dudebro is just a terrible word for any kind of progressive purpose given that it entirely concedes masculinity to the opposition.
I think we’re more than prepared to concede masculinity to the opposition. What redeeming qualities does it have? Everything I’ve seen masculinity be is aggression, envy, or pride, all of which are, uh, mortal sins.
…are you joking?
Or have you just already defined masculinity as everything you hate?
If it turns out that a significant number of straight women actually like masculine men and haven’t been brainwashed into it, what is your plan?
How can a male build a healthy self-identity if to be male is nothing more than to be a flawed woman?
getting random sharp pain in your organs is a lot like when your check engine light comes on in your car. you dont know what it means so you just ignore it and hope you dont blow up
I thought it meant that you get out the CANbus analyzer and read the error logs in all the control units to figure out what exactly is wrong.
I, too, look forward to Transhumanist cybernetic implants that monitor my health status and can tell me I’m definitely not having a heart attack.
I think of my friends as the correct gender identity even if I met them before they came out. However, my mind feels super sure that all my friends and associates who knew me before I came out still think of me as a woman and it feels awful and there’s no way to confirm or deny they aren’t just being polite
Would it make you feel less awful if they told you they do still think of you that way subconsciously after you asked, instead of just being polite?
(For my part I read all your posts with the voice of that SU character you have as your avatar.)
“Of course,” said the moderate, as the ethnic violence increased in the country and multi-generational child sex trafficking rings set up in the cities, “some may die, but isn’t our vision of a tolerant and diverse society worth it?”
: /
I know, this is very deeply uncharitable of me. Something about this latest attack has me on edge. I think it’s that I see a path from here to ethnic tension criticality in England, which, with the previous attacks being a cycle of terrorism vs military campaigns, I didn’t.
If the State fails its duty to ensure the security of the citizens, if it will not actually ensure that it has a true monopoly on violence within its territory, IT WILL LOSE ITS LEGITIMACY.
A ‘retaliatory’ van attack by a white guy is survivable for the government, if this isn’t a sign of a coming pattern in which this picks up. The government needs to put its foot down hard NOW and crush the origin of the Muslim van attacks somehow or else things are going to get very bloody later. If the UK gets a wave of tit-for-tat sectarian vehicular homicide, each new one is going to erode public faith in the government’s hold on the territory, causing the next wave of marginally-most-vulnerable-to-radicalization to become radicalized (as they judge “no one will protect me”) and initiate the next attack until armed militias form.
fuck
All this talk about open borders and the marginal dude is okay and so on… the tail risk end is civil war.
Good fucking lord are you delusional. I hope when you finally wake from whatever mindset you're in, you feel shame. And here's an idea: ad hominem responses get neither side of an argument or debate anywhere. Quit using them. I'd reblog that other post to say this but I don't want you in any of my posts.
“The ‘Emoji Death Front’, first known as the ‘Death to Emoji Working Group’ and then ‘Emoji Extinction Dot Net’, is a distributed terrorist group which first emerged in Sydney, Australia, in 2033, coming to prominence in an attack on the Pyongyang Olympics in 2036. The stated aim of the group is the removal of emoji from Unicode, a goal for which it is willing to-” - excerpt, Google Automatic Summary for “emoji death”, May 2, 2038
The thing I like about the idea of mandatory safety insurance is that it introduces a new actor with new incentives into the problem.
Let us return to aircraft.
The State has determined that every airline company must carry two million dollars in insurance per passenger per flight, to be paid out in the event that the plane is destroyed and they die. It has set certain rules, for instance that the insurance company must be sufficiently well-capitalized and it can’t just waive paying out because the company did something stupid.
Executive Todd has plans to reduce the maintenance on Tumblr Airlines aircraft. He will be at the company for five years. There is a 90% chance that if he does this, there will be no crash, and he gets a million dollar bonus and leaves. There is a 10% chance that a plane will crash before he leaves and he’ll only have a personal fortune of ten million dollars and a mansion on Hawaii left, which he can retire to.
So Todd orders that the maintenance should be cut.
However, Blue Hellsite Insurance, Inc., Tumblr Airlines’ insurance company, depends for its funding entirely on carefully calculating risk and then charging a bit more than that, on an ongoing basis. To do so, as part of their contract (and thanks to provisions passed in law by the State), they can set insurance agents out to inspect processes, planes, and so on.
