ulyssessword
No bio...
User ID: 308
ulyssessword
16hr ago
one slot is all but reserved for the pocket watch that stops time when you open inventory.
My pet peeve: degraded-by-default UIs that cost in-game resources (often substantial amounts of them) to partially fix. Most recently, I could spend a perk point on zooming out farther in Star Valor (top-down spaceship game) so I didn't get sniped from off the screen, and install an armor module in Outer Wilds that highlights interactive objects at a longer range so I can tell them apart from decorative objects.
My other pet peeve: High-speed menu navigation as a mandatory minigame.
ulyssessword
16hr ago
What better evidence could there be than him and his defense literally saying it?
Do you think the defendant in a criminal trial and his attorney are honest and forthright neutral truthseekers? I don't, so I don't rate that evidence very highly.
In fact here's something interesting, I asked chatgpt to run some numbers. "Per participant, was Jan 6th or BLM more violent towards cops?"
That reminds me of Contra Grant on Exaggerated differences:
Suppose I wanted to convince you that men and women had physically identical bodies. I run studies on things like number of arms, number of kidneys, size of the pancreas, caliber of the aorta, whether the brain is in the head or the chest, et cetera. 90% of these come back identical – in fact, the only ones that don’t are a few outliers like “breast size” or “number of penises”. I conclude that men and women are mostly physically similar. I can even make a statistic like “men and women are physically the same in 78% of traits”.
Add a ton of noise that overwhelms a valid signal, then declare that the noise is meaningful. I simply don't care about the BLM protests that were (actually, not "mostly") peaceful, so I wouldn't add them to the denominator.
ulyssessword
19hr ago
P.S. has anyone else noticed this new “lawmaker” noun?
See Google Trends. I hadn't noticed this month's spike, so I'll say no.
I've seen it used as a generic term for Senator, Member of Parliament, Member of the Legislative Assembly, City Councillor, and various foreign equivalents for at least a few years now, and didn't notice anything odd about it.
It was "Cancel Culture is out of control" when (as found downthread (news article)) someone got their sponsorship cancelled for a different person's offensive speech before they were born.
This is Cancel Culture under control. It's entered the range where I can see valid arguments for both sides and the relevant tradeoffs. I still want even less of it, but having social policies/practices that are a bit off from with my desires is normal so it's not worth highlighting anymore.
ulyssessword
2d ago
Yup. It doesn't take much to clear up that you're talking about the last two sentences he said, instead of simply eliding the last one.
ulyssessword
3d ago
I think that's a valid clarification from "The shot came a few seconds later, but I think...". If you're going to place relevance on his last words, then it makes sense to pay attention to his last words, even if it's to dismiss them.
I think your theory makes as much sense as any other about the timing (e.g. about gun violence in general, or random because he was too far to hear), but the one extra answer should be addressed more explicitly than "a few seconds later" IMO.
ulyssessword
5d ago
Except that when the tables are turned, instead of MyLittleCommunistPony it's senior Republican leadership. Perhaps one of the most prominent examples would be Trump pardoning J6 insurrectionists. But also Mike Lee claiming the Minnesota assassin was a radical left-winger. Or, uh, Charlie Kirk.
Your examples are about a mostly peaceful group that didn't kill anyone, an inaccurate denunciation, and a (surprisingly apt) lone voice (why hadn't anyone bailed him out)? I'm still not seeing a pattern of the right supporting assassination or any other political violence.
ulyssessword
5d ago
...a large majority of leftists I've met in person have not been like Redditors.
See section III of I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup:
...half the country.
And I don’t have a single one of those people in my social circle. It’s not because I’m deliberately avoiding them; I’m pretty live-and-let-live politically, I wouldn’t ostracize someone just for some weird beliefs. And yet, even though I probably know about a hundred fifty people, I am pretty confident that not one of them is creationist. Odds of this happening by chance? 1/2^150 = 1/10^45 = approximately the chance of picking a particular atom if you are randomly selecting among all the atoms on Earth.
It's not necessarily that they're hiding it around you. It could be that you aren't dealing with the full range of leftists.
...I could say that for some people their Reddit use is just them blowing off steam and it's not really representative of their entire personality.
You're kind of damning them with faint praise there.
ulyssessword
5d ago
ulyssessword
5d ago
The answer clearly isn't "never". It's also pretty clearly not "defend against individuals on a case by case basis and reserve violence for imminent personal threats"
but you repeat yourself: The first sentence is against "don't ever declare war", while the second is against "act like you haven't declared war".
At some point, the totality of circumstances justify, even demand, a war, yes?
Of course, just civil wars happen.
The criteria you posted upthread (competent authority, chance of success, just cause, last resort) is as good as any other, but I don't think the specifics are that important. If a rational group of responsible, representative leaders decides that war is the best option, then I don't think that any checklist could fully predict my reaction.
ulyssessword
5d ago
To mix my metaphors, War is a switch, not a dial. If you have (justly) declared war, then the restrictions on lethal force are much looser. If you haven't, then the original standards hold. You don't get to judge them as 70% enemies and therefore only deserving of 30% of the protections of civil society.
ulyssessword
5d ago
When a right-winger does it, they get denounced by everyone. When the left does, not so much.
