ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
No bio...
User ID: 822
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
1d ago
If TSMC goes under, Intel will at least double overnight.
Intel in particular also happens to be a strategically-vital interest for the United States, especially assuming TSMC's absence. (Their Israeli branch is also a strategic interest for Israel, though nobody talks about that one as much.)
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
1d ago
It is not time for me to make an effort post on this, so I offer instead some fragmented thoughts.
This was because they don't know how to dance, not because we're so permissive we let them dance however they want. They probably want to be taught how to dance. The adults might even prefer to teach them a dance, but didn't necessarily have permission to do so, or knowledge of how to go about it.
Or in general, they do not know how to ask, and we don't know how to answer.
This is how 100% of the young men I know operate (though it's not how I've seen boys operate, so naturally there's some hope left). It's universal. Where are all the women [effectively] flashing their tits at young men who take risks, anyway? (I am not a woman so I can't be part of the solution; men actually can't do this outside of very specific circumstances.)
That is not necessarily permissive, though, since their first choice of running around, playing, and exploring is denied them.
This is a Boomer-parent-specific problem in general. We're 40 years into our society-wide 100-year Prohibition/Panic cycle on the kid-snatching thing so this is going to continue being a problem for the next 50 years.
It would be more permissive in the case of the restaurant to give them a little playground like fast food places used to have.
It is society's allergy to risk that destroyed them. Scared their kids will touch a needle in the ballpit (wtf?), scared they'll get sick or hurt, scared of the inevitable lawsuit, scared of the judge that will find in the plaintiff's favor with financially ruinous results.
People mostly aren't dressing in clothing that they love and find beautiful for their own idiosyncratic reasons.
Yeah, but the men who really do this all converge on women's clothing these days. I prefer looser pants, and always have (there are a few things I'm not willing to compromise my otherwise high agreeableness on; this is one of them, not that I really need to do it these days), partially because of high sensitivity in relevant areas (mainly around the waist), but long skirts (and tights, when applicable; it's literally just long underwear lol) are warmer (they trap air, like a wetsuit does) and are easier to move around in than jeans are. They're softer and available in a wider variety of materials, too. If they fit better I wouldn't wear anything else. This happens with undergarments too; the male ones are bulky and relatively uncomfortable, but the female ones that still function when applied to male anatomy are actually the exact thing I want [provided I can hide that I'm doing it perfectly; this isn't actually a sex thing, but most people will take it as one, obviously]. While certain manufacturers have tried to make this for men, they put a stupid seam at the bottom length-wise, which defeats the entire purpose.
There is no permission to make noise and accidentally hurt a finger. Now they have to keep children quiet in a restaurant, which doesn't really allow adult conversations.
And this ultimately bleeds into their children. They stop asking. The "kids are naturally rebellious" meme is something Boomers have exposure to but not something that naturally happens if you're a half-competent parent (to the point that I believe the rebellious ones simply had incompetent parents, or ones that would fail to be consistent because 'it was convenient for my kid to take risks in childhood when they were small, now they're teen-aged and want to take larger ones and I'm big mad about that').
This is why, if they make the mistake of appearing before me, I tend to address them directly, because they aren't going to do that themselves. My goal when I meet one is, ultimately, to encourage the expression of... uh, expression in an environment of "everyone you know hates you, wishes you were dead/wishes you'd just go back to the iPad, and your co-ethnics won't help because they have internalized the exact same message, it's For Your Safety".
It's not exactly rocket science to figure out why teenagers are shunning drugs and having less sex. They have internalized "not an adult" (it's like that thing the kids do in IT, but in reverse, where not being an adult is the thing that gives you protection from the invisible clown that lives in the sewers) and they'll stay that way until they die- their kids will probably be all right, though, shame it'll cost them all their good years before they figure that out.
It certainly doesn't sound enjoyable.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
1d ago
he gives no outward impression of being depressed at least as far as I can see
Well, let's put it this way.