BHI’s reaction to a plan that results in a 10% chance of a plane crash is “you WHAT?!” Whereas the risk isn’t necessarily quite so visible or quantified to all others in the organization, or else they may have motivations to ignore it for the same reason as Executive Todd.
So BHI come back and say that either Todd’s plan isn’t going to fly, or the insurance rates are going to go up.
So what was an invisible cost that could have gotten kicked down the road to a successor is transmuted into a stubborn operating cost right now.
Tumblr Airlines makes less profit (upsetting shareholders), raises ticket prices to compensate (thus pricing the risk into the market and making them less competitive), or else doesn’t go through with the plan.
The State could even require that the portion of the cost which is the risk premium is printed on the ticket, informing consumers of roughly how dangerous a given flight is. This is actually an enormous information gain by consumers, who as non-experts find it very difficult to
not only
judge airline safety, but obtain inside information about aircraft maintenance procedures.
An astute observation. I actually left off that part in order to conserve length.
This entire scenario still depends on state intervention, which is why AnCaps and most Right Libertarians will not be in favor of it, even though it loosens the details of regulation to the markets and allows riskier behavior (but just prices it more).
Here’s what the State needs to do to cause this to happen:
Require mandatory insurance on certain classes of products.
Determine the rules governing the insurance so that the insurance will actually pay out.
For instance, wrongdoing on the part of the airline does not get the insurance company out of paying the insurance. (It could, however, allow them to pursue damages against the airline without breaking these necessary conditions.)
Ensure the insurance companies are sufficiently well-capitalized, so that it does not become common practice to make insurance shell companies which immediately fold rather than pay out. Criminal liability may need to be introduced here.
Create a court system in which it is reasonably feasible for regular people to actually collect the insurance payout. (It isn’t necessary that they collect the full payout, just enough that they’re willing to initiate and complete the necessary legal procedures. Some money could go into an ethical offset fund instead.)
I would say that there have to actually be enough competing insurance companies, but the market will take care of that, since this should be a reasonably profitable field. And the insurance company itself is a longer-term investment vehicle than the airline, since its practice of distributing risk changes when investors will get paid.
So, the question then is, is a system of competing insurance companies with competing insurance regulations more or less efficient and effective than a system of top-down, politically-driven regulation where government decides the details of regulations?
And that question is an empirical one. In systems as complex as economies, we can’t just assume the efficient market hypothesis. After all, this plan is in many ways in response to the existing market distortions of limited liability corporations and destruction of value being easier than creation of value.
Do it right, however, and you can also chip away at information asymmetry - the risk pricing by a moderately profitable insurance company that actually has to pay out if the product is dangerous or defective, as a share of the product’s price, communicates a lot of information that the customer previously often didn’t have.
Why would you ever like/want to read age gap where a grown adult is with a teenager!?
Maybe because it’s the only way to write about someone inexperienced with someone experienced without being mocked or told you’re writing “Born Sexy Yesterday” (and then being mocked and condemned for that particular offense).
I feel like the second you write anyone over 20 as sexually inexperienced, people either start laughing at how pathetic it is or start wondering what’s wrong with the character. The older the characters get, the more intense it gets
If you’re single at 30, most people assume it’s because you have a few failed relationships under your belt (or are widowed). Being 30 and inexperienced (or never have dated/married) is almost a crime to some people.
They literally can not wrap their heads around it.
Hell, that whole “Born Sexy Yesterday” video pretty much embodies this! The entire video is basically screaming: “How dare you write about a grown woman who has no sexual experience!? The only way they’d be that ignorant is if they’re a teenager or a child!!!”
Welp, I just helped someone discover that someone else was impersonating them online using their name and picture to discredit them. I’m really mad at whoever’s responsible for this, but I’m glad I could help.
It’s strange, really. If there’s a good reason to hate someone, it’s the truth. And thus, this behavior implicitly admits that the hatred of them is likely wrong.
