domain:arjunpanickssery.substack.com
MaiqTheTrue
Renrijra Krin
4hr ago
I think just as a matter of principle, we need to prevent commerce clause abuse and the abuse of federal funding which both end up being used as a back door way to force states to do whatever the federal government wants them to. As it stands the government can dictate through federal funding that roads be marked for bike lanes, that schools must teach LGBTQ narratives, that the state can regulate environmental protections on products that have never and will never leave their state of origin. It’s ridiculous.
Silverdawn
Small Language Model
4hr ago
Do we have anyone running local offline LLMs here?
How are they coming along?
There are some really good models available to run but they require beastly graphics cards. Here are some llama benchmarks, for a rough idea.
Do you need to load them into VRAM, or can you load them into RAM or something and use either CPU or GPU from there?
In theory, they can be ran on a CPU but GPUs are way better at this task.
The best places to find information on local LLMs that I'm aware of are https://old.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/ and https://boards.4chan.org/g/ and especially the LLM general there.
gattsuru
4hr ago
But I wouldn't be surprised to see something relatively weak, third trimester with rape/incest exceptions or something. With a decent Republican lead in the Senate and probably a small lead in the house, there's at least a chance.
I can't see Democratic senators skipping the filibuster on an abortion ban, Republicans not having three or four Senators flake if the rest of the Republicans try to nuke the filibuster over it, and then there's the lawsuits. The 2003 Partial Birth Abortion Ban [had a third of the Dem Senate cross over](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial-Birth_Abortion_Ban_Act#Legislative_and_judicial_history] to get passed, as a comparison.
That said, I think there are stronger examples. At the regulatory level, I'd expect to see the EMTALA abortion rule nixed, either by the Trump admin removing the rule and/or refusing to support it, and there's a variety of funding levers that can get tweaked (at least until the APA challenge) even if 'officially' no Medicaid money was supposed to have gone to abortion. There's likely to be a lot changed on trans matters, whether through judicial avenues (Skrmetti's getting heard in December, but there's a number of follow-up cases slotted in) or regulatory ones (compare the Dear Colleague letter volleyball). College debt delays and forgiveness might not have survived judicial review moving forward, but they're definitely not going to survive a Trump admin.
And there's a lot of stuff on this sorta path in a variety of spheres. Some of them are unlikely for structural reasons -- a lot of people have tried to pull Project 2025's radfem porn opposition as likely to result in active prosecutions or financial chicanery that the Trump admin just won't be able to pull the DoJ or CFPB into focusing on -- but most of them much more plausible. Sometimes just because the Biden admin made such hilariously aggressive rules, and these people are upset that they're going to lose the benefits of them. But that's still a thing with impact.
doglatine
4hr ago
A right-wing female friend sent me a screenshot of this yesterday and said she was embarrassed to be associated with the idiots who wrote it. For my part, I think it's counterproductive memetics. While I've personally chuckled at some similar memes - e.g., "They're milking AOC on the White House lawn and you're laughing?" for its sheer absurdity - I reckon this kind of extreme edgelord humour is alienating and mysterious for the vast majority of women.
Male friends can absolutely drag the shit out of each other and it's still pretty good-natured, or even an active form of bonding, but nothing as overt happens in female circles. Similarly, young men on voicechat on videogames have been talking about fucking each others' moms in various depraved ways for decades, while lots of women experience this as traumatising aggression. It's clearly a gendered phenomenon, potentially even a biological one - it wouldn't surprise me if we found that isolated tribes in Papua New Guinea where men bond with "your momma" jokes. But I think it codes as grossly and pointlessly inoffensive to most women and genuinely scary to some. While I think that's large because they just "don't get it", that doesn't change the fact that it's probably bad politics.
NunoSempere
4hr ago
maybe kilotonnes
it treats Ukraine as just some pawn instead of an independent country
Well, you know, that doesn't bother me. I don't believe in countries (states). Literally, I don't believe that they exist. They're fictions, like corporations. Really it's a sort of theological idea.
I do believe in nations and to be charitable I can sub that word in. But in that case, from a secular perspective, it's not clear to me why one nation has a right to a piece of land and another doesn't. Where would such a right come from, if not the test of societal virtue that is war? And how sure are we that the ruling class of a nation actually represents that nation, rather than having parasitized it?