Most kinds of meal and by extension every ingredient has some kind of unpleasant taste to it. Sometimes, I plan meals based on what unpleasant taste I'm OK with submitting to on that particular night, and if the only things I have in my fridge are or add up to that, I go out for a burger or tendies instead if I have the opportunity to do so. (This can also happen with scents, and maybe a more extreme pickiness is created when the two are combined- though scents usually prompt initial aversion.)
Some of these ingredients have worse tastes than others, or those tastes are stronger in some people (insert "kids hate brussel sprouts" meme here, which I've always found pretty weird- though a good chunk of this is just parents being shit at cooking and just forgetting about certain things because they haven't eaten anything truly new in 20 years: he's not resisting the food to be difficult, he's resisting the food because it smells terrible right when you open the box and you forgot that matters).
I believe most people experience this with intentionally bad-tasting things- beer's the best example, because they're all bitter and awful as an inherent property of being beer. But it's the kind of unpleasantness, or the unpleasantness you are actively tolerating for other reasons, that makes it a viable beverage. Coffee is the same way, to a point- the reason people put cream and sugar in it is because they aren't actually in it for the coffee taste, they're doing it for other reasons. It's a coffee-flavored warm milkshake at that point, and I like milkshakes because they're milkshakes, not because they're coffee-flavored. (Most specialty coffee is absurd to me for this reason: because a lot of it is made to express the coffee flavor, and that flavor is bad- otherwise you wouldn't have to add sugar and cream and chocolate to it- so why would I want to spend 5 dollars on that when I can just get the cheap drip coffee and season it to the coffee-flavored-warm-milkshake taste that I actually wanted in the first place?)
The exception to those things are so-called "hyper palatable" foods. Your burgers, your tendies, your toaster pastries. There are very few distinct or recognizable ingredients in them, and so the possible space of undesirable tastes and textures is minimized (and in the case of processed foods this is either intentional or an emergent property in their development)- except perhaps for the store-bought frozen ones. Those are all turbo-garbage and they aren't even any cheaper; I don't know why anyone buys those outside of something their kid can prepare on their own when required. The frozen pizzas are like that too.
Take Doritos, for instance: it's a corn chip with good-tasting stuff on it. Or a McDonald's cheeseburger: it's [homogenized] beef, a slice of [homogenized] cheese, mustard and ketchup (both highly consistent mass produced substances), and maybe a bit of pickle (whose method of preparation is consistent and results in a taste that dominates what the cucumber originally may have tasted like). Pizza does that, tendies do that (bonus points for being a sauce-delivery mechanism; also, the McDonald's Szechuan sauce actually was as good as the meme suggested), toaster pastries do that, PB&J does that (though this kind of sandwich is actually really unpleasant to eat).
Contrast that with, say, a fancier curry (not the Glico stuff): you have all the ingredients in the sauce (including the fish sauce, ugh), the peppers, tomatoes, potatoes, etc. You get a larger cross-section over which taste can go wrong (and... if you don't put those things in, it's just not curry) and it stinks up your kitchen something fierce because that's just what garum-based cuisine does (actually, lots of stuff does this- roast beef in particular is fucking awful for this; I can't begin to count the number of times I'd get home from school and smell that in the oven, but because it would take time between the 'oven's on, something's cooking' signal and the 'this is roast beef, not cookies' signal it'd be a cocktease 100% of the time).
I suspect this is heritable; my folks cook the absolute shit out of everything they make (everything's gotta be well done) and don't appear to actively enjoy eating what they make, but what they do make other than that are very simple 3-ingredient casseroles (or meatballs, or what they call chili) that take the form of what I described above. Of course, that's also very vulnerable to low-quality ingredients or the mix being wrong, and if one of the ingredients is changed then you literally can't make it any more.
On the rare occasions I cook, I also depend 100% on recipes. I can't "season to taste" when I don't know what it's even supposed to taste like, or if I do that, one of the ingredients on its own tastes bad anyway/once you can taste it, it's too late to season it; it doesn't help that I'm constitutionally incapable of chopping things in a way that doesn't mash them to bits (nobody else has a problem with this).