“And thus we propose, to protect the common man from this social status war of all against all, the creation of a Social Sovereign, who shall define the boundaries of the ingroup and the outgroup,”
- The Leviathan, Part II, by Post-Neoreactionary thinker and furry artist THobbes85,
why is it that there is nearly always someone accusing all my favorite characters of being dudebro neckbeard PUA creeps
Snape? entitled Nice Guy
Kylo Ren? whiny white boy with man tears
hpmor!Harry Potter?
Sheldon Cooper on steroids, an amped-up version of every neckbeard asshole I knew back in high school and college who thought being male and possessing some semblance of intelligence made him fucking king of all he surveyed.
>Sheldon Cooper
>neckbeard
huh I wonder why this mysterious pattern keeps happening
There’s also this weird assumption that the market is infinitely wide and infinitely deep and people have perfect information with which to price risk, so that absent regulation everyone ends up living in an apartment with exactly the chance of being burned to death that they wanted.
The “efficient market hypothesis” is bad, it begs the question.
Surely if it was bad it would have been replaced by a better hypothesis in the discourse, since this has not yet happened-
In which the Discourse Monk Argumate demonstrates the difference between truth and virality.
essentially privatising the FAA and NTSB, although the NTSB already seems to do really good work and it’s unlikely quality would improve with privatisation.
Though really, I wanted to use aircraft to talk about building safety. The field of aircraft is already pretty safe in general.
What I’m thinking with this building materials issue is that in addition to the Executive Todd Problem being worse (because the real estate will change hands more often than the aircraft and the builders will too), and there being no insurance requirement, a lot of problems (like asbestos, or that cladding) were either known beforehand, or would not have been that difficult to figure out if someone had bothered to check first.
Additionally, the insurance company, the builder, or the owner would be losing money for every month that problem was not repaired. So instead of fighting a long legal battle and not fixing it, it’s more likely at least one of them would fix it now, then have the long legal battle about who finally gets compensated.
That would be the plan, anyway. I have other insurance-based plans to distort the markets as well.
The thing I like about the idea of mandatory safety insurance is that it introduces a new actor with new incentives into the problem.
Let us return to aircraft.
The State has determined that every airline company must carry two million dollars in insurance per passenger per flight, to be paid out in the event that the plane is destroyed and they die. It has set certain rules, for instance that the insurance company must be sufficiently well-capitalized and it can’t just waive paying out because the company did something stupid.
Executive Todd has plans to reduce the maintenance on Tumblr Airlines aircraft. He will be at the company for five years. There is a 90% chance that if he does this, there will be no crash, and he gets a million dollar bonus and leaves. There is a 10% chance that a plane will crash before he leaves and he’ll only have a personal fortune of ten million dollars and a mansion on Hawaii left, which he can retire to.
So Todd orders that the maintenance should be cut.
However, Blue Hellsite Insurance, Inc., Tumblr Airlines’ insurance company, depends for its funding entirely on carefully calculating risk and then charging a bit more than that, on an ongoing basis. To do so, as part of their contract (and thanks to provisions passed in law by the State), they can set insurance agents out to inspect processes, planes, and so on.
BHI’s reaction to a plan that results in a 10% chance of a plane crash is “you WHAT?!” Whereas the risk isn’t necessarily quite so visible or quantified to all others in the organization, or else they may have motivations to ignore it for the same reason as Executive Todd.
So BHI come back and say that either Todd’s plan isn’t going to fly, or the insurance rates are going to go up.
So what was an invisible cost that could have gotten kicked down the road to a successor is transmuted into a stubborn operating cost right now.
Tumblr Airlines makes less profit (upsetting shareholders), raises ticket prices to compensate (thus pricing the risk into the market and making them less competitive), or else doesn’t go through with the plan.
The State could even require that the portion of the cost which is the risk premium is printed on the ticket, informing consumers of roughly how dangerous a given flight is. This is actually an enormous information gain by consumers, who as non-experts find it very difficult to
not only
judge airline safety, but obtain inside information about aircraft maintenance procedures.
Historical accuracy debate aside, white people get to whitewash every culture but God Forbid black people imagine themselves as Egyptians? Don't pretend to care about denying modern Egyptians their heritage, you know that's not what it's about.
why the egyptians and not, say, the aksumites.. songhai, the malian empire or great zimbabwe? nubia, even..
