@thrownaway24e89172's banner p

thrownaway24e89172

Death is the inevitable and only true freedom

3 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 09 17:41:34 UTC

				

User ID: 1081

thrownaway24e89172

Death is the inevitable and only true freedom

3 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 09 17:41:34 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1081

And that's the one thing AI has going against it. You can't yet attend a concert for an artist who only exists digitally.

Ahem...cultured people have been doing this for a while now.

Understandable; most of the anime boorus don't really feature much furry content anyway.

Of course they don't, that'd be too masculine for anime. Angsty potatoes only!

Are you beetlejuice? Or do you, gattsuru and germ have some kind of discord group? I don't see how else you could find a 6 day old comment in a two week old thread, short of trolling my comment history or someone else doing so and reporting everything I write.

I don't have anything to say about the actual topic at hand, but I'll note that I usually browse the site via the comments feed and thus am not usually aware of the age of the "threads" the comments are in. I also frequently take days if not weeks or months (or years on occasion...) to finish writing non-trivial responses to comments. This combination naturally leads to exactly the behavior you're observing without the need of a discord group or trolling comment histories. Text forums are asynchronous; not everyone will or even can respond immediately. That doesn't mean they are stalking you.

EDIT: Grammar.

(The irony about the perfect woman being someone who is not aggressive is that he ended up married at age 56 to a lawyer. Maybe I'm stereotyping lawyers, but that seems like the aggressive type to me!)

His preference was probably "not aggressive [romantically/toward him]" rather than "not aggressive [in general]", given the combination of socially awkward and "dominated by his mother".

Right, but wasn't @CertainlyWorse arguing that debanking should be done via the courts specifically to ensure that it is only done to prevent specific harms as described by law rather than being left up to the whims of the banks and the social pressure others can exert on them?

What differentiates this procedurally from, for example, the processes surrounding temporary restraining orders or the impounding of weapons based on various red flag laws?

There's apparently some confusion over the distance. Some outlets are reporting the shot was from only 200 feet away (see this comment).

According to NBC News (link is to live coverage, so will probably break eventually...) he was shot from the Losee Center, which appears to be part of the Browning Administration Building to the south of that location (and only 200 feet away?):

A spokesperson for Utah Valley University said in a statement that Kirk was shot from the university's Losee Center, roughly 200 feet away from where he was sitting.

Do you beat your wife? Is the correct answer to that, "I cannot answer that"?

He was legally restricted from answering questions that reveal classified information in open hearings. I'm not aware of any laws typically preventing someone from answering the question "Do you beat your wife?".

This is pretty loaded terminology. Is it "lying to Congress" to say one thing about a classified program in a public Congressional forum and then give to Congress the correct, classified answer thereafter? Has Congress been lied to? Like, I get it. You're wanting to say that he lied to the public, and that may be true and scandalous, but it still doesn't sound as bad, so you have to juice it up a bit.

It is lying to Congress to knowingly give a false answer to a direct question by a Congressman in a Congressional hearing. It does not matter if the lie was attempting to hide classified information. It does not matter if the truth is later revealed in a classified briefing. It does not matter if the lie was intended to be theater for the plebes. It is still lying to Congress. He could have refused to answer as I described, which would have been both legal and true.

It's not necessarily the US government that is turning up the pressure. The rest of the Anglosphere hasn't exactly been shy about pushing for such censorship recently and even if the Trump administration isn't going to apply similar pressure itself, it's not likely to apply counter pressure to prevent such crackdowns.

Clapper lying to Congress about it

Clapper gave the correct, classified answer to Congress after the unclassified, televised to the public, hearing was completed.

The correct answer in the unclassified hearing then was "I cannot answer that.", citing the relevant classification statutes, not lying to Congress under oath like he did.

In the Minnesota Public Radio News article it was reported as

Additionally, [FBI Director Kash] Patel posted that Westman was “a male born as Robert Westman,” but [Minneapolis Police Chief Brian] O’Hara has referred to Westman as a man and said he could not confirm that Westman had ever changed names.

