Oceans Yet to Burn
Month
The Internet (also known as the “Titties and Kitties” Fandom),
I am very proud of my “ principled dissent from the “orthodoxy” of racism and sexism “ and I hope other people take the same path.
I do not agree with rationalism, as it is an ideology obsessed with cleansing society of the “irrational”, with insufficient humility about what is knowable and insufficient compassion for the unreasonable Other.
Presuming this ask believes it is part of some social justice orthodoxy, then they should know that the problem with their ideology is the obsessive focus on shaming individuals. Classism, racism, and sexism are structural problems that need reworking of the incentives our society lives on. All the constant shaming does is continue the cycle of fear and violence.
Christianity and communism represent an escape from that cycle.
Markets don’t actually work efficiently when people don’t have practical alternatives, don’t have access to information and the ability to process it, or just don’t go through the work of comparing. Obtaining information is NOT free! It has major opportunity costs! And the vendors will fight against you doing it!
“Jeremy Corbyn tried to pass through a law that would required private landlords to make their homes safe and “fit for human habitation” last year – but it was rejected by the Conservatives.
Labour proposed an amendment to the Government’s new Housing and Planning Bill – a raft of new laws aimed at reforming housing law – in January last year, but it was rejected by 312 votes to 219.
According to Parliament’s register of interests, 72 of the MPs who voted against the amendment were themselves landlords who derive an income from a property.”Whatever you think about the man as an individual or politician, he sure is on the right side of history a lot.
More regulations driving up the cost of housing <—-> Right side of history
the regulation about not cladding the outside of high rise buildings in flammable material tho
having sufficient fire escapes
for that matter fire alarms
very poor choice of example of regulatory harm
I’m sure our dear Voxette wouldn’t mind losing the regulations in favor of requiring all landlords to carry insurance against the death or debilitating injury to occupants with a cap at $1 million per occupant, reflecting the cost to the rest of society of people dying in unsafe housing. After all, it would be terribly immoral to give the landlords a subsidy, right?
They will of course also be required to carry sufficient insurance for neighboring buildings. It wouldn’t be very fair if they got away with a huge fire burning down someone else’s property just because they were bankrupt.
House Majority Whip Steve Scalise was shot at congressional baseball practice in Del Ray, Virginia, and possibly four others were injured by an assailant, according to another lawmaker who was at the practice.
Representative Mo Brooks of Alabama said on CNN that he and other lawmakers tried to apply a tourniquet with his belt on one injured person to try and stop the bleeding. Scalise crawled to the outfield.
More from Bloomberg.com: Russian Cyber Hacks on U.S. Electoral System Far Wider Than Previously Known
“There must have been 50, 100 shots fired,” Brooks said.
Brooks said Capitol security forces were firing back with pistols at the shooter until the shooter was tackled to the ground.
More from Bloomberg.com
- Trump Has No Plans to Fire Special Counsel, Spokeswoman Says
- Trump Cheerleaders Turn on Special Counsel Mueller
- Singapore Premier Lee’s Brother to Leave City Amid Family Feud
Read Scalise Shot by Assailant at Congressional Baseball Practice on bloombergpolitics.com
I’m afraid that we’ve crossed lines we can never come back from. Attacks on public servants are an attack on democracy.
A truckload of presidents have been assassinated over the course of U.S. history. Congresscritters have been succesfully murdered before. Democracy will survive.
Attack more public servants imo
Do you want right-wing paramilitaries? Because that’s how you get right-wing paramilitaries.
How much you wanna bet that silly proboscis monkey/tapir/boar you kids all love is some multimillion dollar viral marketing scheme.
surely not @owlwisdoms100!
Owls actually sinister Capitalist plot by Korean consumer electronics giant and heavy industrial conglomerate Samsung, created in very farsighted move to sell more Galaxy S9s.
@digging-holes-in-the-river reminded me of a form of sexism, or at least huge wrongness, that I sometimes suffer from, although I think I’m improving.
Logical belief: as reported by reliable statisticians, women are 52% of the population
Alief: women are a small minority, like 5% or something. They don’t really take part in society.