There’s a rich history of dynasties and great empires throughouit that continent but why is there a particular focus on egypt?
There are many amazing societies and civilizations that never get the appreciation and attention they deserve because egypt constantly gets white and black washed.
some kinds of common knowledge are a massively valuable public good, and a centralised authority is typically the most efficient way of providing it.
It’s related to that idea that we all have time and love to comparison shop between everything. It’s basically saying “you’re going to get screwed by that crucial detail you didn’t know was important beforehand.“
and that you have the time and resources and are still alive to pursue damages through the court system against those with deep pockets who have screwed you over.
I’d be interested to learn more about different models for decentralized accreditation services – consumer safety, etc. You see a little of this with professional guilds and etc I guess? But I’m not sure how much money you’d need to throw at meta accreditation to get good trust levels, or how much duplication of work you get in a free market of accreditation services, etc. It really does seem like a central authority is a good way to go…?
I think the tricky part is enforcement and incentives. Structural engineers were complaining about the cladding long before buildings started burning down, and fire fighters were shocked when they tried to put out the fires, but in order for that to translate into it not being sold, purchased, and installed on buildings there needs to be someone who says “no” when the architect says “cheap!”
The thing that gets me with the Libertarianism thing and safety regs is that, precisely because of all the losses of information in the process and limited information resources available to buyers, I feel the regulation process really does have to bottom out somewhere with “men with guns come and say no, you can’t do that.”
And I know they hate that, but their plans often effectively give out huge subsidies in the form of unaccounted-for externalities, information asymmetry, and so on, to capital.
“Make them all buy insurance” requires a strong state to come through and force the issue and also make sure that that insurance will pay out. But if you don’t do at least that, then you allow people to engage in arbitrage against peoples’ lives (more than they do now). One could argue, even, about smoothing out lifetime earnings with loans to help pay for safety, but financial markets are waaaaaay too frictional for that and the future is too unknown.
So I don’t feel too bad about the building safety codes.
And some of the Asian countries prove you can have the building safety codes and even earthquake standards without the part that causes housing prices to quintuple.
some kinds of common knowledge are a massively valuable public good, and a centralised authority is typically the most efficient way of providing it.
It’s related to that idea that we all have time and love to comparison shop between everything. It’s basically saying “you’re going to get screwed by that crucial detail you didn’t know was important beforehand.“
The aircraft engine maintenance example is instructive for other reasons: airlines have strong financial, legal, and moral incentives not to kill hundreds of people, and their passengers obviously agree with this, as do the crew of the aircraft, so all the incentives should be aligned. But they still fucked up.
It turned out that some airlines took shortcuts that did not actually harm the integrity of the engine mounting, while American Airlines and some others did dangerously crack the mounting and leave it vulnerable to failure on take off, as eventually happened.
But this damage could have been noticed with regular inspections! They used a shortcut procedure – despite warnings from the aircraft manufacturer – and did not check to ensure that the shortcut was safe.
Once again if people actually did their damn jobs we wouldn’t need regulation, but believing that the market will accurately price risk in its absence is just silly.
Ah, but here’s the trick: Corporations are not unified agents. While Tumblr Airlines might have incentive not to destroy aircraft through negligence, killing hundreds, and customers of Tumblr Airlines might have incentive not to die horribly due to lack of maintenance, Executive Todd does not personally lose $400 million when the aircraft is destroyed and can effectively extract the money ‘saved’ by cutting maintenance and move on before the consequences can catch up to him. Also, each additional dollar he earns feels less real, and its loss will hurt him less dearly than the dollar before it.
Also he’s not fully rational because he’s still human.
All the NTSB recommendations are technically trade offs that have costs; consider American Airlines Flight 191 which crashed on take off killing everyone on board and two people on the ground after an engine separated from the wing due to improper maintenance procedures had cracked the pylon.
While 273 people may have died, the improper shortcuts taken during engine maintenance saved 200 man hours per aircraft! Why, the meddling FAA banning this procedure may have done more harm than the original crash!
Nah it’s alright fam,
If we assume that the GDP per capita is $55,000, and that the typical passenger has 35 working years remaining, we can just have the state bill the company and its shareholders $525,525,000 and put them into debt bondage and sell off their assets if they are unwilling or unable to pay.
