PutAHelmetOn
Recovering Quokka
No bio...
User ID: 890
The common talking point about low-trust and high-trust society is a high-truster saying, "Why can't we just have fistfights? Why is everything a fight to the death?" and a low-truster replying, "Of course everything is a fight to the death." Another fun fact: didn't people used to just walk around armed (whether with guns or with swords)? They still insulted each other right?
I suppose you can insist on calling this honor culture and legalistic culture, but i think now we're just arguing over meaningless words.
"Violent Sikhs are just modern UK soldiers" is a hot take, but if he is getting convicted, isn't that evidence against the entire idea? And what you're left with is just inflammatory rhetoric?
I didn't have in mind any kind of service exploits when I said "hacking the client." Of course companies can ban you from their services, for essentially any reason.
I only had in mind white-hat "preserving a retired product," but I think its kind of silly to think the community or the market is entitled to that. Of course, the relevant punishment here is getting sued, not getting banned.
If a software license wants to say "you cannot hack the client, ever" then who is the law to prevent that? In general, we allow all sorts of things in software licenses.
To my knowledge, courts only enforce IP law against "hacking the client" projects whenever the companies can prove they're being financially harmed. Most of the time it means they have some version of the service up already. I suppose there might be cases where a very edgy fan fiction tarnishes the brand's IP, but presumably the company does believe there is financial damage in this case.
Well there is one other case, which maybe is the real discussion: if the fan-made project is making money, companies will go after it to get a piece of the pie. I think that's fair. If a company wants to stop service for their online game, I don't think it means the IP should become public domain. For example, the service might be unprofitable after merely 1 year. The company should still be able to expect royalties, for example. Or, be able to veto a fan-made service, even if it is profitable in the market.
I say this as someone who has played MMOs, as someone who is sad many have changed or shut down, and as someone who follows various emulator projects (And am sympathetic to the community).
One of the pushbacks people will give is that DiCaprio's dating young women is a kind of moral failure. Therefore, your readers would disagree with it this way: many of them are morally upstanding and would only ever want to date someone with similar levels of life-experience and power. And so, they would take issue with "Probably all men..." bit.
It could be for a similar reason to the rise of indie studios in Videogames? Arguably corporatizing these "art forms" leads to a lot of optimization that audiences eventually burn out from. Indie creators do interesting and artful things.
If we are talking about adultery laws and "absurdly cruel victimless crime sex," what does that have to do with laws against young men having sex?
Like, based on the original example of an older female teacher, it seems completely off-topic. What do you mean?
I really hope this doesn't turn into a trend. Arresting people for social media posts is Yookay Behavior (am I saying it right?)
if you take two pixel-by-pixel identical artworks, one made by a human and one made by an AI (or at least, the kinds of AI we have today, using the methods that today's AI systems use -- this isn't a simple chauvinism in favor of carbon over silicon as an underlying substrate), the AI image is simply worse, because (very briefly and roughly) human effort has intrinsic value, connecting with other humans has intrinsic value, the total historical and social context of an artwork has intrinsic value, etc.
Let's talk about color! No, not artistic color theory. I mean an obligatory link to the relevant: what Color are your bits?. Interestingly, the author has added a short preamble that mentions generative AI! Albeit mostly from a copyright perspective, which was one of the original reasons for thinking about Bit Color.
In the red/blue button debate, people sometimes argue that blue-pushers only say they push blue, but would actually push red if the experiment were carried out.
From this perspective, the blue/red debate is a misunderstanding:
- Red-pushers are answering the thought-experiment literally based on the perceived coordination point
- Blue-pushers are engaging in rhetoric, in an attempt to set the coordination point
Could Newcombe's problem just be a misunderstanding?
- Two-boxers are answering the thought-experiment literally based on what they would do
- One-boxers are engaging in rhetoric, precommitting to be the kind of person who wins the game
It would probably be bad PR
But the asymmetry of male vs female dynamics comes from:
- women's in-group preference vs men's competition instinct
- women's choosiness vs men's desperation
- women are wonderful effect
These things are psychologically hard-wired, not cultural. The only way to make a society where the women and men have symmetrical dynamics is social repression or genetic engineering. The feminist movement, and its outcomes, moved us closer to a state of nature.
The "men's feminist movement" is just Patriarchy.
Then I must disagree with the OP's prediction that it would disgust the median man 'on here.' The median man here is about 30. He is too young to remember patriarchy.