Minecraft. Mining. Relaxed.

That's fair. I do wonder how much of that is due to not being principled versus not being effective at communicating in general though? Effective communication skills aren't that common, particularly at the higher bar of being effective at communicating with an at least partially adversarial audience.

How do you define a "principled liberal"? Liberals typically have principles beyond "freedom of speech" and recognize that important principles sometimes conflict. Does being "principled" require a naive "Rank principles in order of importance and act based on that ranking." method of conflict resolution?

They themselves believe in equity more than in meritocracy.

I don't think this is true. They believe in a different kind of meritocracy, specifically one that focuses on the skills needed for social climbing rather than the nominally productive goals that meritocracy usually implies. "Equity" and "equality" are mere tools to be used to gain social standing, whether by elevating oneself or eliminating one's competition.

Have you noticed a difference in quality of analysis of mature code-bases versus its ability to make changes/additions to them? The consensus on our team so far seems to be that its analysis is significantly better than its generation, though how much of that is the quality of the AI versus the quality of our prompting is rather up in the air.

As WhiningCoil expresses above, the redpill perspective on women essentially considers them as men's lessers, baser creatures driven primarily by instinct. This is a perspective with strong cultural precedent, and its echoes persist to this day, even in aspirationally egalitarian societies. When feminists keep talking about wanting men and women to be equal, despite their equality before the law and the outright preference shown towards women by our cultural institutions, this is what they mean.

And that is evidence that feminists are either too incompetent (they aren't...) to understand the reason for this or are deliberately maintaining (or feigning) ignorance for social manipulation. The idea that men are by nature baser creatures driven primarily by their instincts (eg, "They think with their dicks.") is widespread in culture just as it is for women. Men are not seen as inherently better than women; people who control themselves and don't give in to their base instincts are seen as better than people who don't. Society expects this of men in a way it doesn't of women and in return grants them greater status for achieving it, as well as punishing them much more harshly for not. Feminists typically focus on eliminating the greater status granted men without eliminating (often rather reinforcing) the greater pressure nor the greater punishment.

I've seen people of both sexes put up with shit I really wouldn't have; being down bad is quite the drug.

Unfortunately so are low self-esteem ("this is the best I could ever hope for") and self-harm ("I deserve this abuse"), particularly in people who don't show it publicly.

It's only considered "cheating" when it is framed to make progressives look bad. It's considered a perfectly valid solution when framed as a solution for groups progressives hate.

You may think this, it might actually be true for you. That is not why the meme exists. Nybbler is correct. The meme exists for 2 reasons: 1) The "Hello HR" meme is true to life; and 2) Reality produces approximately 1 Marie Curie a century, whereas it produces dozens of her male equivalents. I was once an engineering student. Lady engineering students, as a rule, just flirt to get their work done by the men.

The "Hello HR" meme is only true to life in the sense that there do exist a small minority of women who fit it. Likewise "lady engineering students" who "just flirt to get their work done by the men" do exist, but they are a small minority of female engineering students. Those that do stand out a lot more however due to the relative lack of social skills in the type of people who typically become engineers making them more vulnerable to such social aggression.

The Army is an army and a land force. The Air Force was originally part of the Army, ergo it too is an army and a land force. I apparently misunderstand your disagreement then, because I thought your classification was due to how its forces work, which was why I brought up the land-based nature of its assets.

No, no, and no respectively. And that wasn't how I made the determination, it was how you did by arguing that the air force isn't an army because it uses aircraft. My determination was that because it was originally part of the Army it is therefore just another army separate from the Army for bureaucratic reasons.

Does the fact that the US Army maintains its own fleet of ships make it a navy? Are the aircraft that are still directly under the US Army unconstitutional? What about the aircraft that are part of the US Navy?

It is obviously a land force as demonstrated by its fixed assets (bases, airfields, etc). That some of its units are temporarily airborne doesn't change this fact anymore than the fact that a person who is running temporarily loses all contact with the ground would make running soldiers no longer part of an army.