@KingOfTheBailey's banner p

KingOfTheBailey


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 10 01:37:00 UTC

				

User ID: 1089

KingOfTheBailey


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 10 01:37:00 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1089

Ah, I see the problem. Thanks.

I am now curious why you favor the fourth form over the second.

You're welcome. How do you decide when it's acceptable for your personal style to deviate from normal formatting conventions? I remember deciding at a fairly young age that many punctuation rules around quotation marks were indefensible, but especially the rule about placing the period inside closing quote.

Speaking of hyphens, using a hyphen to join an adverb to an adjective ("professionally-edited") is incorrect. See e.g., Chicago Manual of Style 5.93 ("A two-word phrasal adjective that begins with an adverb ending in -ly is not hyphenated").

Doomish doesn't sound specific enough ("doomer" was one of the early "-oomer" memes). I am sympathetic to Yud's arguments and think Yuddites is very apt.

It took me until Charlie Hebdo, and the response to it, to understand this.

There is a news article I've never been able to find again, published on 9/12 or 9/23, about how we mustn't give up the rights and freedoms that make America special when responding to this threat. It's such a shame to look back on it and think we almost did it, almost held fast to our principles in response to an attack unlike anything the world had seen. And then instead, once the shock wore off, we had the PATRIOT Act and all that followed.

Well I was referring to assaults which wouldn't have happened had the victim been normal.

Yes. That is called a hate crime.

This argument proves too much. Crazy people fighting on the street are assaults which wouldn't have happened had the victim been normal (to the extent you can identify one).

To the extent that sexuality and "gender identity" are malleable within individuals (and despite "born this way" rhetoric used to justify gay marriage, there seems to be at least some amount of this, particularly in women), queer advocacy can be considered as harming the people who would otherwise have had functional lives. For a concrete example, you could consider the promiscuity of gay culture, which allowed AIDS to devastate gay communities so badly that it was designated GRIDS, for gay-related immunodeficiency syndrome, when it was first detected. A more recent example might be the amount of unnecessary suffering Monkeypox caused. For trans, the social contagions seem even stronger and the harms more stark (due to hormonal/surgical intervention and the reduction of one's dating pool to epsilon). People on Discord posting under queer identities have me aware of what they called a "queer gap", where all the time spent "figuring yourself out" means that queer people hit social/romantic/life milestones later than straight people. This, too, is a harm. Are the benefits of the promised self-understanding and self-actualization worth it?

I saw a tweet once about the Millennial experience being something like "get told none of the rules apply, and that you get to reimagine new ones, only to reconstruct all of Grandma's wisdom from first principles in your 30's and scramble to apply them before it's too late". Defaults matter and are mostly good for most people. It seems to me that a lot of advocacy speaks as if the defaults work for maybe 5% of the population when it's rhetorically something more like 95%.

Only that they've been on the "edgy Newgrounds Humor" thing for years. Racist Mario was uploaded to YouTube 12 years ago and TRANSformers 10 years ago. The new Space King is up to 7.4M views and their board game's Kickstarter is at 3.7M on a 50k target. Chud money has been looking for something to fund for a long time, and they'd be mad not to ride that train as far as it takes them.

And for all the in-universe "NO GIRLS ALLOWED" stuff, Tom & Don seem like decent mellow spergs when they appear as themselves.

Not on short timescales. This is the sort of thing you need thick community bonds to make work. If one were interested in conserving society, I'd first look at getting people out of rentals and into real homes so they put down roots. That means stabilizing house prices, ensuring proper order, addressing illegal immigration so the demand side brings houses back into affordability, etc.

I can understand why western justice systems consider insanity as a defense against a finding of guilt, but the incentives seem to align better if it's considered an aggravating factor in sentencing.

Praise be to SPACE KING! Episode 5 is out.

HPMOR does a much better job with this, because Slytherin's current behavior as the "evil" house — — comes from evaporative cooling. Slytherin gets a reputation for having all the death eaters and attracting all the dumb blood purists, so everyone who doesn't want to be associated with that convinces the Sorting Hat to send them elsewhere, which means Slytherin gets worse, and by the time Harry shows up, the cycle's been running for a fairly long time and the whole house deserves a rebuild.

Puss in Boots: The Last Wish wasn't bad on that front, but that's the only thing vaguely modern that I can think of.

A moving performance and a powerful clip. But if the laws instead lie flat as a crop-circle for one's enemies but tall and thick to protect one's friends you just have anarchotyranny.

Probably not any more. I think you need the lounges normal people don't even know exist.

Yeah she did a good job in the film, I agree. Unfortunately, the casting choice or the desire to diversify limited the pool of qualified stunt performers, with fatal results.

