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

Showing 25 of 252027 results for

domain:youtu.be

30% vs 90% (tilde number percent space tilde number percent) is showing non-strikethrough in my preview box, so it clearly can work and the real problem lies elsewhere. Now I'll post and it'll strikethrough and I'll look like an idiot.

Upon reading the comments in the reddit thread, it seems that this meme is also a reference to Team Fortress 2 online multiplayer having a "team rebalancing" function that's intended to keep things fun by fixing imbalanced matches but routinely fails at evaluating player quality and thus often makes matters worse.

So the meme-maker was just going a bit wild with that analogy.

This feels like the uncanny valley of civil rights & protesting. A truly authoritarian country doesn't have protests, because everyone knows they will be squashed. Presumably South African women have it so bad, protesting would just anger the men.

Is it actually an uncanny valley? Do we know for sure that utopias don't have any complainers? Given that utopia is impossible*, is the question even meaningful? Yudkowsky's recent post on future humans being impoverished by lack of oxygen makes a lot of sense to me. As an average progress-critical reactionary, I think its human nature to want more, so my rule is simply the more protests and 4B movements, the better everything is.

And what happens when they get the weapons and lose anyway? Do we just all start collecting Nuka-Cola caps?

I agreed with you yesterday on needing to have more compassion towards anti-vaxxers

I didn't use the word "compassion" in the posts I wrote about vaccines, and that's not what I was asking for anyway. I was asking for understanding - an understanding of the conditions and values that cause people to do what they do and think what they think - but that's different from compassion.

There's an intense sneering involved in what you're saying there

No there isn't.

It's just a fact that some people are more fit for biological reproduction than others. But I don't think that evolutionary fitness is tied in any direct sense to your ultimate moral worth. Some of the greatest men to ever live (Plato, Kant, Nietzsche, etc) had no children.

Nature is dumb; it is opinionated, certainly, but you can decide for yourself how seriously you want to take its opinions. The appropriate response, upon learning that you are defective according to nature, isn't "ah, I am defective, all hope is lost". The appropriate response is "very well, I am defective. I accept this designation. But now what? What can this defective organism accomplish? You might be surprised at the answer."

I saw a chart that showed the people with huge incomes had high (by first world country standards, so around 2.0 or 3.0) fertility, but they're quite rare. It was a U-curve chart, not a diagonal chart.

And it's certainly not commensurate with Niger's 6.4 TFR.

You have South Korea, Taiwan, Japan, the PRC, and some city states. Taiwan is arguably the best comparison for South Korea and it also has a TFR below 1, while the PRC will dip there very soon. The city states are South Korea tier but they’re also city states, I’ll give you that.

I fundamentally disagree that parents have some inherent incentive structure to care for their children that is superior to the incentives of social institutions.

Then the rest of this debate is moot. But you're proven so utterly and violently wrong by history that I have a hard time believing you've ever seriously considered the question if you think the State is a good guardian.

Have you met many children raised by the State? Or checked the

In a different worldly circumstance with different institutions, it could easily be the case that the State is more aligned with child interests than parents are.

It was fine to believe Rousseau before the XXth century. I don't think it's fine anymore.

We have tried that world and discovered that the worst thing an individual can do to does not raise to the horrors that States can visit upon you in both scale and intensity.

Sure some weirdo can kidnap, rape, torture and eat you, and this stuff has been done at scale by institutions too. But is he really going to give you horrible diseases on purpose and keep you alive to study how you die?

Granted the far edge of evil is not necessarily instructive of your median expected treatment. But there is something to how different the incentives are when you're a relative versus a number on a spreadsheet. It's far easier to argue the human experience of the number doesn't matter, in the grand scheme of things.

Do you think doctors (especially in America) were making these medical decisions with the full knowledge that the medical literature did not support these decisions?

Yes. I think they intellectually knew the risks but let their interest, curiosity and politics get in the way of their better judgement.

It is my belief that:

  1. the American medical system is uniquely corrupt and ill conceived in that it demands large amounts of scrutiny for new drugs but waives much of this scrutiny for off label use

  2. the psychiatric community at large has handled GD very poorly since constructivist arguments made is a political issue and overcorrected its terrible historical handling of homosexuality as LGB and T got put together in a political coalition

A hypothetical

I don't think there is much to learn from this situation since it is a very clear cut case of abuse, which is of course one of the edge cases of parental authority we can all agree on, alongside drug use, wanton violence and the like.

