anon_
22hr ago
Taking aside the insipid culture war aspect (which we all agree on and hence is just kind of boring to discuss), it's actually kind of interesting as an extremely effective example about the Generalized Lucas Critique.
- Conditioned on some threshold SAT score, having a good GPA was fairly predictive of college success.
- This makes sense -- the SAT was a good filter for aptitude. Beyond aptitude, GPA measured other components (diligence, focus) that contribute
- Once you remove the SAT, having a good GPA is no longer predicative
- You can not use correlations in the historical data to predict the effect of a change that modifies the structural rules by which the data are generated.
anon_
23hr ago
I also found amusing the implicit admission that doing things like prancing around in a bikini is a central aspect of a young woman's lifestyle.
You know, maybe this off topic and deserves it's own thread, but at some point we're going to come around to an America where the red tribe is more promiscuous and sex-positive than the blue.
When that inflection point comes, everyone from Gen X and older is gonna have to totally rewire their brain.
anon_
23hr ago
Just shows the importance of having your own versions of the services which are necessary for daily life.
This would require unchaining their private sector to provide them, which in turn changes the balance of domestic power.
These things are all linked, you can't just manage an economy like you're playing SimCity.
anon_
23hr ago
The most shocking thing is that Rubio isn't even doing this to protect Americans. Rubio is doing this on behalf of a foreign country.
Be assured if the ICC had their way, they would have charged Rummy and Cheney.
Protecting a small country from the ICC is an excellent way to remind them not to try it against a big one.
anon_
23hr ago
Obviously the ICC and the rest of the internationalist crowd continues to believe (just as they did in 2003 when W invaded Iraq) that national sovereignty must give way to international law. Waving around the democratic mandate of the Israeli government is totally irrelevant to the question, given they don't believe that the nation itself has such authority. Quibbling about how it's constituted is besides the point.
They're pretty obviously wrong, but it is important to actually understand the core of their position (even if we all disagree with it). It would be impossible for them to concede that a national leader has impunity if he can demonstrate sufficient democratic mandate -- indeed it makes a mockery of the entire conception of international law as vindicating universal and inalienable human rights. They can't just say "well they're inalienable unless the guy alienating them won an election" -- that's an untenable position.
anon_
23hr ago
Step one in making things better for young white men is killing affirmative action, which is directly discriminating against them.
This would probably improve the lot of most Jews, who stand to take some proportion of the spoils currently reserved for URM.
If Fuentes could stomach doing something that indirectly helps them because it also helps him, that is.
anon_
23hr ago
curtails Democrats own ability to issue orders of dubious legality like Obama drone striking a US citizen
If you're going to trot this tired canard out, you should consider invoking it at Ulysses Grant who ordered ~100K US citizens killed by canon and bayonet.
The democrats are saying the orders may be unlawful and the military itself should exercise judgment on the unlawfulness to remove trump. The responsibility is borne solely by others and never by the democrats for affirming an active course of action.
If they had made themselves judge of the lawfulness, you'd consider that arrogation of authority they don't have.
I do think the a soldier should consult with a JAG if there is a questionable order, even given the presumption of legality.
anon_
23hr ago
I can't say that I buy the second bullet about implying that unlawful orders already happened. YMMV, but I think if you look at a claim and conclude it's "without evidence" then you should probably conclude that the speaker(s) did not actually intent that claim.
anon_
23hr ago
I think he asserted that it already happened and they "SHOULD BE ARRESTED" (capitalization original).
anon_
1d ago
We very often talk about the future in such terms. I told my son "if you bang your spoon on the table, it gets taken away". It's not hypothetical, it's saying that if a possible thing comes to pass, this is what may come of it.
So yeah, the Dem Senators are indeed highlighting this as a thing that might happen in the future. Perhaps they singled it out because they fear it.
anon_
1d ago
They at the very least are guilty of providing atrocious legal advice.
That's true, but it's hardly anything near sedition.