I think I get this from working in a very male dominated profession, and, to the extent I ever socialise, socialising with people from that profession.
I don’t often seem women complaining about this kind of view, presumably on the view it’s too ludicrous to occur to them, although I think complaints like “why are you treating all women as a uniform special case” are a sort of second-order effect.
I mean you’d feel like that in some industries, business, politics.
On the other hand: primary school teachers, nurses, dental hygienists (apparently 98% female, in Australia at least).
It’s interesting when you see a particular field pass 50% female intake because you know there’s going to be a shake up coming when all the old guys hit retirement age and society recodes whatever it is as a ‘girl thing’.
Victoria Police has got their female representation up from 8% to 26% and I’m really curious to see how people react if it ever gets to 50% or above, that’ll be totes fun.
Some Normie: as reported by reliable statisticians, women are 52% of the population
A Nerd: women are a small minority, like 5% or something. they don’t really take part in society.
Enlightened Discourse Master: there are no women, only men and traps
I’m their god and they worship me and my feminine thighs. I have entire death squads at my disposal, and i could not be happier. My guns and paramilitias are my rights, and I don’t need you to fight for them you fucking normie.
[Random Interval] Reminder that the White Nationalists still seemingly haven’t noticed that widespread human genetic engineering is arriving in 1-3 decades.
Like, here they are, freaking out about IQ levels, when if they’re right on the origins of IQ, it will be sorted out within one or two generations. And that’s assuming that they’re right in the first place.
[Random Interval] Reminder that the White Nationalists still seemingly haven’t noticed that widespread human genetic engineering is arriving in 1-3 decades.
How the fuck does someone like me (who sometimes considers himself an alien in a human suit) have a better grasp on basic human interaction than like a good 60% of this hellsite
Blue Hellsite™ is a social experiment in selection bias and Homestuck fanart sponsored by the University of Nantong. I’m surprised you hadn’t realized that yet.
“DEAF TO THE JEWS” the man shouted, holding the boombox aloft in the air, wearing an old Wehrmacht uniform.
Legions of uniformed dancers followed him through the street in formation.
Satisfied, he passed the boombox to an attendant, grasped a microphone, and began to rap.
It wasn’t the best timeline, it was true, but it certainly it wasn’t the worst, either.
I wonder, if, on some level, the opposition to “cultural appropriation” is driven by an intuitive realization that if you actually mix all the cultures, you don’t have a multicultural society anymore, just one with a dominant one again.
Brand loyalty is such stupid nonsense though. Like…we know you’re not a real person, McDonald’s™; we’re not going to swear an oath of fealty to your shitty ass hamburgers.
teens in unison: today we will cast off the corporate shackles
OP may not realize what practical brand loyalty is. It isn’t about swearing fealty, but about not putting in the effort and risk to try another brand. Not a big deal for hamburgers, but, say your family had major issues with a Ford minivan and started exclusively buying all their cars from one Japanese company…
Or perhaps OP was somehow exaggerating for humourous effect. I have heard that such things are possible.
teens in unison: today we will reblog OP
Clearly unpossible.
Though I may have just been exploiting this opportunity to talk about how explore/exploit makes brand loyalty sometimes rational.
Brand loyalty is such stupid nonsense though. Like…we know you’re not a real person, McDonald’s™; we’re not going to swear an oath of fealty to your shitty ass hamburgers.
teens in unison: today we will cast off the corporate shackles
OP may not realize what practical brand loyalty is. It isn’t about swearing fealty, but about not putting in the effort and risk to try another brand. Not a big deal for hamburgers, but, say your family had major issues with a Ford minivan and started exclusively buying all their cars from one Japanese company…
So You’ve Married Your Anime Waifu
God i wish that were me
can’t relate
God I wish that also were me
Sometimes, a prominent person P says something ambiguous and weird on TV. It can be pre-taped, but it has to be “live” like an interview or a late night talk show. The statement is possibly problematic when taken out of context, and only a small point in support of the main thesis.
For example: “If you don’t know what the candidates stand for, maybe don’t vote” or “Women’s child rearing work is important and should be valued”or “Black men have big penises”.
The talk show host asks next question. Someone tweets this sentence in isolation.