Now let's alter it to make it actually interesting. Say there is no physical evidence of this abuse and you are getting all this from the minor, but you also know for a fact that the minor is mentally ill.

It's not so clear cut then is it?

I've been in the unfortunate position of having to care for people who are paranoid schizophrenics, and the amount of hallucinated lies I've been told is staggering. But then again some people do abuse their kids.

The issue isn't so much how that particular hypothetical could be resolved, but what a good general rule is for dealing with such problems at scale. And I find that despite its pitfalls, leaning on parental authority does provide the best results.

I really don’t like this sudden government panic over UAPs. Either they really exist and the government has no clue what’s going on, or the government really wants us to think they exist. Both possibilities make me uneasy.

I don't know why the election has triggered a renewed gender war

It's the abortion issue, which is more Christianity v. secularism than men v. women, but is often conceived of as men v. women.

Testing.

30% vs. 90%. EDIT: backslashes don't work.

30% vs. 90%. EDIT: <plain> tags don't work. Okay, I'm stumped.

Fairly-boring story TBH (which I have told elsewhere, but not IIRC anywhere that's not login-gated).

My mum's a misandrist (as in, she literally taught me the Y chromosome is a defect), she divorced my dad when I was 3 and got custody, and I'm effeminate in some ways. Fast-forward to puberty and she's accusing me of sexist abuse every time I turn around because now I start registering to her as "man" rather than "child". I developed dysphoria, wanted to transition.

Around this point, I ran away from Mum (who was not supportive of me transitioning; she was at the time a TERF although she's objected to transphobia since so I don't think she still is), because she confiscated my computer for a month and semi-starved me for a week, I ran amok and manhandled her (for the first and only time), and she called the police on me. Went on finasteride, got permission from a psychiatrist for cross-sex hormones, but procrastinated over the fertility problem long enough for the dysphoria to dissipate (and stopped taking the finasteride). Still probably qualify as "genderqueer" - I'm not exactly upset at having moobs from the finasteride - but the intense dysphoria, with phantom-limb and disgust at my penis, is gone. Hence, I qualify as ex-trans although not really a detransitioner.

I ran into the same problem with a post last week. Still have no idea how to manually type tildes without triggering strikethrough.

PRC is closer to Japan than it is to Korea, unless you think the numbers are fake. And I don't think it's fair to compare city-states with full sized countries.

Saying "developed East Asian countries" is kind of a loaded term, because you really only have Korea, Japan, and arguably China/quasi-china areas.

It's not an intentional strikethrough; it's ~ (tilde) symbols (meaning "approximately") before "30%" and "90%" being misinterpreted as a strikethrough by the software.

Thank you for pointing out the major issues and reasons why RFK got put in this position.

Pretending that this faction are the smart enlightened ones and others are idiots is Hanania tier propaganda talking point repeated ad nauseum. I find it interesting how a rationalist esqe associated space have this bad behavior as a common norm. A lot of shared people from both spaces and Tabarok retweets approvingly Hanania promoting a Thiel guy as the preferred option over RFK. Unfortunately it is propaganda here because the pro big pharma establishment faction is close minded and has huge tunnel vision.

This is the biggest issue for me. Science(TM) has become a religion, and many rationalish types still follow that religion even when it's obviously promoting false beliefs.

While women are largely the gatekeepers of sex, I don't understand how a sort of threat of withholding it would work on a macro level. My understanding is that by and large the sex that happens is mutually desired by both parties, so trying to go on strike will hurt the women as much as it does the men.

My understanding of the labor perspective is that strikes work through government capture or extralegal action such as assaulting strikebreakers. Though maybe an industry wide or general strike can work without those elements, they still require some representative to go to the bargaining table.

Married women are seen as “serving the needs of men,” she says, alienating the group from what could be a more inclusive movement.

Someone should inform my wife

As an aside, it’s ironic that women fear men the most in a place like Korea, statistically one of the safest, close to being THE safest place to be a woman on earth. I wonder what this fact says about women and gender relations . 4B makes a lot more sense in a place like South Africa or perhaps Sudan or Chad. But Korea? Lol

it should be based on something recognisable and draw from the truth even in exaggeration.

The "recognizable" thing is all the media pieces talking about Trump "being in bed with dictators." And the point for people who believe in that is they believe Trump will allow the dictators to attack, and the idea that the US will actually attack is the humorous exaggeration that "draws from the truth" as the people who like the meme understand it.