Soldiers unsure about the legality of orders should go talk to a JAG. That's what it's for.
anon_
2d ago
Based on her traits before having entered service? Or in the counterfactual where the very same person with the very same disposition to enlist who randomly was disqualified at 18?
Because it’s probably correlated in a way that’s preexisting. I doubt there’s much of a causal relationship.
anon_
2d ago
I’m not familiar with any data on this but I seriously doubt the average woman who signs up for military service anywhere in the world normally does so at the age of 18.
Even a basic Google search for "average age at enlistment" cites 18-20 for the US, France and a few others I plugged in. For Israel and other compulsory-service countries it's 18. Germany showed a slightly higher average in the low 20s.
I also doubt that a woman doing military service is generally conducive to her ever entering a stable marriage in the first place.
I will take moving the goalposts here as admission that the original point is conceded.
Not that any of this disproves OP’s argument about the 30% figure in any sense but it needs to be pointed out anyway.
It doesn't disprove it, but it does say this scenario is rather rare.
anon_
2d ago
her soldiering and child-rearing will come into conflict, even in peacetime.
The average enlisted soldier serves less than 1.5 4-year terms. An 18 year old woman would be discharged at 22, 24 or on the outside 26 -- well before any appreciable drop in fertility. A 24 year old can easily have 4-6 kids, well over the current average (e.g. beyond the current most-binding-constraint).
Society can afford for 30% of young men to die in the trenches and recover fairly quickly
Even in the worst of the wars, only 15% of young men died -- that would in France/Germany in WWI. So this is also off by a favor of 2.
anon_
2d ago
I don't think the Diet Coke and gatorade are that flammable tho.
Anyway, grocery stores make tiny % profits on huge volume, and so the only incentive is to sell more. Sounds a lot like a large streaming platform making a fraction of a penny on ads.
anon_
4d ago
Grocery stores have put trashy magazines, Diet Coke and candy bars in the checkout aisle since time immemorial.
anon_
5d ago
The Algorithms are not providing some unique functions that isn't available elsewhere, and the content they're 'curating' is, as stated, nearly infinite.
Sure. Neither is a gas station or a grocery store or any other service. The fact that you can go to Whole Foods doesn't mean Albertson's isn't providing value. And I guess it's hypothetically possible to contract with General Mills to buy your Lucky Charms directly, just about as impractical as viewers and content creators figuring out how to interact directly without TikTok or Instagram.
Which of these should I be sending money to 'thank' for acting as an intermediary for my awareness of some creator and their content?
With the exception of TheMotte, they all already have very solid business plans. And FWIW, I doubt most of them are basing it on curation or discovery as a fundamental source of value. If anything, their only metric when deciding what to show is whatever scores the highest engagement when they A/B test, which I think you already grok.
Its practically hostile design, and I return that hostility with hostility.
You're only burning your own soul, being angry at the world like that. Especially for something that you can very well live without (live everyone pre-2010).
anon_
5d ago
I'd rather give money to the creator directly, and not to the platform that is honestly a minimal value-add, but leverages its network effects to continue to act as the middleman between creator and viewer whilst pretending to be the reason this connection happened at all.
But platforms are the reason that creators and viewers can match each other at all. It's not a minimal value-add, it's a necessary (but not sufficient) piece of the entire transaction.
anon_
5d ago
Never was ejected. /r/TheMotte is still there. Every month /u/naraburns bot still posts an (empty) QC thread.
anon_
6d ago
It can still drag the war out for two more years and inflict hundreds of thousands more Russian casualties.
This is always the thing though -- does something else happen in those two years that changes the reality.
anon_
17d ago
Oh I fully agree. But if the GOP can field a +5 candidate they can win in a D+3 state. That how Youngkin won.
Well, I think given how negative about sex the modern left has become, it was inevitable that some reaction would happen.
Moreover, I think the football-and-beer contingent never quite as prudish as the conservative average.
More options
Context Copy link