So if you're in control of what you eat, and you can spend 10 bucks on one of those store-bought BBQ chickens or get tendies instead, I'll take the tendies every single fucking time, because those chickens tend to be dry, under-seasoned, slimy, and you have to take them apart to eat them- why the absolute fuck would I take the effort to do that, or expect anyone else to, when the tendies are strictly superior 100% of the time if I'm in the mood for chicken?
Maybe it's learned helplessness; maybe if I did meal prep for the same meal 10 times and recorded exactly what I did, I could gradient descent my way into the tastiest possible version of a dish 100% of the time (which I think is what those meals-in-a-box promise, but they don't advertise that fact- the reason I don't want to cook is because it takes a half hour to chop everything and the produce I'd have to buy is always sub-par at best, which those services do not solve). But I don't think that's worth the cost or effort because that would take me literally all day and I can just go out for a fucking burger instead- maybe when I can no longer do that I'll consider it, or I'll be making food for my [hopefully future] wife and I can at least customize or appreciate it for that reason instead.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
2d ago
Maybe, but humans have a pretty easy time of doing that without AGI (re: Khmer Rouge).
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
5d ago
I'm somewhat surprised they wouldn't wait for Trump to actually show he can do something, instead of reacting on his babble.
I'm surprised that you are surprised.
The parts of Canada from which Trudeau (and his voter base) come all define themselves in relation to the US (generally in Blue Tribe-inspired ways). The more on the "Left" you are, the more concerned with the US you are.
The rest of Canada is not like that, but because this is not a government that gives a damn about what the rest of Canada thinks about literally anything whatsoever (the Liberal government functions in a post-national Imperial fashion), you won't see that in the official response.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
5d ago
can't really do more damage in the time he has left
Yes, but the damage is the point. More damage means more for the opposition to clean up, and the less they can actually get done by the time the Eastern Big City party's time comes round again.
It's rational for him, therefore, to fuck up everything in the only way he knows how, in the same way an angry cable guy cuts the cables off so far down in the box that they need to be replaced or spliced- a bad-faith attempt to cost the next company time and money. Which is important in a "well, the other guys couldn't fix the intentional sabotage, so why not vote for the saboteurs?" context, which politics is.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
8d ago
Noon-Is-Noon faction
Ironically, these are the same people who tend to be fans of SI (popularly "the metric system").
When I see those people do this I just laugh. Oh, so now you want to preserve a human-centric unit (like every system of measurement did before SI, metric or not) now that it affects you, rather than those backwards blue-collar people who do human-scale works with their hands? Humans don't divide evenly into fractions of the [wrong] size of the Earth; convenient for a state who wants to alienate its population, inconvenient for anyone who works for a living.
For me, the sun rises at 7 AM and sets at 4 PM. Which makes any job a salt-mine one, where you go down into work in the dark, and you go home from work in the dark. I'm more than happy to push sunset beyond the bounds of the workplace for at least some people because not seeing daylight for 4 months is unnatural, it sucks, and it kills because the evening commute is simply more dangerous when it's dark.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
8d ago
that teenage women are still physically immature
A minimum of 200,000 years of evolution (this stretches much further back than mere humanity, so this is probably closer to 225 million years of evolution) suggests otherwise, though of course that depends on what you mean by "physical maturity".
An organism that dies after copying itself once is obviously going to be less fit than one that stays alive to copy itself multiple times. If we assume that it was common (outside of the last 100 years... but a lot about the last 100 years is anomalous) for women to get pregnant quite soon after that was physically possible, and they died at outsized rates (because it would injure their body too much in an age where medicine did not exist), then we should expect that the average age of "ability to survive a pregnancy" [which is probably not what you mean by 'physical maturity'] should match the average age of "ability to get pregnant" reasonably closely.
