The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4hr ago
They don't want to do that either.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4hr ago
Very little of their studying plausibly impacts their TFR because only like 1% of the readings are about having children or getting married. If they had normal education and normal work, but retained the pro-fertility cultural elements, which is possible, then they would still have a high TFR.
Would they? If they had to work for a living, maybe they'd be less desiring of children (who, when you're a working person, cost money and make more work for you)
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
7hr ago
This is easy to say, but very hard to demonstrate that it actually works. It certainly is not a mathematical inevitability.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
8hr ago
In the US the OAS-equivalent (Social Security old-age benefits) is notionally (though not actually) funded by a tax paid during your working years. This (by design) makes it hard to make the case you're making here about transfers -- it's hard to make the case that people who paid 6.2% (and whose employers paid the same) on their earnings all their life specifically for this purpose deserve nothing when they actually do reach old age.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
8hr ago
Perhaps we could actually try to make having children the financially preferable choice instead of an immense burden relative to childlessness/having too few children before we throw up our hands and declare defeat?
We can't. Essentially everyone wants them, especially those who have children. Removing them would mean making children somehow less safe and protected. This is everything from child labor laws to car seats to occupancy restrictions (on number of children in a room) to expensive requirements on child care providers, and much more.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
9hr ago
The idea is to increase fertility generally, not to create some weird cult. I am skeptical that your approach would work on the small scale (trying to do ANYTHING in the Third World is difficult), and do not believe it could be scaled up at all.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
9hr ago
At some point, the idea will be proposed to euthanize childless elders who are not financially independent, and nobody physically capable of pushing back will be on the other side of that proposal.
Why would financial independence matter? I'm fairly sure some of the fertility-demanders here have said that old people saving money doesn't count because the actual products and services have to be provided by younger people anyway. Euthanizing the childless who do have assets also has the bonus (from the viewpoint of the euthanizers) that they get the assets away from those hated geezers and crones.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
9hr ago
This is a boring gotcha.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
9hr ago
· Edited 9hr ago
Well it's not strictly wrong but nobody has ever found out how much money you have to offer to make it happen.
My guess is there isn't enough money in the world, unless you want to subsidize the fertility of the worst of the worst. That is, you can't transfer enough money to increase the fertility of the working class and above without reducing it among those you're taking it from more than enough to make up for it.
Better would be to reduce the cost (especially the non-delegable cost) of having children, but no one knows of a feasible way to do that. We keep doing the opposite with the expected results, and I expect there's a positive feedback loop -- as children become rarer, we insist on more parental investment per child, which discourages children even more. I call this a "K-selection spiral" (or "death spiral") -- please make this the title in any Index of Crackpot Theories.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
11hr ago
· Edited 11hr ago
I was once paid to port C code from a system that allowed code to dereference null pointers (by just making the MMU allow that memory page and filling it with zeroes). And so the C code written for that system used that behavior, depending on foo = *bar;
AIX did this. I think the first three values were 0, 0xdeadbeef, 0xbadfca11. C programmers weren't supposed to depend on it -- the compiler would use it to avoid short circuiting expressions like:
myptr == NULL || (*myptr == whatever)
which would save branch overhead. And the very common
myptr == NULL || *myptr == 0
could skip the null test entirely.
But I'm sure some programers did depend on it.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
12hr ago
A lot of these bugs in Rust code that keep going viral are stupid. But they also stink of a programmer utterly and thoroughly tapped out fighting the borrow checker. So mentally exhausted at the endless walls put up between the simple task they have to do that they've been working through one by one, that at the end of 8 hours their judgement is so impaired they decide "Fuck it, it's just one line of code, it doesn't need to be safe."
This isn't the way safety people think. They think the problem is not that people are tired of fighting their burdensome safety measures and so bypass them; they think the problem is that it's possible to bypass their safety measures, and so see this as reason to put in more controls.
That's not my objection to Rust -- Rust was created by and is controlled by my Culture War enemies, who inject their beliefs into their actions a lot more than even Richard Stallman ever did. But it is an objection to Rust.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
A response from Jeremy Carl on his substack The Course of Empire.