News Cycle I
“P said racist/sexist/fascist thing”
“Other people react to thing said by P“
“What twitter users think of P’s latest gaffe“
“Former friend condemns P”
“People distancing themselves from P”
Now our protagonist clarifies that they meant what they said, but they meant it in an innocuous, literal way.
News Cycle II
“P doubles down on racist/sexist/fascist comments”
“P still not apologising”
“Right-wing weirdos agree with P“
Now P must clarify that he really didn’t mean it like that. He does not agree with the weirdos at all and regrets any offense he may have caused. He clarifies his original statement to eliminate any confusion.
News cycle III
“P offers non-apology, repeats offending statement”
“We decided not to give P a platform any more”
“Has racism/sexism/fascism re-entered the mainstream? A political scientist explains, also P is terrible“
At this point, the actual statement by P is buried three clicks deep in these news articles. P thinks the original offhand statement was blown out of proportion. He tries one more time.
News cycle IV
“P: Concerns about racism/sexism/fascism blown out of proportion“
“P goes on offensive in racism/sexism/fascism row“
Q, a friend of P, tries to give a sympathetic account of the original statement.
News cycle V
“Q: P was misunderstood“
“Q defends P’s racist/sexist/fascist outburst“
“Q’s defense of P proves old boys networks still at work“
“P’s employer has still not fired racist/sexist/fascist P“
After Q, nobody wants to stick their neck out for P now, and nobody wants to be seen talking to P. People who defend P mostly do so anonymously.
News cycle VI (mostly think pieces, not news stories)
“People need to stop defending P“
“Stop saying racism/sexism/fascism is no big deal“
“Waffling about giving racist/sexist/fascist people a platform hurts marginalized people the most“
The media realise that there is nothing more to say, and smaller outlets/latecomers try to milk the issue one last time. Nobody wants to talk to P any more, and P is wary of any journalist who contacts him.
News cycle VII (still no news stories)
“The privilege of P-supporters“
“We’ve had it with pro-P trolls in our comment section“
“Why we don’t talk to P and why people like P do not deserve a right of reply“
P tries to find somebody who wants to talk to him, somebody sympathetic. He does not want to talk to anybody who previously painted him as racist/sexist/fascist.
News cycle VIII
“P sets record straight“
“P shows true colors, talks to far-right ‘newspaper’ “
This can end in either irrelevance after the third news cycle, P going on the offensive on social media - cutting any and all reporters out of the loop to say his piece unfiltered, or P going “Welp, guess I’m a Nazi now, whatever that means in this day and age”.
actually I can’t abide the thought of shaving armpits, it’s a sensitive concave surface! why would you do that!
Looking younger is attractive for women because straight men value it (most likely for biological reasons related to fertility), and women in general have features that make them look younger and softer than men. (You’ll notice women tend to have less body hair in general.) Now, while the timing of puberty and so on means that this doesn’t entirely make sense for armpit hair, it isn’t one of those preferences that has to be unified so long as other traits of sexual maturity are present.
For straight women seeking men, youth is still a benefit if it doesn’t get in the way of other matters, and there is some debate about the influence of widespread use of hormonal birth control on sexual preferences, in addition to the usual debate about social formation of preferences.
LGBT individuals, of course, have no reason to be in any particular preference grouping on this matter.
Must admit, the endless fascist vs. communist schtick that Tumblr has going on gets a little tiresome. Why must everyone be so uncreative?
unfortunately posts complaining about endless fascism vs. communism debates are now more overplayed than those debates themselves.
struggling to go up another meta level here lads
We need a new object level debate to meta on, obviously. How about National Technocracy vs. Globalist Populism?
honestly I’d really appreciate it if people who dislike transhumanism point me in the direction of why
I don’t know if I’d say I ‘dislike’ transhumanism so much as it’s important to keep the general arc of science and medicine in mind.
“Scientists installed robot wings in my back and now I can fly” is awesome. “Scientists installed first-generation robot wings in my back and then I was in unbearable pain because all of my spinal discs prolapsed” is not.