And, for the most part, it does; whether an LLM (or the society that trained it) believes biological truths about maturity are secondary.
and giving birth is higher risk as well
Probably explained more by the demographics of who is more likely to do this than anything else (and the fact this is more likely to be handled through unofficial channels; it is irrefutable evidence of a quasi-capital offense in the modern West, after all). Other than that serious confounding factor, environmental endocrine disruptions and better nutrition may be able to push the age of "able to get pregnant" under "able to survive pregnancy" more often, but we don't have good data on that which isn't statistical noise and modern medicine is miraculously effective at trivializing the health risks of pregnancy (I'm not convinced the youngest documented mother survives that pregnancy 1000 years earlier).
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
9d ago
Yeah, but there's a difference between being sanctimonious (or perhaps more charitably, intentionally interpreting 'in vain' so broadly that it covers even the 'positive' expressions, to the point that I'd consider "may gosh bless the United States" to be swearing in reverse, as it were) and noticing that there's a very specific thing/feeling/emotion using "Jesus Christ" (and to a point, "God/oh my God") as an invective or an incredulity uniquely communicates. "Hell" and "goddamn" have the same thing going on to varying lesser degrees but this one's pretty unambiguous.
So if you want to invoke the same expression without doing that directly, you want to use something that sounds like, but isn't, the word everyone else would use to do that. Hence the substitutions in that case.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
9d ago
DD is simply a meme size, like 6’.
Men don’t actually understand, or generally get a chance to understand, the nuances in sizing, so we might think ‘gag boobs’ whenever someone says something larger, and also it’s an anti-signal to be larger, as when women get their breasts enlarged (code: trashy), there’s no reason not to go straight to the maximum one’s body can support (it’s not any more painful or expensive).
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
10d ago
Yes? For instance, your entire country could lose its mind over an uncommon cold, and then there’s rioting in the streets for one political faction while the other normies kill each other over toilet paper.
You think humanity has changed much in the 4 years since that happened?
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
10d ago
Because it's pointless and smacks of a chodey kind of schadenfreude.
I dunno, I think "the only thing valuable about certain women is their bodies, and so if they're not saving them to sell to a man in exchange for resources this is a massive problem and it means the men won't want to buy, which has implications for family formation for those women; also DAE think sex with men is Bad and Evil?" is certainly a worldview.
Of course, you have to actually unpack that rather than just saying it to be obnoxious.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
11d ago
This doesn't seem, to me, nearly as corrosive to the social fabric as the general social expectation that even normie religious women will have some sexual history that they don't need to disclose to their husband.
I thought hiding that was the point, though.
Normie religious/straight marriage laws and rules are all about managing competing interests, are optimal if you assume you don't actually have love up front, and help keep the marriage together should the desire in learning how to love not be equal among partners. They work even better if/when the woman is not economically useful.
But modern society turns this into a trap for the men in the relationship! If you ask with the tacit statement that you'll be offended by your future wife "having cheated on you before the relationship even begins, what a sinful broad", what do you think your wife going to say? It's the spear counterpart of unintentionally selecting for assholes, where what you're doing here is excluding women who aren't intending to lie to you (which are the ones you actually want... right? Or maybe not; I wouldn't know- is the 'virgin experience' really an emergent property of virginity?).
From a biological standpoint, I want to minimize the chance I end up raising another man's child (if I'm going to put effort into kids I want them to actually be mine). I think I have a better chance of doing that by emphasizing "my wife feels safe telling me things", but my biology hasn't yet resisted me for dating a non-virgin and people tell me this occurs magically, so...
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
11d ago
I think she's 100 percent honest there.
Then why be actively planning to still have it both ways? Brain damage from (what is described as) the ionizing cancer-causing XXX-rays those sex acts emitted?
Being used as just a piece of stupid meat/treated as if I’m only in it for myself existentially annoys me, in my experience, but it’s more that than it is any particulars doing the damage.
(Of course, if you know you’ll need straight marriage and sell your meal ticket to it…)
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
11d ago
Am I supposed to treat her like she's a completely fresh, clean bowl of cheerios?
Depends, are you getting straight-married or gay-married to her?