It's so demeaning to the Ukrainian people who are fighting for the independence of their country.
If they don't want to fight they can stop. Or, if the people want to stop but can't -- as is evidenced by their enslavement and sacrifice by the men calling themselves their leaders -- we should ask if perhaps that's the real problem!
Ukrainians are the ones who will determine how far they are willing to go to protect their homeland and their people.
It's not clear to me that the ruling society of Russia intends to harm either the land or the people. Actually I think it would be happiest keeping both wholly preserved (but under its own control).
Seems to me that what's going on here is that the land and peoples (the people living there are hardly homogeneous) exist and two competing ruling classes are vying for control over them. One is willing to enslave them and spend their lives to stay in power. The other is basically willing to do the same. It's not clear why either of those is 'right'.
I just don't know where everyone seems to be getting their sense of clear-cut moral stances from.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5hr ago
Hinging an argument on an accusation of dishonesty is precisely why I feel it is reasonable to request evidence of dishonesty, lest that accusation of dishonesty also be dishonest.
But no one accused him of dishonesty. Nate never said "I didn't get any contract", that's my entire point! It's his opponent that exposed himself to an accusation of dishonesty if and only if he didn't send the contract. This, and the fact that you thought it's his reputation as a better that's at stake, makes me think you're not really getting the logic behind my reasoning, but I don't know how to explain it any better.
hanikrummihundursvin
5hr ago
There's nothing nasty about making fun of the people who practice murdering their children so they can continue having careless sex with no consequences.
What does Fuentes being controlled opposition even mean? As you said yourself, "bodily autonomy" arguments are vapid. Laws are made that govern this type of stuff. It' already 'your body, my choice' and it always has been. Why sanctify the democrat crocodile tears by buying into the idea that 'your body, my choice' is a nasty thing to say? Oh, you can't have unprotected sex and then murder a baby to rid yourself of the consequences of your good time? Boohoo.
remzem
5hr ago
Yeah they've been cooking this one for a while, started around the first assassination attempt. They were already seeding Trump with "intelligence" about Iranian assassination plots, after the first one (which was entirely homegrown) they fed this intel to the media to attempt to co-opt the backlash into fueling the deep state's global imperial ambitions. https://www.cnn.com/2024/07/16/politics/iran-plot-assassinate-trump-secret-service/index.html
Now we have this convenient arrest. Pompeo and his lackey Hook starting to worm their way back into Trump's inner circle. etc.
Probably a good chance this is the deepstate's new strat, similar to how they used the Russian pee tapes to corner Trump on backing out on their expansionist efforts in east europe.
Some other smaller deep state moves as well, like McConnell coming out and saying the filibuster will remain which was framed as being nice and magnanimous but will conveniently limit republican power. Then you have the proposed new senate majority leads with Thune and Cornyn both leading and being RINO deepstate ghouls. Senate of course has to confirm cabinet picks and so will have some influence there.
ArjinFerman
Tinfoil Gigachad
5hr ago
If it was actually 50-50, why did he take down his real time election result projection?
Glassnoser
5hr ago
Why shouldn't he get credit for hedging his model more than others?
Glassnoser
5hr ago
It's not useless if it's actually 50-50.
Glassnoser
5hr ago
The bias term is the polling error. The reason he treats it as an error rather than a predictable bias is because he doesn't think it's predictable. Assuming it is predictable based on two elections where it was actually pretty different, even if it was in the same direction both times (something that had a 50% chance of happening even if it were completely random) risks over fitting the model.
To elaborate on that, if literally all the polls miss left, you can’t fix that with weighting. In reality, he would have needed to put all of the weight on AtlasIntel and Rasmussen and close to 0 on everything else. This shows that weighting is the wrong approach.
No, it shows there was a polling error. Let's say he follows your advice and the polling error is in favour of the Democrats in the next election. Then his model would have been really really inaccurate.
Of course, if there really is a consistent bias in favour of Republicans, then it would make it more accurate, but there isn't much data to make that assumption.
FruitfulLemonyLemons
5hr ago
I think this change would make its availability feel less precarious than it does now.
ulyssessword
5hr ago
I chose to move to a moon just to see what happens rather than any well-considered reason, but I think it worked well.