Do you think you could find even 1/100th the support for your two examples (or any other ones you care to use) compared to crowdfunding for the ICE attackers or a community dedicated to "Free Luigi [Mangione]"? The would-be Trump assassin got lauded for his attempt, though his death put a damper on any attempt to rally support.
To be clear: the threshold I'm looking for is $360 in public fundraising from at least five people, or a 400 member community dedicated to them.
It's the difference between one crazy person (who happened to be right-wing), and a notable fraction of the left wing as a whole (who are rallying around one crazy person who happened to be left-wing).
ulyssessword
6d ago
Here's my recommendation: Stop treating political actors as neutral service providers. Newspapers, nowadays, are not apolitical stewards of information for the benefit of the public.
How about the opposite: I'll loudly and conspicuously complain about how they aren't meeting the standards of neutral service providers. I can't think of a better way to convince people that newspapers, nowadays, are not apolitical stewards of information for the benefit of the public.
ulyssessword
6d ago
If it's bad for one story, and it should be consistent for every story, then...
I, for one, would be happy if they got rid of their racially-biased capitalization. I can't even point to this story as the basis of my opinion, as I thought it was bullshit politicization from the first time I heard of it.
ulyssessword
6d ago
I don't think that cartels can benefit from capitalism nearly as much as normal corporations can, and that limits their ability to exploit profitable opportunities. It's not like they can just issue bonds to spend money before they make it. Same with the stock market, investors, and everything else. They also face a more challenging labor market, and have important internal constraints on their decisions.
ulyssessword
6d ago
There used to be a time where I thought newspapers would be forced to either do something like:
... Of course if it were a white assailant murdering a black victim, then it would be front-page headlines everywhere.” [sic]
or:
... Of course if it were a white assailant murdering a [B]lack victim, then it would be front-page headlines everywhere.”
Of course, there's no enforcement mechanism. Only putting direct quotes between quotation marks isn't a fundamental law of the universe, after all, and nobody cares about those standards of precision.
fakeEdit: and if they were just correcting grammar, then they should have added a comma after "Of course...", so it's not an evenhanded application of their standards.
See also the CBC, here: They omitted "...of Alberta..." from their quote of the referendum question because it flows better and they don't care about precision.
ulyssessword
6d ago
They'd probably lose subscribers and influence quite quickly. It's not a popular opinion, to say the least.
ulyssessword
7d ago
Let's say the US has X amount of specialized talent and thus they can only do Y amount of productivity with in a year.
How close are you to reaching Y? Is a person's contribution to X fixed at birth (or shortly after), or can it increase through training, education, and experience?
Your argument relies on the idea that X is both largely fixed among the existing population and that it's a relevant near-term constraint on industry, while I'm not sure either is true. Underemployment is rampant, with only 56% of college grads working at a job that needs any degree. Still no perfect candidates? Just hire someone 80% qualified and train them up the rest of the way. Can't handle the last 20% of the job having no competent people? Hire them earlier and train them up before it becomes a critical constraint. Can't plan ahead that far? Sucks to suck, git gud.
ulyssessword
8d ago
That's probably about right for the application processes. What is it for spot checks, which would (presumably) happen to immigrants with illegal coworkers? Also, it doesn't have to end with deportation. Just fighting through bureaucracy another time is annoying enough to merit mention.
ulyssessword
8d ago
From context, it's pretty clearly a guess. However, it lines up with manual data entry error rates for general tasks, so it's probably around correct.
ulyssessword
10d ago
Huh, so what you're saying is that the Jews really did have it coming?
Lol, nope. But I did check.
Cults are marginalized, criminals are jailed, and pedophiles are excluded from some jobs. Unproductive workers are fired (or at least not promoted), unpleasant people don't get invited to parties, and flaky people don't get trusted with responsibilities. I'm guessing I would agree with the consensus 90% of the time, but that last 10% is very important.
ulyssessword
10d ago
Also conveniently forgetting that people got deverified for badthink. That kind of put the nail in the coffin for the claims of "objective notability" for verified status.
ulyssessword
10d ago
Ingroup you mean? Why would it?
"[X] is persecuted because it's bad" should be the default assumption, despite what a lifetime of cultural conditioning tells me. Are they correct when they claim that those views have no place in a well-ordered society?
I think they're wrong to look down on those views, but I had to examine the object level to reach that conclusion. A different group of people imposing fear about a different set of opinions might be right.
ulyssessword
10d ago
I've put dozens of hours into Noita, but I still don't know how to resolve the tension in its game design: It both requires and punishes experimentation. If you find a mystery late in a run (whatever "late" happens to be for you, personally), then you're faced with a choice: Test it, and have a 50/50 chance of dying or learning something, or leave it alone forever. I ended up installing a resurrection mod to deal with it.
My search only found one related tweet.
I don't think it counts, but it wasn't (necessarily) made up from whole cloth by your friend.
More options
Context Copy link