Because she seems the type to still want (or rather, need) a straight marriage, and at this point I think she’d have a hard time with both, because the betrayal in a straight marriage is not being a virgin, but the betrayal in a gay marriage is not being fucking trustworthy enough not to want to fall back into needing those straight marriage privileges for the relationship to be viable (because she can’t provide them now as well as she used to).
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
11d ago
despite breaking down on camera?
What, you even think that reaction is genuine?
I don't; I think that's trying to cover oneself with the female privilege to be hurt by sex ("dissociation") for the camera when prompted/given the opportunity (and a good number of women will, as that's their social role). She is well-practiced in acting, obviously. It's just sex, and discovering you're putting swine before pearls and feeling terrible about it isn't unique to professional women- this has probably happened at least once to every human being.
But it sure does gets the expected reaction from a bunch of white-knighting simps, the glory of which those brain-dead Christian men are falling over themselves trying to cover themselves with- they're doing literally the same thing she just did, for the same reasons. (Ever wonder what the straight spear counterpart to 'cumslut' is? Well, now you know.)
The cherry on this cake is that she can get married to a fairly normal guy tomorrow because Riley Reid, another adult entertainer did this too.
Fuck 1000 guys, or have a fake poor-me mental breakdown? I'd consider the latter much more difficult to accept, where the former is more just a health risk (I don't want cold sores, sorry).
You can get the original here.
I find that the original is much more committed to the bit than the sequel (and in the sequel, you can capture some of it if you turn the Meme Power up to 69), but I am hoping in the meantime for a mod that restores what belongs in the game after a certain point rather than what the creators were forced not to include in a game for reasons related to selling it for actual money.
That said, I found the rationalization for why things are the way they are relatively satisfying, and it's actually a plot point so I'm not too sad about it. It's Duke Nukem 3D for the Internet Age, complete with Mighty Foot.
I also find that, whenever someone makes something like this, the impression I get of them is irrevocably positive. There really isn't any room for cynicism or personal callouts if you're doing this; it's just childish, unironic love of the patently ridiculous through a lens that everyone who experienced it sees as personally empowering. It's very difficult to show it to people who don't quite get it and that makes me sad, because it's for a very particular audience at a very particular time (kind of like HomestarRunner, for that matter).
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
11d ago
Teachers back then thought they could beat the stupid and evil out of children – and they had a duty to
And if you're a teacher who is wicked (I beat my students because I enjoy it), simple (I beat my students because I'm not capable of getting them to learn any other way/it's the path of least resistance to the required outcome), or just going through the motions (I beat my students because everyone else does), what a convenient boon! Why do the work to justify anything in a house of learning when you can just let the lash do it for you?
So after the beatings era, the experts came up with a new theory, where strictness was excoriated, damaging the child’s ‘true potential’ etc.
Sure, but the problem is that once you make it a blanket rule (otherwise known as "going too far"), the wicked, the simple, and the checked-out start taking advantage of it. Fast-forward a generation, and compound that with changes in labor laws that compromise the quality of your labor pool, and you get the fart-huffing "no wrong answers, only wrong targets" education system of today that's merely cargo-culting what was once valuable about that way of doing things. So the wise are now punished for trying to mark on right answers since that's the only way students learn, the wicked teach grievance studies to get that same personal euphoria as they used to get with the beatings, the simple think having no standards... well, that's great, they don't have to do any work now, and the checked-out are happy so long as the official metrics look good.
I am skeptical.
I am too- replacing abusive men (and the ways men conduct abuse) with abusive women (and the ways women conduct abuse) didn't actually reduce the amount of abuse in the system. My skepticism rests on the degree to which the balance will tilt- if we can let the wise do their jobs and sufficiently protect them as they run into the practical challenges of the policy, delay the wicked sufficiently until it's time to change the system wholesale and knock them off balance again (I think government central planning tends to call these '5 year plans'), get a little more out of the simple, and motivate the checked out into wisdom, we're going to succeed in some way.