Which is related to my other thought, which is that we just aren’t very good at predicting what life would be like under very different circumstances. On a certain level transhumanism isn’t that different from people saying that we’d have flying cars and robot maids by the year 2000.
yes, although this seems like just avoiding over optimism, even if you think it’s the right direction overall.
Do not underestimate the cyborg equivalent of furries who WOULD endure the lmao prolapsed spine phase of transhumanism
These brave heroes will help bring mankind closer to perfection, and/or test the safety of the secondary backup heart implant before I get it. Truly, our hats go off for these brave Cyberfurs™.
single_tear.png
What happens if you take a bunch of socially inept, above average intelligence, and mentally ill people and have them try to do stuff together? Sounds like a disaster. Well…
“there was that bizarre scandal last year in which someone was accidentally impregnated and then decided not to abort the child, going against what had previously been agreed upon, and proceeded to shamelessly solicit donations from the rationalist community to support her child”
EXCUSE ME DON’T YOU MEAN *HIS* CHILD YOU PROBLEMATIC PIECE OF SHIT OMFG
Leaving aside the whole trans issue, and that suicide baiting at the end is the opposite of charity the commenter claims to have…
I think the issue here is that while institutions like religion supply important guidance by relationship norms like using monogamous marriage as a basis for family formation, the weird supernatural stuff that holds it all together is pretty obviously false, and at other times it really is out of date or punishes harmless groups (e.g., the gays).
Now, we could fall back from the religion to the nation, but nations aren’t particles, they’re waves, so they don’t look real at contrarian depth N = 1. (Whereas I’ve been a sort of double contrarian since high school.)
From that, we could fall back to intuition, but lots of people that claim to be “intuitive” are stupid, manipulative, or trying to justify bullsht. So the Rationalists push that out as well.
And thus people try to fall back to just reason instead, but there are holes in that related, in part, to insufficient information gathering and processing capabilities that brains normally deal with by aggressive summarization and other things, plus still having biases even if you try to remove them.
On the other hand, Rationalists also have less aversion to forbidden shadowspeech, which means some things that are true but forbidden can actually come up in their spaces (as well as things which are false but forbidden).
It bothers me when white ppl and other non-black ppl try to justify cultural appropriation with that “culture sharing” bull crap. Like black people are telling you to stop twerking and wearing our hair styles. So listen? This isn’t a fucking debate.
“I too believe in strict racial segregation”
So if one side says “don’t copy” because its cultural appropriation and the other side has (at least historically) said “don’t copy” because it’s degenerate art, does this mean that it’s win-win.
by not twerking you can please college students worried about oppression and the KKK, it’s a rare opportunity.
well I know you’re (possibly) a huge square and probably think tags ought to all be covered up with a nice solid layer of gray paint, but when you said you take exception to the idea covering up tags is uncool, do you mean you disagree it’s uncool for other artists to cover up people’s tags or you disagree it’s uncool for like, the authorities to cover up tags?
huge square checking in!
if a bunch of people are playing the same tagging game then yes I guess it’s tautologically uncool for one of them to break the rules of the game.
but since I’m not playing that game I’m free to say fuck your tag.
you’re dodging the question, square boy
not at all! I admitted that there is a subset of people for whom it is uncool to cover up tags: namely those people who participate in a subculture with mutually agreed upon codes of behaviour that describe covering up tags as being uncool.
I don’t know if Banksy is such a person, but if so then their action was uncool according to the conventions of this subculture they implicitly agreed to uphold.
However, anyone outside this subculture is free to disregard its conventions and cover up or otherwise obscure, modify, or erase tags with complete impunity, disclaiming any allegations of uncoolness as being mere status grab attempts.
Honestly, the whole tagging thing involves writing on other peoples’ walls without their permission, what right could they possibly have to object to other taggers tagging over their tags? “Oh well it’s my tag” - well it’s not your wall it isn’t, you already broke the rules of ownership, you can’t claim to be covered under them again.
One could argue on a Consequential basis or an aesthetic basis, but the vast majority of graffiti has insufficient artistic value for that. It’s mostly just people writing their names, over and over again, usually making walls and buildings look worse in expensive ways.
Every tagger caught by the state should be conscripted into removing all these worthless name tags as community service and be made to pay for the paint to do so themselves.