Now you may object to the state rolling around and charging huge sums of money as payment for accidental deaths, but I have it on good authority that everyone signed over their trusteeship to the state rather than get kicked into the ocean, entirely of their own free will. Quite remarkable, really. So I assure that this plan is entirely Capitalist.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO POST PIXELATED ART OF QUESTIONABLE QUALITY (AT RANDOM INTERVALS BETWEEN TWO HOURS AND SIX MONTHS) UNTIL OUR DEMANDS ARE MET
DONALD TRUMP WILL IMMEDIATELY STEP DOWN AND BE REPLACED AS PRESIDENT BY A WORKING GROUP OF SELECTED PERSONNEL FROM GOOGLE, AMAZON, AND IBM’S MACHINE LEARNING DIVISIONS, AND THE RAND CORPORATION, WHO WILL BE DIRECTED TO GOVERN IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST. A $1 BILLION DATACENTER WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO FULFILL THEIR COMMANDS
MILITARY-GRADE POWERED EXOSKELETONS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY LEGALIZED FOR CIVILIAN OWNERSHIP
DETROIT WILL BE DECLARED A SPECIAL AUTONOMOUS DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND PUT UNDER THE IRON HAND OF A CEO FROM ASIA BACKED BY HEAVY MILITIA FORCES, PAID AS A PERCENTAGE OF DETROIT REAL GDP ANNUALLY
MARTIAL ARTS TRAINING WILL BE MADE A MANDATORY COMPONENT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM AND AN ANNUAL TOURNAMENT WILL BE HELD TO DETERMINE THE ‘MOST BADASS HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR IN AMERICA’
ADDITIONAL DEMANDS
THE GAZA STRIP WILL BE YIELDED TO EGYPT, THE WEST BANK WILL BE YIELDED TO JORDAN, THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY WILL BE DISSOLVED, AND EVERYONE WILL SHUT UP ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST FOR A PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN TWO (2) MONTHS
CALIFORNIA WILL BE SPLIT INTO FOUR ADDITIONAL STATES AND WESTERN CALIFORNIA WILL BE PROVIDED 5,000,000 PERMANENT RESIDENCY PERMITS TO ASSIGN AS THEY SEE FIT ON THE CONDITION THAT THEY ARE PROHIBITED FROM VOTING ON IMMIGRATION MATTERS AND JUS SOLI IS ENDED
MUNICIPAL POLICE WILL BE REORGANIZED INTO AUTONOMOUS AGENCIES THAT COMPETE ACROSS MULTIPLE METRICS INCLUDING RATE OF FATALITIES AND DONUT CONSUMPTION AND MAKE METRIC-WEIGHTED BIDS FOR ACCESS TO MUNICIPAL CONTRACTS. A SOFTWARE-MANAGED EVIDENCE EXCHANGE WILL BE BUILT TO COORDINATE THIS. NO MORE THAN A RUNNING AVERAGE OF 1.2 DONUTS PER DAY PER OFFICER WILL BE PERMITTED.
THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC PARTIES WILL ABANDON THEIR IDEOLOGIES AND ADOPT THE IDEOLOGIES OF NATIONAL POPULISM AND GLOBAL TECHNOCRACY RESPECTIVELY. DEFECTORS WILL BE CONSCRIPTED TO SERVE AS EDITORS FOR THE NEW FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF CLICKBAIT FOR A PERIOD OF NO LESS THAN FIVE YEARS
Now, the original posts here are a joke, but…
(1) A group selected from such high IQ people, including one pool that has direct experience with US politics, would probably outperform Donald Trump, and they could do some real data-crunching using all that computer hardware to develop the kinds of new policies we need. Of course that’s not an actually practical hiring-for-President mechanism, but performance in other sectors of government might be improved by such things.
(2) Access to defensive military hardware is relevant to the 2nd amendment and will continue to be as we go farther into the 21st century. Part of the very idea of arming the populace is that it introduces last resort accountability.
(3) Detroit being put under the rule of a gifted businessman with flexibility in policies could radically alter its economic fate in ways that, under the current path, are not feasible.