I agree it's not a good meme, I'm not saying it is, this is not an apologetic. But it doesn't make literally 0% sense to me, I have enough understanding of the point of view behind it that I get what they're saying and why they're saying it, despite disagreeing with great intensity.

It seems like arranged marriage is another big difference, yes? From my understanding arranged marriages still exist in Japan but are uncommon, while they’re very rare in South Korea and the sinosphere.

imagine that maybe they can personally get ahead enough on the newly established "fight against Trump tooth and nail" ladder that an exemption from 4B is quietly granted to them after all?

"Imagine" is right. The exemptions from 4B will be granted to Chad, like they always are. Chad voted Trump, and he might wear a MAGA hat while collecting 4Bs.

Meta: your post is 700 characters of your own words, followed by a verbatim quotation more than ten times that length. The source you linked does not seem to be paywalled. Assume that the average reader is tech-savvy enough to click on a link if they want to read the article. Quoting two paragraphs should be plenty if you are not interrupting it with commentary. Besides I gather that the motte is likely run over a jurisdiction in which copyright is a thing, and thus relies on fair use exceptions for quotations.

The article you quoted is clearly partisan. For example, uncritically referring to the gender pay gap is a red flag for me. From my understanding, the pay gap is a typical example of an equality of outcomes, not an equality of opportunity. Women are free to pick high-paying careers like engineering instead of low-paying careers like gender studies.

To this day, young men perceive that discrimination against men is more serious than against women, even though 50 percent of women between the ages of 19-29 say they’ve experienced sexual discrimination at work, compared to 30 percent of their male peers.

The article makes it sound like that statistic clearly refutes the perception of the men, when in reality, it does nothing of that sort. Perhaps men are less likely to see themselves as victims of sex discrimination. Or perhaps the cases of discrimination men experience are more severe.

From 2021 to 2023, female sexual assault victims saw a 15 percent rise.

This sounds like the author was searching for an impressive statistic to support their claim that women are more in danger than ever. Of course, 2021 was still partly COVID. And it could be that it is simply the rate of reporting which increased, which would be great news instead. Of course, it could also be a real increase, and perhaps even part of a worrisome trend instead of a random fluctuation, but so far the author has not shown the non-partisanship that I would just assume that.

It’s an acceleration of the already widening gender gap in American politics, including an increasing number of young men rejecting feminism.

Feminism can mean a lot of different things. The message of woke feminism to white cis-het males seems to be: "You are the oppressor group. By default, you are in the wrong unless conclusively proven otherwise. Your concerns do not matter because they are not the result of structural oppression." Clearly it is a total mystery why that message fails to resonate with young men.

It’s too soon to say if the 4B movement is here to stay in the United States. But even if it isn’t, the surge in interest says something about the social forces unleashed by the 2024 presidential election.

I will make the prediction that it will indeed not stay in the US.

Lots of single people do not participate in the dating market for a variety of reasons, and I doubt that the politics of their preferred gender is the main reason. Many more people will filter dating partners by their politics.

Finally, I think that if you want to avoid having sex with Trump supporters, a better strategy might be to select on geographic location. Fucking people from Hawaii (37.5% Trump) and avoiding people from Alabama (64.8% Trump) would be more effective. Wikipedia has a convenient list of criteria. The urban (38% Trump) vs rural (64% Trump) divide is in any case much stronger than the male (55%) vs female (45%) split.

I saw no warhawk ever saying Trump would attack South Korea and Taiwan on behalf of China and North Korea. This is literally something nobody believes in. That's what makes it such a bad meme - instead of being based in reality, it just goes "what's the worst thing I can say about person I hate"? That's not how good meme is done, you can't just say maximum vile shit, it should be based on something recognisable and draw from the truth even in exaggeration.

There is plenty of evidence. Just not evidence that fits into the special box that people ask for which is "cannot be explained innocently for other reasons". Look at the PA senate race now. The steal is being attempted, it may or may not prevail.

The only way to find definitive proof of fraud, given our current system, is sting operations. A thing the current DOJ refuses to implement, and which they would also put you in prison for life if you attempted.

Well obviously Trump is hitler because it's on the left. But what is that crap with balancing and nuking South Korea? Trump never not only wanted to do anything like that but was accused about anything like that. Same for Taiwan. Worst that was said about him that he may cut off aid to Ukraine, but that is far from what is being displayed, as if Trump is going to do worse that Russia, China and North Korea taken together, by far. This is just stupid.