The lack of core miners wasn't an issue given the ease of importing materials (I ran out of local copper and uranium, and local oil was very very insufficient) because the other planets had nigh-infinite amounts of ore. I got copper from the belt, uranium and oil from the oil moon, and all of the advanced materials from around the system. Low gravity is extremely important for using spaceships, as it allows you to use just one fuel tank for a full set of chests (to 300 integrity) and still have enough range to make a round trip.
I hadn't thought of the respawn trick, but I'm not sure if I would use it if I had. It feels like an exploit IMO.
Glassnoser
5hr ago
What's wrong with his method? How could he have improved it?
crushedoranges
5hr ago
A child, when introduced to the concept of probability, gives equal weight to the possible outcomes. Two choices means 50/50 (a coin flip.) A pollster that isn't better than a coin flip is useless. You might as well ask a child. (I believe the children's election - 52/48 in favor of Harris - being +2 D, while being wrong, was more accurate than any of the left-leaning pollsters could muster.)
ToZanarkand
Some day the dream will end
5hr ago
Inasmuch as there's a breakdown in relations between sexes, I don't think you repair that without making abortion (at least during the first trimester) widely available.
Let's say he had bet $100,000 at 50-50 odds that he wouldn't roll a six on a die. Then he rolls a six. Does that prove something about his beliefs? It's only profitable in expectation. There is no guarantee of making money.
To take the election example, 50-50 means losing half the time. It's only profitable because, when you do win, you win more than you would have otherwise lost.
If you're not producing a useful, falsifiable prediction then what is the point?
That is just not possible to get from a single sample. You need to look at his track record over many elections.
roche
5hr ago
Keep in mind that religion is a social mechanism -- one of multiple nigh-invisible but indispensable mechanisms to keep us from clawing out one another's throats. In Japan's case what happened is not religion, but something functionally equivalent to one, which is that the entire country sort of melded into one enormous clan, and the operative faith here is that if one performs his duty in the clan to the nth degree he's going to get all the spoils of society, which is why Japanese elders make no bones about picking up trash or being a crossing guard, and why they're so reticent and polite. Japan is also by no means homogeneous, and that word is a phantasm unless you're talking about very old villages or uncontacted tribes.
and then they formed warm relations the formerly enemy distant genome.
Politeness is a social mechanism too
Tophattingson
5hr ago
Bodily autonomy is a fake argument because in practice nothing else follows from it aside from abortion.
Hey, there are some of us who are actually consistent on this - pro-abortion, pro drug decriminalization, and anti-vaccination. You just won't find us in the Democratic party.
Folamh3
5hr ago
Bodily autonomy is a fake argument because in practice nothing else follows from it aside from abortion.
And sex work, and medical transition for minors.
ThenElection
6hr ago
Testosterone causes the closure of growth plates. So, surprisingly, lower testosterone might lead to taller heights.
Eunuchs in China were notably taller than men who were whole, and it's been known since antiquity that castration results in larger male bodies (Aristotle: "As a general rule, mutilated animals grow to a greater length than the unmutilated").
MathWizard
Good things are good
6hr ago
I actually think the no special resources is a point in Nauvis' favor for the main ground base, because it means the core miners give an even distribution of resources instead of overloading you with one thing for export (which is what I want my mining outposts to do, not the main base). But the gravity and biters are points against it. I chose it anyway and tolerated the downsides partly for sentimental reasons, since all my pre-space stuff was already there, but mostly for the respawn. If I make spare space suits for each planet then I can return home by stripping all my stuff, sticking it in a warehouse, and then suiciding and respawning on Nauvis. Makes it way easier to go exploring and building outposts if I don't have to budget for a return trip. I could be mistaken, but I don't think you can do that effectively with other planets, since if I recall correctly, the respawn options are something like (Nauvis, nearest space station, nearest occupied planet) or something like that, which will only work reliably if your chosen base is near (or you have shuttles from Nauvis to the new base I guess).
Vulcanus is actually the best place to end up stranded on, you got very lucky there. There are almost no threats to worry about and you have easy access to an almost infinite amount of every resource (except for uranium). Gleba is the actual hell-planet.
More options
Context Copy link