I bet a lot more people would be sympathetic if the act if illegally spraying paint on a building usually looked more like this:
Or even this:
motorcycle cops would be cooler if they literally turned into motorcycles
dammit, argumate now my entire sexy photoshoot artistic critique of neoliberal capitalism is RUINED
frckin’ owls
Need to get someone to promise to eat something ridiculous if Donald Trump get impeached. A hunk of granite maybe? Maybe some of the Swedish rotted fish thing?
can i volunteer to eat abstract concepts
@collapsedsquid Unless you can get on national television and make a good spectacle of it there somehow, no.
Call Xi Jinping. I will eat the share of the national debt controlled by China by transmuting it into bearer bonds printed on tortillas.
The Memetics Unit of the Ministry of State Security’s Cyber-Warfare Division denied responsibility for rumors of “thinking emoji waifu” that began to circulate on Monday.
“The weaponization of emoji in such a manner,” stated Public Representative Takayama, “is unthinkable. It’s unthinkable. It sounds like something [ISIS] would do.”
Pressed on previous creation of Sheikh Shrek Rule 34 that was allegedly traced to the Ministry by foreign news organizations as part of what was believed to be an effort to undermine Saudi Arabia, Rep. Takayama continued to deny any claims of the Ministry’s involvement with emoji-based cyber-weapons. “Look, I know all those foreigners think we’re going to cast some sort of emoji spell at them that will somehow hack their brains into voting for the next Brexit, but that is not what we do,” he said. “The Memetics Unit is a defensive organization created to protect this country from political interference from non-state actors such as 4chan.”
The history of our nation’s involvement with formalized memetic warfare is believed to have started in 1986, with an internal START Corporation paper titled “Going Viral: Ideological Replication Vectors & Attack Surfaces” originally circulated among a handful of elite mathematicians…
I think e3 is over and I hope that means I never hear about whatever that cyber punk drama was about again
I learned more about the origins of a genre I’ve never read than I ever cared to knowThankfully, as we know, people really quickly drop culture war stuff as far as videogames go
“-and now, President Highever has ordered deployment of additional troops to fight GamerGate-sponsored insurgents as the Montana crisis continues. The troops, who are expected to arrive on Wednes-”
in just a few years, the last gamergate survivors will have died. listening to their warnings now is more important than ever before
Tags Now:
#the iron hand - the State
#the invisible fist - Capitalism
#the red hammer - Communism
#thx xhxhxhx - you know who you are @xhxhxhx
#chronofelony - time travel
#mitigated future - futurism
#art+#oc - hand-made, free-range, gluten-free, organic, locally-sourced PNGs
#shtpost - quality, 100% serious post, always repost this
#politics - elaborate joke post, never repost this
#trump cw - self-filter tag for anti-memeist bigots who are prejudiced against our first Meme-American President due to the orange color of his skin
#discourse preview 2019 - retrocausal posts from the New Mexico Timeline
#nationalism - posts banned under the 2089 Human Dignity Act of the Earth Sphere Federation, filtering these is recommended for normies and anyone who isn’t a NatSep
#augmented reality break - (alternate (reality) break) tag intersection, but with coffee so it’s better and therefore augmented (like me)
Future Tags (Vegas Timeline):
#this week on woke or broke - exciting new youtube show in which contestants try to guess what is social justice orthodoxy and what was cooked up by the producers. failing contestants are fired from their jobs
#miti draws dallas - performance art piece in which thousands of teleoperated drones are released in a swarm over Dallas, Texas, and pictures of frightened and heavily-armed Texans are posted to Tumblr in five minute intervals
#super love love demon battle - SLLDB fandom drama. eventually boils over into discussion of the SLLDB fandom murders
#HobbesWasRight - series of articles laying out the philosophical groundwork for Googlezon Dynamics’ Leviathan Project and its benefits for the security of the state and the populace
#dogs - dog photos and canine cybernetic augmentations. also ferrets, to go with the ferret mistagging fad
#national technocracy - hypothetical point within the N-dimensional ideospace lattice originally theorized by RAND Geospatial Dynamics Working Group in the 1950s, generally summarized as “that thing that comes after prediction markets”, many researchers dispute whether it can actually exist. abandoned by Silicon Valley CEOs in favor of a system based on Facebook likes.
