin America. But... I just don't see the mechanism. The money spent was too small. The programs too ineffectual.

The likelier truth about USAID is, like most government programs, it was essentially useless. The biggest political effect is that it allowed leftists a sinecure with good pay and benefits. And cutting it was worth it for that reason alone. But did cutting USAID kill people in Africa or bring down communists in Latin America? Press D to doubt.

I don’t think it’s as simple as either side says. I don’t think USA was specifically trying to prop of Leftist governments in Latin America. But having said that, avoiding the problems that come from leftist policies does prop up leftist governments. It’s like anything else, removing the consequences of bad ideas simply enables people to continue making those bad decisions. So in that sense, because those leftist governments could rely on Americans and (American tax dollars) to bail them out, they suddenly face the political consequences of the results of leftist policies. They can’t hide from it, because if the government owned power plants can’t keep the lights on, they can’t hide that, and the public will demand better. This is why homeschooling and private schools are popular in the USA, the failures of public schools are too obvious to hide and changes are demanded.

Because it has a lot of alcohol, drugs, and sexy women in various states of inebriation. Where else can you find that? The library? The computer lab? Maybe the chemistry lab?

Im going to push back on Asian education being a sacrifice, I’d say it’s more like tryouts. You have limited slots of good-enough jobs for a huge population, so you need to sort the population so that if there are maybe a million really good jobs, 5 million decent jobs, another 10 million good-enough jobs, and a population of 50 million, the population has to be sorted, and the education system is probably the best place to do th3 sorting. Given that the results will be life long, people push educational systems to their logical limit.

I don’t think JBP is actually all that radical for a guy of his age and religious views. He’s all but come out as a conservative Christian of some stripe, he’s basically a 1980s conservative, which might be radical in current year, but in the era when he was growing up, things like “you cannot force me to affirm your pronouns” or “clean your room before you reform society” or whatever. Listening to the things he talks about on his channel don’t read as radical for a guy who’s at least 60, and in many cases is pretty progressive for his cohort.

In the context of going to a frat party, yes, it’s a reasonable expectation that getting blackout drunk and wearing very little clothing is probably going to end in rape. Not that all men are rapists, but the kind of PMC men who are are very likely to go to drinking parties at frat houses.

I think it might go full USSR or Yugoslavia. Identity is a hell of a drug, especially when combined with set asides.

I see most of the modern west as currupt and morally bankrupt as most of it really has no reason to exist other than nothing has replaced it yet. European civilization doesn’t serve much of a purpose, it doesn’t see itself as anything worth protecting or with any missions worth accomplishing. It’s just a political system that exists to manage whoever happens to be there while not protecting its natives from harm. If Europeans still believed in their own civilization or values, or saw themselves as something worth protecting, there’d be hope for the EU. Americans still see themselves as a people and a civilization worth working for. They have residual Christian faith (most are at least nominal) and residual belief in their system even if the government they live under barely resembles the government the Constitution describes or the founders intended.

NATO doesn’t really have even a pretend reason to exist. It’s supposed to protect Europe from Soviet communism. But given how much of European society has embraced most of the tenets of socialism, they wouldn’t have much to fear from communists. And the Soviets haven’t existed since the early 1990s. It’s basically an institution that has no real reason to continue, and other than the US, no serious military to speak of. Nobody is afraid of European military intervention, German tanks or British aircraft are not the enemy that would make anyone tremble. Only the USA has a military worthy of the name. Increasingly, however, we are afraid to use it, especially afraid of putting boots on the ground to occupy territory and destroy the enemy.

There are a lot of violent rapists, but women do not seem to care about them, and they don’t care about preventing that crime. They don’t advocate for harsher sentences and they don’t want to prevent the rape-inclined from migrating here. Neither do they want to introduce norms which prevent violent rape, like you find among the Gulf Arabs with 1/300th the rape per capita as us. It’s questionable whether women even care about justice as a concept: you don’t typically hear about a woman torrenting a book on judicial philosophy or discussing the merits and demerits of retributive justice online. They may occasionally discuss penal theories with their girlfriends but hardly of the judicial sort. It does not appear to me that they want “more justice” as evidenced by their complete and total disinterest in anything approaching an inquiry into matters of justice. I am exaggerating somewhat; there are of course women who pursue these fields in academia and produce important research. But the women yapping about the Cornell 7 are Not These Women but their opposite. They have probably never read the Wikipedia article on Blackstone’s Ratio.

I think the real explanation is to simply ask if the people doing anti-rape advocacy (and I see much the same in race-advocacy) are median women. The answer is pretty much no. Most of them are women drawn from the PMC, and as such they have PMC concerns about rape — specifically college male students and their right to dress and act as they please around them and blame them for the fallout. Other forms of rape don’t matter to them because as PMC females destined to work in the nonprofit industry, they are likely to live in safe neighborhoods and work with properly emasculated male colleagues. Workplace rapes still happen (to poor women, mostly) and local youths in poor neighborhoods still rape (poor women or women stupid enough to go into poor urban neighborhoods). But really, unless you are poor or go out of your way to visit the wrong sorts of neighborhoods especially alone and most especially at night, your chances of experiencing that kind of rape are practically nil. College rapes matter because PMC women go to elite colleges, and want to go to parties with men, wearing slut-worthy clothing and drinking/drugging themselves into a stupor. They want to do this and not face negative consequences.

I don’t think most people follow that advice explicitly. More often than not it runs: Good at X -> Like to do X, Does X in presence of opposite sex -> is seen as good at something, woman desires men of high skill -> dating and marriage lead to kids.

No matter what the specifics of being an ordinary person are, the vast majority of people will by definition be those ordinary people. It’s just going to happen by statistics. And if the vast majority of people in a society get shut out of the basic human rights of having a family and a home and so on, you’re very likely to end up with a revolution.

The modern west in general has a problem with consequences and hard limits. Women are getting it worse only because they have cultural protections that men are not given as much, or not in the same way. It’s still sort of there, but for the rest of culture it’s about allowing a lack of self control and self discipline, but it’s still sort of there, for example when parents just don’t care if there kids try in school, or for college kids when they’re told they can study anything they want in college and it will be fine and don’t worry about the job market or the loans. It’s the same message of “you shouldn’t face any serious consequences for a choice you make.”

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.