(4) Martial Arts training as an option would likely increase interest in Physical Education and help lower obesity, in addition to increasing national defense readiness.
(5) National identities being useful doesn’t mean they’re immutable and vice-versa. The entire political infrastructure in Palestine has this whole opposition to Israel element built into it, and I’m not sure who the Palestinian identity is really benefiting anymore. Jordan and Egypt are both faring better and would likely improve overall conditions in those areas without them being owned by Israel. Of course, there’s probably some reason this won’t work / catch I’m unaware of.
(6) California isn’t actually a monolithic blue state, and if they want to have sanctuary cities and the like so much… why not let them kinda do it, but torpedo the effect on voting demographics so there’s no incentive to undermine the national immigration policy just to win more at politics?
Actual racists won’t like the policy, but the opposition to immigration is not driven purely by racism despite what many proponents say.
(7-1) A lot of policing police focuses on individuals, however, if the entire police department could be effectively fired at once, that provides organization-level incentives to use best practices better policy. Costs of externalities, and public benefits, are worked into the bid so that it isn’t flat lowest-cost. For instance, add $500,000 virtual price to the bid for every police-related fatality provides organization-level incentive to provide more training / be less gung-ho about the use of guns.
Alternatively, just make them take out insurance that pays into an offset fund.
(7-2) Cops need to be physically fit for their jobs, even though counting individual donuts is overkill. If a cop in this country is bulky, it should be because he’s built like a weightlifter.
(8) If this shift occurred, it would make both of their policy angles less stupid.
Not a huge fan of the writing style, but this article makes a solid underlying point: whatever the other incentives for building high-rise residential buildings, they’re terrible if you care about the social health of your city. I’m sympathetic to motives like decreasing housing prices in general, but if the tradeoff is between inexpensive housing and annihilating the social fabric, I’m not sure you’ve actually made any improvements to the situation. We’ve known more-or-less how to build healthy cities for decades now, thanks to the work of people like Jane Jacobs; that that Le Corbusier shit still seems to exert a powerful influence over urban planning should be a civilizational embarrassment.
I suspect most of the action is less in building high-rises–though I
like high-rises–and more in moving single-family deatched homes into
three- and four-story residential complexes. Which are exactly the sort
of thing that happened in the areas Jacobs celebrated. I’m not sure
even high-rises are anti-Jacobsian if you still have plenty of
ground-level retail etc.
Yeah, that last point is part of it; it’s not the density, it’s that isolating neighborhoods or regions of a city to be purely residential or purely commercial makes them either commuter neighborhoods where everyone spends their time bottled up in their personal living space bubble, or sterile wastelands where nobody can just wander down to a cafe for breakfast on a Sunday morning if they feel like it (or, for a less furiously bourgeoise example, you don’t have to spend an hour going to and from work every day).
And the thing is, on some level, developers must know this is a terrible way to design cities: think of how many shopping malls in America are designed to imitate the mixed character of a major thoroughfare of a small town or a cozy European neighborhood: it’s like they see the benches and the wrought-iron lamposts and think they can, in cargo-cult fashion, summon the necessary spirit to make this a desirable place to pass the time, but they’re not actually investigating what makes a street pedestrian-friendly. The clearest memory I have of this is a street in I think Sydney, which tried to do inviting shopfronts and cafes with outdoor seating and all that, but was otherwise surrounded by blank flat walls, and was devoid of any other visible human life besides me and the person walking next to me.
I think I am far from alone in thinking that a neighborhood where I can walk downstairs to the shop, buy some stamps, then post a letter, all over such a short distance I question whether it’s really worth it to even put on shoes, is far more pleasant a place to exist than one where I trade that for a half-acre of lawn and slightly less traffic noise. You could build a futuristic arcology-style high rise like that, that packed together a lot of different types of residential and commercial spaces, but it seems like zoning laws and practical considerations mostly prevent that in reality.
I am almost as anti single-family homes as I am high rises; urban sprawl is as ruinous to a healthy, livable city as artificially separating residential and commercial areas, and insisting every house be an island surrounded by its sea of grass sort of necessitates that kind of segregation anyway. The really crazy thing is that it feels like the U.S. has only been living this way from, like, the end of World War 2 or so, so it’s not like we’ve irreversibly committed our civilization to this path. At the very least, not actively punishing that kind of mixed development would be a start.