Men today do not take overall responsibility for women (relative to patriarchy). Women are more independent than ever in their education, careers, and the support given to single mothers and divorced women. As far as I can see, the people who would actually be disgusted by our society -- the ancestors who were actually acculturated in patriarchal monogamous norms -- are all but dead. And it was the feminist movement which also reciprocally freed men of patriarchal obligation: men are no longer legally responsible for their wives or daughters in general; men are no longer required to be monogamous; etc.
Arguably the Boomers (and Gen X?) would be the ones disgusted by this mythical "men's feminist movement." Perhaps that is why we have vestigial parts of family law, or why we have pearl-clutching articles on the plummeting male labor participation rate? I'm not so sure these expectations will die with the Boomers. It would require a critical mass of women to willingly relinquish state coercion over men, and given the direction gender relations have been heading, it's not happening.
Can you elaborate on what a "men's feminist movement" would look like? Boys can already become twinks and to an extent (some) men are able to refuse responsibility just fine. I think you might be under-estimating how many men (here) are so seeped in gender-conflict that they would prefer pro-men outcomes at the cost of any amount of disgust.
What pro-men outcomes do you think a "men's feminist movement" would have?
I usually people hear their projects called "small, medium or large." There's not a hard definition. Small projects can be comfortably worked by one person. Large projects probably need at least a team, maybe multiple. Medium projects probably need a small team.
Probably when you talk about project size you need to be more specific. Larger projects tend to:
- have more consumers
- change slowly rather than rapidly
- be deployed as multiple services
- have multiple experts who know sub-systems, rather than one expert who knows everything
- have long release cycles, requiring batched testing approaches
These are not caused by "high LOC." Perhaps I'm describing "(poorly written) enterprise software." But these are still things people sometimes mean when they talk about "large project" or "small project."
I don't see the connection between this and Gamergate. At best, you could say "this game causes gamers to be attacked as pedophiles" which fits with the Gamergate narrative ("gamers attacked").
My only exposure to controversy about the game was people calling it sexualized, creepy, and pedophilic. The people who call this game perverted are themselves gooners. They are kind of like woke people who call DnD racist for having low-intelligence orcs. It is a kind of self-report. "Strong man protects little child" is completely normal and wholesome in media. It does not therefore become un-wholesome because the child is loli-coded.
Pedophile is becoming more common attack de jour among the Extremely Online. I expect it will follow a similar path of the word "racist." Concretely, I expect within the next decade, a new round of MeToo/cancel culture to include cancelling men for being "pedophiles" but this will not involve any legal proceedings. The "pedophilia" in question will just be age gap relationships (not harassment!).
If this prediction is true, then it would be unsurprising to see the newest term of derision applied early to an easy target like gamers.
In short, I think the controversy is caused by:
- perverts sexualizing the game (even though it is not sexual)
- getting mad at it (because straight male sexuality is taboo)
Regimes that use military force for legitimacy could, in theory, let people think and believe what they want, but they would never ever ever let people have access to arms, since that would threaten the legitimacy.
Regimes that use consent of the governed for legitimacy would never ever ever let people think for themselves, since the people may turn against the regime. If communist countries' legitimacy comes from a (perceived) consent of the governed then the regime must control the information and minds to ensure the people continue to perceive the government as legitimate.
I cannot find the origin or meaning of "enjoy arbys." I see eigenrobot say it a lot, and as far as I can tell, it means "you reap what you sow" or "this is how the world is now, deal with it." What is up with arby's?
Yes, when I first learned about Slave Morality 10 years ago, I immediately thought "wait this is just social justice." However, the modern culture war isn't primarily focused on impotent weakness. It is more correct to say social justice is just Feminine Norms. This explains sympathy for the weak while also explaining why certain Ressentiments are not left-coded (e.g. Incels).
"In their blood to hate" sounds like a thought-terminating cliche. It seems to me just as correct to say the Left has an ingrained instinct to feel equality (=sameness). I think your model of the Right is right though.
It depends on how much friction there is going to new stores, how much stock there is, and how much you personally enjoy shopping.
I doubt the 50/50 ratio comes from "male mortality being higher than female mortality." It comes from the fact that the most successful males are just so damn successful that from an expected value calculation, gambling on being a male (from behind the veil of ignorance) is worth it.
That comment is about accelerationism, i.e. pushing for a different future. The idea is that pro-feminist solutions to fertility collapse are necessarily oppressive to men. Done correctly with the right technology though, the rebellion can be probably be prevented.
- Prev
- Next

It's rare to see this kind of media coverage used against Democrats right? So what does this case mean? It's probably not a sign of Democratic moderation per se. If the authors really are Jewish it seems this is part of the re-alignment whereby (Zionist) Jews are becoming Republican? If so, we might expect to see more media and education power defect to the Right.
More options
Context Copy link