#dogfree - actual dog photos, just dog photos
Future Tags (Montana Timeline):
No tags for this timeline, possibly unstable. Radsuit suggested.
Part of what makes Banksy’s work so popular is that it doesn’t operate much like street art at all. Think about Invader or Fairey, artists who appear in Exit Through the Gift Shop: Invader’s 8-bit career began with a single “Space Invaders” icon that the artist reiterated endlessly. Fairey’s work started with a stencil of Andre the Giant prefaced by the word “Obey,” again, repeated over and over. While they’re both more like media moguls than graffiti writers today, Fairey and Invader started with the same strategy: to project themselves into public spaces by broadcasting themselves all over it.
That ambition to control a public space through this sort of redundant branding, to make the street your own, is a masculine one—and it’s shared by the overwhelming majority of street artists. In the theater of the public square, graffiti is cousin to cat-calling—which Slate’s Dee Locket smartly explains as the constant effort by men to “create the illusion of dominance in shared public spaces,” specifically by claiming women’s private spaces as their own.
pure ideology
Wanksy
So wait… is graffiti Woke, or Broke?
It’s like the tension in MMORPG design: if everyone does the same quest it destroys the logic of the game world to some degree (the bad guy is beaten millions of times!) but if quests have to be unique for each player you can’t share the experience.
I don’t think this actually true. Bill Gates, 1/8th of that number, is *already* doing massive-scale philanthropy, it hasn’t yet solved the problem of human poverty because human poverty is an even more massive scale problem, and it’s not obvious to me that any authority that could tell Gates to run his philanthropy differently/confiscate his money and do it instead of him would necessarily do a better job than him.
I’m in favor of governments taxing very wealthy people and using the money to pay for things that make the lives of poor people all over the world better, but I think this specific claim about the 8 richest people in the world makes solving poverty seem like a smaller problem than it actually is.The thing about using mass immigration to try to solve global poverty is that it can’t keep up with birth rates. Redistribution from the wealthy mostly can’t, either.
Only what is produced can be consumed. The production capacities of these migrant-generating countries must be increased, and their birthrates must fall (increasing paternal investment per child, further increasing per-capita economic productivity in addition to not spreading limited base resources as thinly).
Probably the way forward isn’t quite giving or taking but something like partially self-funding institutions that “sell” infrastructure at a discount and promote development of local businesses and foster self-improving attitudes, promoting the formation of better institutions that will help the changes to stick.
One of the things Bill Gates is trying to do is cut birthrates in the developing world by promoting contraception, girls education, and vaccines (cut the death rate and the birth rate also drops).
Yes. That’s part of the reason I don’t approve of seizing his fortune for the glory of the third world - the US government in the hands of the Republicans does the opposite with bans on funding to nations that practice abortion.
In their religious fervor, the Republicans are Natalists - a policy that might make sense for nations like Japan, but which does not make sense in countries that already cannot feed their populations.
I don’t think this actually true. Bill Gates, 1/8th of that number, is *already* doing massive-scale philanthropy, it hasn’t yet solved the problem of human poverty because human poverty is an even more massive scale problem, and it’s not obvious to me that any authority that could tell Gates to run his philanthropy differently/confiscate his money and do it instead of him would necessarily do a better job than him.
I’m in favor of governments taxing very wealthy people and using the money to pay for things that make the lives of poor people all over the world better, but I think this specific claim about the 8 richest people in the world makes solving poverty seem like a smaller problem than it actually is.
The thing about using mass immigration to try to solve global poverty is that it can’t keep up with birth rates. Redistribution from the wealthy mostly can’t, either.
Only what is produced can be consumed. The production capacities of these migrant-generating countries must be increased, and their birthrates must fall (increasing paternal investment per child, further increasing per-capita economic productivity in addition to not spreading limited base resources as thinly).
Probably the way forward isn’t quite giving or taking but something like partially self-funding institutions that “sell” infrastructure at a discount and promote development of local businesses and foster self-improving attitudes, promoting the formation of better institutions that will help the changes to stick.
