campfireSmores
No bio...
User ID: 539
Good catch! I should have done a twitter search.
I also think the people who valorize prison rape are doing a bad thing.
That he even lasted 4 days at that level of shitstorm in a cultural place so far behind the lines is remarkable
Not that remarkable. He got into SNL on the strength of his stand-up and his audition. There wasn't any vetting process where the producers checked out his podcast. I bet there's a vetting process now though!
I just included the list because I felt frustrated with myself for not being able to summon it earlier. There should be a guide for how to talk about stuff like this in the Wellness thread.
I have a response to this, but we shouldn't be having culture war talk in the wellness thread.
I'm in the Wellness thread though. I'm fine with debating it in the culture war thread. If anyone disagrees with me they can just ignore this post, or make your own post in the culture war thread. I'm not trying to start a debate in the wellness thread! That's not why I made this post
Most podcasts are not 100% gold. It's a weekly unscripted thing, bad jokes slip in. Shane Gillis has said the joke wasn't one of his good ones, offensiveness aside.
I'm not saying you have to like the podcast, just keep that in mind.
At a Q&A I asked Scott Alexander if he was going to circumcise his kid and said he was in favor of it and his wife was against it. I'll be honest, I'm kind of shaken. I'm sometimes able to argue persuasively against male genital mutilation, but I wasn't on that day. I sort of made a fool of myself, I guess. It's a painful subject for me.
It's also just kind of shocking and dismaying, because I think that noticing that male genital mutilation is bad is something almost anyone with basic rationality skills should probably be able to notice, and he didn't. Now I want to ask Yudkowsky. I'll choose my words more carefully.
He mentioned the adversarial collaboration on SSC on the subject, which to me had a lot of obvious holes and flaws in it.
Purposes of the foreskin:
-
Prevents the covered skin from contacting clothing. Clothing contact desensitizes the penis through a process called keratinization. If you're circumcised, you'll notice that the circumcision scar and the places below the scar are what's sensitive, and everything above that isn't very sensitive. That's not normal.
-
The foreskin has densely packed nerve endings.
-
The foreskin provides lubrication, both through natural lubricant and through a gliding motion.
-
Protective against health conditions including meatal stenosis.
I can also rebut the purported positive outcomes of circumcision, and talk about the risks of the procedure. I have videos of men with botched circumcisions talking about their suffering.
I don't really want to get into a debate about circumcision here. I just wanted to provide an example of what someone arguing the point looks like.
My question is this: Is anyone else shocked/saddened that Scott is pro-cutting?
The less players in the AI game the less impossible it is that humanity will survive.
bone headed move on my part! Yeah, it's not really a motte group. Just a rationalist group. I'll post it on rationalist spaces too.
Does anyone play games on Steam? Here's a steam group.
If a lot of people join it would become an easy way to find rationalists to play games with.
Edit: here's the link
I'd rather protect people by preventing them from investing than preventing people by silencing them. dath ilan (yudkowsky's fictional alternate earth) has a licensing scheme where you need to pass a test before you can invest.
I have never heard anyone say that. So it can't be that usual of a response.
- Prev
- Next
Sometimes board game cafes will have Open Table nights, where people come to play with strangers and not people they brought with them.
More options
Context Copy link