site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 246188 results for

domain:nature.com

Kids are idiots

It sounds like you and your friends were idiots. My friends and I didn’t get up to anything this bad. Of course we did stupid shit, but none of it involved theft. My parents would have been mortified to learn I was involved in stealing anything.

Also, I don’t know what gives you the impression that I support draconian punishments for first-time teenage offenders. In any of the anecdotal scenarios you referenced, I’d be happy to see the kids involved forced to do some sort of community service. The people for whom I have zero sympathy, and for whom I prescribe maximally harsh penalties, are habitual offenders.

I think someone who sees "if we Republicans can't win at the ballot box we should grab our guns and start shooting" is right to be worried that the shooting will be not entirely discriminate.

You live in a village and hear a young passionate man with a red band on his arm state they'll only expropriate the needed share of corn from only the lazy bloodsuckers who exploit others. How confident are you?

This description reminds me of Sarah Palin, who was a remarkably charismatic figure, except that that charisma was a very normie boomer type of charisma that's very vulnerable to attack in our modern political environment. Trump has something similar, but with an extra more unique quality that makes him the defining figure of our times.

Sure, kids steal stuff and do other bad things. But it is certainly possible, in principle, to have a system of law and enforcement that comes down hard on shoplifting gangs and habitual criminals while applying consequences to the girl swiping some earrings at Claire's which, while unpleasant, are not ACTUALLY life-ruining.

That when people ask for that, they're offered tyranny -- "OK, but if your kid does anything wrong we're going to have him thrown into the general population with the father-stabbers and mother-rapers" -- or anarcho-tyranny -- "We'll start by throwing middle-class kids in jail if they step out of line and if that doesn't work, maybe we'll consider moving on to the gangs" tends to make them stop asking for enforcement. But that's because the responders are acting in bad faith and don't actually want to stop the problem.

I'm sure civil war will respect all of those fine details you specified.

Not respecting all the fine details doesn't imply genocide either? Do you think the US respected all the fine details in Afghanistan? Or do you think they committed genocide? Or do you think neither, and therefore your entire argument is invalid?

"Bayesian" has been the hot new word in my part of the internet for the last few years!

It includes more people than you think it does. I can recall the following instances from high school where I was either aware of or partially complicit in theft:

  • One friend of mine would steal practically anything he could out of museum gift shops whenever we were on field trips. I don't even know that he necessarily wanted the stuff he was stealing. He was a good kid who got good grades and came from a good family. He's currently some kind of engineer for General Electric.

  • A group of us decided to whitewash the local graffiti tunnel just after all the seniors in our graduating class painted their names on it. A friend who worked at Wal Mart put several hundred dollars worth of white paint on the loading dock for us to steal. We kept joking about it being a heist. I wasn't there for the actual heist, but I participated in the whitewashing.

  • Two friends of mine were convicted in juvie court for stealing plants from a local nursery that they intended to give as Mother's Day gifts.

  • On the band trip junior year my roommates and a few other friends did a grab and run of beer cans out of the cooler in the hotel bar. My role was to create a distraction by trying to get served underage and getting into an argument with the bartender.

  • I was at a Halloween party and a bunch of us piled into a Dodge Neon and drove to a farm field nearby where we proceeded to grab pumpkins and throw them in the back of this one kid's El Camino. This fat, black cop who was the local fuzz showed up and started chasing us while running with a flashlight. I remember I had to jump a fence at the edge of the field and I actually stopped to let him catch up because I wanted to see how he negotiated it; he was trying to wriggle his fat ass underneath it and I started laughing before continuing running. We all had to walk back to the party, and when the officer showed up and saw all the pumpkins my friend's parents said that they told everyone to bring a pumpkin to the party.

I'm not aware of any of the people involved in the above incidents having any contact with the law whatsoever as adults. I also spent 4 years working for the Boy Scouts and dealing with kids all the time who, while I don't have any specific knowledge of criminal activities, they were the kind of jackwagons who I wouldn't be surprised if they stole something. The entitled rich kid brats who are bound and determined to see how close to the line they can get before I have a talk with their scoutmaster about my ending their participation in my program.

When people say shit like this I always get an image of the naive mom who says "well certainly my David would never do anything like that!" Kids are idiots, and if you think that the impact of harsh punishments for petty crime among teenagers would be limited to minorities and poor people, well, I have some swampland in Jersey for sale.

I got out to see the local college do a production of Pierre, Natasha, and the Great Comet of 1812. It's a sort of rapid mishmash of an episode in War and Peace, fun in that it's one of my favorite books, and the music was enjoyable. The college kids did a fair job, especially for a fall semester performance with several obvious freshmen in key roles.

Dolohov and Anatole were great, as was Ellene, who commanded every scene.

But like Hoffmeister, the casting disappointed me. Pierre, while a talented singer, was ruined by woke casting. He was skinny. Pierre MUST be fat. The entire character is based in his size. He should ideally be noticeably tall while also being chubby, the kind of guy that looks harmless when he slouches but when he rears up you realize he's a bear of a man.