Not directly, but someone with actual academic ability could have held that professorship, and several classes of students were given substandard education so that activists within the institutions could feel good about themselves. If you mapped it all out, you could probably argue for a fair amount of diffuse damage, and a lot of diffused responsibility. But since our systems aren't very good at reckoning that sort of thing (and are currently uninterested in even trying), the scrutiny fell mostly on Arday. I would not want to find myself in a position like that, watching my entire world crumble because I'd been promoted far beyond my competence and had been found out.

Tragic, and @faceh's sign needs a lot more tapping. The demand for diversity exceeds its supply, with awful consequence.

I'm reminded of the casting of Domino in Deadpool 2 (2018). In the comics, an image search shows her on covers in a variety of pale tones ranging from Caucasian-white to body-paint-white. The movie cast a woman with mixed German/African-American ancestry and gave her a big Afro. Then, they had to find a stunt double and tried to match the actress's sex and ethnicity. They went with Joi Harris, a motorcycle racer with no previous stunt experience. Domino's Afro meant Joi was performing stunts without a helmet, and during a take she lost control of the bike, was thrown through a plate glass window, and died.

There can be no reconciliation without truth. This is a phrase that comes up in indigenous affairs, and advocates for indigenous peoples use it to mean that there cannot be a reconciliation between indigenous populations and the states that oppressed them without there first being a truth-telling and a serious reckoning with what was actually done. I believe that it applies here. "Woke 1 was crazy"; OK, which parts were crazy? Who said them? Who believed them? Will there be a reckoning? Will the people who pushed crazy ideas be kept away from any levers of power, institutional or otherwise? Or, instead, is the Democrat machinery trying to put out a message of "whoopsie daisy, we went a bit far there sowwy" until the next time they can go for the big prize? Based on how little has come back on the architects of the COVID response, I think the answer will be just "whoopsie daisy, sorry, vote for us again please".

Given that there's still an active fight over men playing in the WNBA, the DSA seems to have a lot of influence within the Democrats, and I'd estimate not even 10% of the downstream cultural impacts of "Woke 1" have receded from the high-water mark of ~2022, I don't think anyone has won. To look at some concrete policy examples: Canada and several US states still allow abortions with no gestational limit (i.e. "full-term abortions") and the UK has decriminalized full-term abortions; trans self-id remains the law of the land in e.g. large parts of North and South America, Ireland, Western Europe, Australia, and Scandinavia; land acknowledgements are common enough that Wikipedia documents them as present in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and parts of the US; and the concept that a nation should enforce its borders and deport people who violate them still remains controversial. Software has eaten and now runs the world, and the world of software is still as hard-line progressive as it was in 2022, both in the open-source world and in the halls of the major tech companies. Wikipedia, the world's reference to large parts of reality, remains staunchly progressive; and the cultural bias in the software world will absolutely tilt AI developers' sense of whether a model is "biased", and so when LLMs replace Wikipedia as the default person's answer to questions, it will also put a progressive tilt through the world's understanding of itself.

There's no "won" to assign to any "we", not yet. The vibes are shifting, and most of that shift has been through (and because of) Trump's second term, but IMHO he's got a good chance to flub the midterms after making a mess of Iran, and any shift in electoral performance will be read as a bellweather. Even if he performs well in the midterms and is succeeded by a Republican, I wouldn't say there's any "win" to call until there's evidence of a sustained and durable cultural shift. What became "Woke 1.0" was latent in the culture for some time before it erupted, reactivating people who were sympathetic to the "politically correct" era of culture but mixing their memes with the Tumblr generation, as the latter graduated from being "just kids on college campuses". That generation built on groundwork laid in the 60s, where the left was able to push a lot, make a lot of counter-cultural headway, and when the high water rolled back they somehow landed college professorships and dodged pretty much any serious consequence.

Yes, but if it's been documented as happening since the 1970s even on Wikipedia, ideology over raw capitalism has been a thing for quite some time.

I think you can call Floyd's death the trigger but not the cause, because TV programming has been willing to purge things that red tribe likes at least since the 1970s.

Doyle was fond of that word, too, and I still snigger at the thought of Watson being unable to contain himself while conversing with Holmes.

It could be that you grew up in a much more literate culture than the current generation, whose parents are more phone-captured, whereas younger generations got hooked on/left with games much sooner, or just had a thinner reading culture in general and didn't pass the SF/F around their friend groups?

I suppose you could consider The FAA's DEI Hiring Scandal as Bayesian evidence to get a sense of how the aviation industry might be thinking about DEI. That might make someone much less keen to start logging hours and spending dollars with a flight school.