Changing policies always have this effect to a minor degree at first so it's hard to tell what shifted, and by the time you know, the will is gone. (This is why tech companies believe in 'moving fast and breaking things'- it is in theory an institutional policy that really hurts the wicked. But it also really hurts the customer, who can trust dishonest, self-interested men to be consistently dishonest and self-interested; it's the checked out in the process of becoming wise that really screw everything up.)
because parenting and schooling don’t really matter
They don't to/have a negative effect on children born wise. For everyone else, it's "we know you're going to try and fuck up everything, so the best we can hope for is that those energies are channeled in at least a coincidentally-productive way", "you're too stupid to figure this out but our society is very insecure about some people being objectively better than others so we launder this through our daycare system", and "learning how to learn" for those who don't know but, if they knew, could perform very well.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
11d ago
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
12d ago
a preexisting proclivity for temperance
I think the only limiting factor on preference for breast size is once they become so large they're a visible deformity (at which point you get into inflation fetish territory- aka the DeviantArt school of sexual attraction). Of course, that also means having breasts that large is selected against.
"Those who disagree are just falsifying preferences" is a too emotionally satisfying theory to not be suspect.
I think that pushes the average size preference up, not down, for 'she looks like a little girl that means ur a pedo hahah also die' reasons.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
12d ago
See, the trick in that situation is that he doesn’t actually have the power to stop his adult daughter from doing that. And he knows it. She can trivially acquire a boyfriend that can support her and physically defend her from her father when required.
Parents are naturally anxious about that, because if you’re going to pay the bills for the kid you are owed power (and power used to make true what just ain’t so is still power), hence the obsession with chaperoning (virtual or physical in times gone by).
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
13d ago
Or possibly having been a child....
When it comes to children, most parents are Last Thursdayists- that they believe they sprang into existence as a fully-formed adult and, while they might have distant memories of childhood, have never actually been one. Sometimes they might even say the words "when I was a child" but their subsequent behaviors tend to suggest they [believe they] have never, in fact, been sullied by the experience- either that, or they are forgetting on purpose to prove a point.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
13d ago
For parents that are stupid and don't lead exemplary lives (as arguments can be made by words or by examples) I think unfortunately for them their children are at the mercy of the broader culture.
Perhaps that, then, is the fundamental horror of raising teenagers for most parents- especially the ones who are just intelligent enough to know this happens, but are unable to stop it. It's especially important for parents who want to retain beliefs that are more incompatible with local reality [as contrasted with simply 'untrue', which is how the wise-to-wicked pipeline works] to be much more intelligent/capable than the general population such that their child retains them.
Hence the attempts to ride the ever-decreasing amount of power they have into the ground.
ThisIsSin
One cannot seek change to a game one cannot adequately describe
14d ago
for learning to be basically functional as an adult in the society you live in
It's not so much 'learning to be basically functional' as it is 'wanting a life at all'. The first one is pretty easy- you either know it by 14 or you never will (though again, if you're prevented from doing it by KidTracker-type abuses of technology, that becomes a harder sell)- the second one... well, that's a lot more difficult especially if you position worshipping death not wanting a life as a virtuous act.
This is an intractable problem.
No, it isn't. Do what the UK does, pass a law preventing age discrimination in insurance. Easy. It is vital that teenagers don't have their want to learn to drive killed, and doing this subsidizes the risk of that over their entire life rather than forcing it as a single up-front cost.
And, y'know, the whole 'criminalizing children walking down the street unsupervised' thing, and society's corresponding worship of Safety, isn't exactly helping.
Of course, the easiest way to solve this problem is to simply conquer half of Europe (including her colonies in the South Pacific), but 1945 was kind of a fluke.
Well, there have been a few of them. There was one in 2011 where the SATA3 ports controlled on the northbridge would cook themselves (though that one was a problem with the chipset, not the processor); then there was Skylake's shit-ton of bugs in 2016 or so (to the point that Apple said 'fuck it' and accelerated their own CPU development). And then are the series of speculative execution attacks that made every older computer 30% slower when the patches were installed (and for some of them, there is no patch, they're just broken forever).
It seems Intel fucks up in a major way every 5 years or so at this point.
More options
Context Copy link