The ginger cast as a Pierre did his best, but his efforts to emote and over-act being drunk and sad didn't work because it made him seem frail, where if he were fat moving awkwardly could still portray robust strength. This interacted poorly with the script, which did a poor job communicating age when using a student cast. Anatole and Dolohov refer to Pierre as "old man" sarcastically, despite being his age, but frail skinny Pierre just seemed ancient. The communication between mid twenties Pierre and teenage Natasha is meant to be more intimate and frank than that between Natasha and Marya Akhrisimova, but that's not clear in the casting. Pierre's confrontation with Anatole was confusing, in the book it's clear that once roused Pierre tosses the young rake around and roughs him up, even though he'd been a genteel cuckold to that point.

Andrey was also cast weakly, but that's a tough one in the script, especially at school: he only gets one real scene, but he needs to be charismatic, upright, and dream hot for the love between him and Natasha to work.

Overall I had a great time. One of my favorite scenes in one of my favorite works. I think if I were reworking the script I'd try to make economic relationships clearer, but that's probably tough. But the driving aspect behind a lot of the plot is Natasha Ellene and Anatole all need to marry rich.

I read Scott's piece as about as Straussian as he ever gets.

He lays out a long and detailed takedown of the Democrat Industrial Complex, then adds a relatively wishy-washy 'but Trump does these bad things too'. I don't think he's a secret MAGA by any stretch, but I do think that Scott has come a long way from his railing against feminism days & not because he ever had a 'come to Jesus' moment - he's just very politically canny now, and cares about what happens to his (grey) tribe. My guess is that he's predicting a Trump victory and wants to avoid himself, his family and his tribe from being targeted by anti-Trump backlash, living as they do in the heart of Blue culture. Again, I don't want to accuse Scott of dishonesty as I think he's a top 1% scrupulosity person - I think he won't be voting for Trump and doesn't particularly like the guy. I just think that the piece should be read with an eye for realpolitik.

I'm sure civil war will respect all of those fine details you specified.

If you want to discuss, then discuss. "DAE just start shooting is the only choice here?" is only technically discussion.

I don’t know about ‘woke’ (although various aspects of the culture, language, attitude towards vice, sin, sex, therapy, relationships and so on of people in this Norse mythology are seemingly identical to those of progressive game writers in 2010s and 2020s California). But certainly the affect, style, tone, seriousness, language and so on was pure Marvel Whedon CW-show quippiness.

I'm not a Trumpist, nor did I even say I wanted to murder them all. Even if I had said it was time for open war (I did not; I said that given his premises, open war made perfect sense), open war does not imply genocide.

Stop trying to stifle discussion.

This cements my thought that the “Vance is weird” campaign is a fully enclosed propaganda ecosystem, as in, it isn’t exaggerating some aspect of Vance (eg “Trump lies”), it is just totally made up. And that’s really spooky, because there’s a section of the public that will believe whatever the DNC wants them to believe. If they can make you believe Vance is weird they can make you believe anything.

I dunno, to me it kind of makes sense that a normal guy would seem weirder as a politician than an average politician would. It's up to what people expect of a politician. Normal people don't methodically control their actions and words to make everything fit into a neatly packaged personal narrative, so it's easier to cherry-pick examples to craft a different narrative.

They aren't actually forced to work. They may be granted certain privileges if they do work (along with the meager stipend) but no one is forcing them to work. That's the deliberately misleading part.

This isn't really the right place for this kind of thing. We are a discussion forum, not a place for organizing political action.

If you want to discuss that website, or discuss who you prefer for president, or discuss why we need approval voting all those are fine.

I mean, yeah. Boost pay for prosecutors and hire more of them. Same for public defenders. Expand the courts. Give police enough money that they can actually investigate all of the crimes that are reported to them. Make juror compensation $500/day so people will stop trying to get out of it. I don't have any problem with any of this. But that's not the world we live in. the point I was making wasn't that you can't make changes to fix these things, but that the reason for this goes beyond woke prosecutors deciding they don't want to charge shoplifting.

God of War reboot games

What "woke" dialogue was in God of War?

The factory must continue to grow on other planets.

It's useless for them.

Elaborate. I don't think the militarization of police is intended to prepare them with better tools for giving tickets and responding to DV calls, it's adopting tools that suck for actual policing but have blatant counterinsurgency applications.

You said that- not me. PISA scores and results speak for themselves. Arabs underperform.

Some circles debate whether [whatever your demographic is] even qualify as homo sapiens.

Probably, but that's not bad. Fallout decays fast.

Speak plainly about whatever you mean. All I can piece together is that whatever it is includes something about a war involving China.

The surge in the 70s depends on Supreme Court jurisprudence which probably couldn’t have occurred before the New Deal. But I think capital punishment advocacy does date back to the 1800s. States like Michigan banned it early with explicitly Christian arguments.

Today’s split probably has more to do with partisan habits than with religion.

Nope, complete news to me.

Aw, I specifically wrote up Wise To The World because it wasn't about the Presidential election or national politics. Guess I could see it being read through that lens, though.

Deiseach is definitely an older, Irish woman.

It actually makes TequilaMockingbird's comment all the funnier as it would in fact be the funniest answer.

…you know she was active on this board, right?