ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
No bio...
User ID: 626
Why? If you're talking about sending help to Ukraine it might be wise to take their corruption into account (do you want it to end up in some oligarch's offshore bank account?). In any case, the conversations here aren't limited to just this context, and in your original comment you seem to have implied that any mention of Ukrainian corruption must be Russian propaganda, regardless of context.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7hr ago
Drats, foiled again!
Which account do I have to ping to get your opinions on law and politics?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7hr ago
I don't think so, it's more of a dismissal of the black and white thinking pushed by Western elites. I don't think that saying "Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a dictatorship" justifies the United States' invasion in any way, for example.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7hr ago
You said:
“Ukrainian corruption” is a dog whistle for Russian propaganda.
But Ukrainian corruption is directly observable and widely accepted as existing. When I pointed it out you responded by saying that the implication that Ukraine deserves to be invaded because they suspended their elections is what is Russian propaganda, but that doesn't seem relevant to anything that was said further up the response chain.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7hr ago
I never actually read the essay, but it's a reference to Mark Fisher's Exiting the Vampire Castle.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7hr ago
But that's not what you said in the previous comment?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
7hr ago
Isn't that a bit like saying "greenhouse gasses" is "environmentalist propaganda"?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
8hr ago
How much, and how heavy-handed? Eh, this is where I’m more reserved. I think a scenario where all the major editors get a phone call from Barack Obama is less likely than one where they all go to the same dinner parties and talk each other into the same conclusions.
Yeah, I agree on that. The conclusion I draw from that though, is that these dinner parties are not to be underestimated, and any place where influential people congregate is inherently suspicious.
Thanks for the more elaborate response, as I wasn't sure how to respond to the other one.
Why am I obliged to engage in conversion with those people? I don't want to and I don't need to.
Because they're powerful people in influential positions of mainstream medical and academic institutions.
They certainly didn't start with consensus. The fact that puberty blockers in the UK were prescribed to minors shows that. But eventually experts have cooperated and come to the conclusion that based on current evidence or rather due to lack of good evidence we cannot allow puberty blockers to minors except for clinical studies.
This was brought to the attention of the UK government which now has made a law based on recommendation of experts.
I have a different perspective on what happened.
There was a consensus of experts and it said the opposite. Just look at this article by Jack Turban, yeah yeah it's just pop-sci, but Turban is an acclaimed expert in the field, and his article cites an alphabet soup of psychological and medical associations, and it seemed pretty clear that the science was settled. This consensus was not shaken by internal debate among experts, Cass was ordered by the government to conduct her review, and for that matter the government did not do so at their own initiative either, but has done so due to public pressure stemming from the controversy. Now, I'm not familiar with who exactly lobbied for the review. For all their faults, the British medical experts seem to have a skeptical streak, so I wouldn't be surprised if it turned out some of them spearheaded it... that said, surely you see how the topic being controversial among the general public would prompt them to look into the issue?
In other words, at each step, the review was prompted by outsiders questioning the experts in their field of expertise, and none of it would have happened if people followed the approach you recommend. Further, despite evidence for "gender affirming care" being judged to be of poor quality, it seemed to have no impact on the worldwide status of the procedures themselves - some countries limited the precures in a UK-like fashion, but it's largely a local affair, not a global one like Ivermectin, and I haven't seen an analogue to pharmacies declining valid prescriptions from a doctor, which is what was happening with Ivermectin - or on the professional status of it's proponents.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
16hr ago
Additionally, if Canada did somehow join the USA, they would not be state 51, but rather states 51-60. That plus 40 million new left-leaning citizens would probably mean Democrats sweeping the elections for a generation.
That's why it needs to be annexed as an unincorporated territory!
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
17hr ago
I agree that there is a useful version of the term, but I consider it part of the motte-and-bailey game. I keep seeing people use it to describe Joopoasters and advanced racists so it soaks up their vibes, and than slapping it on relatively mild dissident figures who are not so hot on liberalism anymore. I don't know if he's still doing it, but that was essentially the entirety of James Lindsay's timeline for a while.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
20hr ago
This is my guess for what actually happened.
Sometimes I wish we were as badass as you think we are.
You do, and you help people with dual citizenship circumvent countries that don't (I remember reading some official entry from the US Embassy in Dubai (I think) that went something like "Dubai doesn't recognize dual citizenship, here's what to do when they confiscate your American passport").
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
Uh... You're like the last person I was thinking of, pretty sure I've seen you around for quite a while.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
It seems like we've had a slight uptick in leftist (or at least anti-Trump) posters lately
Sorry to derail, but same, and while I welcome their presence I'm more than a little bemused at it's implication. All this time we were told that the reason they're leaving is that they were being mistreated, my current conclusion is leaning towards: they were leaving because they felt they're winning, and no longer need us - they're coming back because they're feeling like they're starting to lose.
In medicine the evidence is assessed by quality. I don't often do it myself because it takes a lot of time. We work in groups and we have to rely on groups that do good job assessing the quality of the evidence.
If you read the link and go deep, you will find that a lot of evidence about ivermectin is discarded because it was of very low quality.
Right, but you're acting like an assessment of "low quality" is the end of conversation, and anyone disagreeing with it is automatically intellectually lazy. It would be music to my ears, because that would mean anyone doubting, say, the Cass Review, gets to have all their opinions disregarded on all other subjects, but it's just not how it works, nor is it how it should work.
My advice is – do your own research but learn to do it properly.
You're assuming way too much about me and what I'm saying. My only point is that people disagreeing with you on this aren't automatically intellectually lazy.
I'm with you on people's susceptibility to propaganda, I just have my doubts about the elites being sane enough to even try it. Just look at the flailing around trying to find "the Joe Rogan of the left", it's not a complicated formula, it's even being offered by several people, they just have to promote them, but they just won't do it.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
So while we're doing this, can we also admit that the hysteria around Russian influence was always nonsense?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
The paradigm is in the link I provided with clear and detailed evidence – exactly which studies and how they showed that both groups (ivermectin and placebo) had no statistical differences.
Right, I'm pretty sure it's still in accordance with the paradigm to make an argument for studies coming to a different conclusion being given more weight / not being excluded, for example. Even if the argument is ultimately wrong, it doesn't follow that it's intellectually lazy.
It is your homework now to see that other group is outside this paradigm.
I understand the temptation to put someone in a "guilty until proven innocent" situation, but "he's guilty, it's your homework to see why" is taking it to another level.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
A.K.A "a day that ends with a 'y' in Washington D.C.". What is it that you'd want to discuss about any of this?
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
For most of those files, I'm not even sure what they do or whether I can safely gitignore them
Are there any other Unreal projects on github? Might be worth checking what they commit, and what they leave out.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
1d ago
If your kid got run over by a young man (who have the highest odds of causing fatal accidents) and this was picked up by misandrist feminists, who would proceed to milk the hell out of it to fuel a campaign to raise the minimum driving age for men to 25...
...it would, in fact, be the height of cuckoldry to make a comment like "I wish my kid got run over by a woman".
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
2d ago
Were they ever so scarse that people would be "lazy" like the modern human?
Quite the opposite. Scarcity would cause laziness to be a transient state, a high you'd be constantly chasing like All Bundy ruminating on that highschool football game where he scored 4 touchdowns.
Come now, that's uncalled for / against the rules. An insult expressed in a civil manner is still an insult.
More options
Context Copy link