“. If you identify yourself “I am a PHP programmer“ or “I am a Windows user“, that sounds like you can’t change that! Criticism of your tool, or of the ecosystem around your tool, sounds like an attack on your personality. You are forever married, shackled even, to an editor, operating system, language, graphics editor. “ <- I really dislike this attitude. I think that programmers should view all these things as tools that can be taken up and put back down again as needed rather than being a part of your identity.
That makes sense, after all a language is just a language, and while they sometimes have new concepts and idioms to learn, IME they aren’t that challenging to switch between.
My question is whether employers will treat it that way. It’s obvious to me that a good C# programmer is only N months away from being a good Java programmer, but the job listings don’t seem to work that way.
Physicists and mathematicians regularly invade other fields but other fields do not invade theirs so we can see which fields are hardest for very talented people.
If someone from another field successfully invades physics or math, we just call them a physicist or mathematician instead of whatever they were originally.
What about when a Poli Sci major ships software?
“Money is no object”
That’s right, as my new theory details, money is not a collection of particles, but actually a wave -
FIRST DATE IDEA: Go on about how women don’t have souls, but neglect to mention that you don’t believe in souls period.
Alternatively, women are the damned creations of a twisted heathen god.
As are men, and indeed all living things.
Born from the fire of the wicked lands, she is Woman, terrible and cruel, violent and tribal, a maelstrom of hatred and injustice.*
* Do you like Woman? Please see our related companion product, Man, the Fire that Kills™
come to think of it why don’t Australians call software developers softies
maybe all Australian software developers are totally ripped from a regular routine of surfing and fighting kangaroos to the death
i’m told this is the normal daily routine in Australia
The internet has truly led to a Golden Age of jokes that are just rewrites of actually funny jokes with three words changed so that now they’re about politics and suck ass
you know who else sucks ass? Mitch McConnell
you know how Trump gets ass? Mitch McConnell
you know who photographs Trump’s ass? Mitch McConnell
wait guys we have to stop, I can suddenly hear Gaston music and it’s getting louder
“not being white does not mean you are of color”, while a perfectly reasonable statement in the right context, suggests a categorisation scheme of:
- white (or “people who think they are white”, Ta-Nehisi Coates)
- people of color
- just folks
Whiteness/Colorness is defined by oppressiveness. Therefore, Yamato in Japan and Han in China are not People of Color.
Shitpost, or just another mileage marker on the road to Asians leaving the Democrats’ coalition in the US? Our expert DiversityTek™-certified discourse panel debates…
(edit: geez just how tired am i getting one of the countries wrong)
One Direction, corrupting an entire generation of potential logicians (via argumate)
In the future Deep VR Tumblr, Discourse is carried out entirely through Disney-like musical numbers.
So, to return to Jeb Bush:
BUSH: I would have, and so would have Hillary Clinton, just to remind everybody, and so would have almost everybody that was confronted with the intelligence they got.
That’s a justification. It’s just one that turned out to be wrong.
Alrighty, we’ve established that Jeb Bush thinks Iraq was justified.
Clearly the whole thing was a massive case of motivated cognition:
Step 1: We want to invade Iraq.
Step 2: Cook up an excuse to do this.
Step 3: Convince enough people it’s not bullshit.
Step 4: Quagmire.And of course the real question for elected officials is not just Iraq: yes or no, but why Iraq at all? Why not Saudi Arabia? and so on.
But I’m just feeling slightly ancient in that this Iraq question was the defining issue of the early blogosphere, circa 2003-2005.
It split the tech community into two camps, the pro-War bloggers (also known as the 101st Fighting Keyboarders, or chickenhawks) and the anti-War bloggers (also known as the Decadent Left Fifth Column, or pro-Saddam stalinists).
It was a deeply stupid time.
Understanding the depths of the stupidity may help those who were not there avoid such stupidity themselves, when they face the next great challenge.
I’m younger than you, and I was too young to understand how strange it should have seemed to me at the time.
But I have not forgotten.
Fortunately, I already understood what a mistake it was by the time I was able to vote.