Skipping to the conclusion:
There are many good things in Savage’s article, and I always welcome it when anyone shines a fresh spotlight on the discrimination against White men that has been going on for years. And to the extent he opens up some eyes that are not already opened as to the reality of the discrimination that young White men are facing in 2025, I give a hearty two cheers for him. But neither Savage nor his piece are yet deserving of a third.
The establishment that denied opportunities to Savage and his millennial and Gen Z White male cohort are not, as Savage seemingly implies, basically good people who unfortunately had the single moral or intellectual flaw that they happened to discriminate against White men. They are horrible people, people who are totally unworthy of controlling the commanding heights of our society. They are moral monsters, racists, sexists, and intellectual cowards. And they, and the corrupt institutions that they have run for decades, must be either reformed completely with their incumbent leadership ousted—or else destroyed.
Savage has done a real service by thoroughly documenting, with the latest data, just how detestably hostile to young White men our so-called “elite” institutions have become. But until he and the fellow White male “moderates” and IDW camp followers he profiles rid themselves of their deadly desire to make excuses for their abusers, they will unfortunately be of limited help in solving the problems Savage so ably outlines.
Facts and data are wonderful things, but courage and conviction are more important still.
And even his the article’s final sentences are timid questions rather than confident declarations.
So there is some vitriol out there.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
It's probably named after the Chicago airport (which is named after the battle)
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
No, he went after the family of a soldier killed in Iraq too.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
I'm sure it would not surprise you that the salience of discrimination depends directly on the position of the target in the progressive stack. And that this applies on the right as well as on the left.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
A team of 99% white male writers is probably not the best way to go if there are black women who might buy your product.
Why do we keep getting teams of trans lesbians of color then? They represent a very tiny slice of the public. And honestly, Don Draper or any of his real-life pasty-white 1950s counterparts could sell to black women better than they could.
Also, isn't there so much insane overproduction of talent in the humanities already?
There's overproduction of something. I wouldn't call it talent.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
Right, but (thanks to Democratic control of mainsteam media) to most of the country those aren't even attacks; they're legitimate protests against a rogue organization.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
This is way too defeatist my friend. While we yet draw breath there is hope. We absolutely can and will reverse this evil and corruption. Far mightier empires have fallen throughout history. It may seem impossible now, but things change gradually then all at once.
There is nothing actionable here.
I've been seeing the normies get more and more radicalized my entire life. I think we're on a good trajectory.
The normies have indeed become more radicalized. For the left, as we saw in the Great Awokening of 2020. Every once in a while they get a good look at their destination (e.g. Sam Brinton transing their kids) and recoil, but then they go right back. And the "adults" on the right preach doing nothing, and when the more action-oriented on the right start acting, said "adults" are more horrified by them than by their leftist counterparts.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
It also seems like you agree with me that the early versions of the pattern where not caused by intelligence
Early versions of the pattern were part of what resulted in selecting for intelligence.
I think this suggests the later versions, seemingly following a very similar script, also werent.
They do not follow a similar script. The Christians who wouldn't engage in moneylending might well have hated the Jews for being moneylenders (especially if they were in debt), but they didn't hate them because they were somehow preventing Christians from being moneylenders.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
Even Shakespeare's cantankerous shepherd put the end of that period at 23. Anyway, in practice leaving bastards all over the country was a privilege of the aristocracy.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
I am also of the vitriolic right, but IMO it behooves us to keep in mind that yours is the exact same rhetoric used by the left to valorize rioting negroes and palestinian combatants and all manner of domestic terrorism and social engineering.
All that worked for them. It's still working for them. The woke left hasn't passed its peak; it's just currently in a tactical retreat. In 2028 the Democrats will have a trifecta and their woke vanguard will bring everything back on Day 1, because they have no scruples about the procedural and institutional barriers they use to stop their opponents. They'll "just do things" and there will be no Chicago judge to stop them, nor would they stop if they were told. And if there is resistance, the riot machine gets turned back on.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
2d ago
In recent years, a different third term has been fully spoken.
3. You deserve it.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
2d ago
The Pittsburgh Synagogue Shooting is the most prominent recent example.
Obama did step over some lines that Nixon crossed, but were allegedly re-established.
More options
Context Copy link