Huh, so I associate “no high-rises” with “no mixed-use”. As you point out they’re obviously separable. But the sort of zoning regulations that bar the one often also bar the other.
Whether or not most people would, in practice, enjoy mixed-use development, a lot of people are very vociferously opposed to it. Which is part of why it’s illegal in most places.
Who are these mixed-used haters, seriously? This is an honest question; the advantages of medium-density mixed-used development are praised in literally every media source I see and by 100% of my peer group, so I have a very hazy notion of who opposes it and what their real or supposed motivations are.
People who want to make sure no one is on the streets outside their house ever.
Like, the reason a lot of people dislike mixed use housing is pretty much exactly the same Jacobsian reason it’s a good idea. There’s always people on the street and things happening. People who want not-that find it unpleasant.
Okay, this gives me at least a vague idea of the reference group: people who are aesthetically pleased by the suburban notion of vast regions of Just Houses.
People are allowed to have that preference; but why are they allowed to oppose the existence of mixed-use even if they don’t have to live there?
And could they be bought off by an alternate strategy?
Am I on Papatulas’s bad person list? That might make some sense as to this morning’s barrage of anon hate
I keep wondering how long it’s going to take before a Crusader for Justice comes to raid my supervillain lair blog and seize my killer robots send anon hate.
I am being followed by over 70 carbots for some reason
I’m still not sure what their purpose is, because most of them don’t have any advertising, so the experiment of gathering them instead of blocking them all hasn’t yielded much useful information for the field of carbotology.
Also there were a few pornbots I didn’t block last time. Imagine being someone who really hates porn, man, it must seem like a conspiracy that those things are everywhere.
I like this “Sanders and Corbyn did well because they don’t require their people to be stupid and connected enough to take unpaid internships before joining“ theory.
how do buses and tracked trams differ significantly? ability to route around obstacles?
mmm, tracked public transport
Was this an anon?
The big difference is actually political - it costs more to set up tram tracks so AFAICT governments are less willing to shut them down or move them. This means that, unlike bus lines, which could radically change across the entire city in a month, you can build apartment buildings next to tram tracks and trust that there will still be trams there if the ridership is high enough. The routes are also going to be better defined, say if you’re an employee wanting to move somewhere you can easily commute to your place of employment from.
WE WILL CONTINUE TO POST PIXELATED ART OF QUESTIONABLE QUALITY (AT RANDOM INTERVALS BETWEEN TWO HOURS AND SIX MONTHS) UNTIL OUR DEMANDS ARE MET
DONALD TRUMP WILL IMMEDIATELY STEP DOWN AND BE REPLACED AS PRESIDENT BY A WORKING GROUP OF SELECTED PERSONNEL FROM GOOGLE, AMAZON, AND IBM’S MACHINE LEARNING DIVISIONS, AND THE RAND CORPORATION, WHO WILL BE DIRECTED TO GOVERN IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST. A $1 BILLION DATACENTER WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO FULFILL THEIR COMMANDS
MILITARY-GRADE POWERED EXOSKELETONS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY LEGALIZED FOR CIVILIAN OWNERSHIP
DETROIT WILL BE DECLARED A SPECIAL AUTONOMOUS DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND PUT UNDER THE IRON HAND OF A CEO FROM ASIA BACKED BY HEAVY MILITIA FORCES, PAID AS A PERCENTAGE OF DETROIT REAL GDP ANNUALLY
MARTIAL ARTS TRAINING WILL BE MADE A MANDATORY COMPONENT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM AND AN ANNUAL TOURNAMENT WILL BE HELD TO DETERMINE THE ‘MOST BADASS HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR IN AMERICA’
ADDITIONAL DEMANDS
THE GAZA STRIP WILL BE YIELDED TO EGYPT, THE WEST BANK WILL BE YIELDED TO JORDAN, THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL IDENTITY WILL BE DISSOLVED, AND EVERYONE WILL SHUT UP ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST FOR A PERIOD OF NOT LESS THAN TWO (2) MONTHS
CALIFORNIA WILL BE SPLIT INTO FOUR ADDITIONAL STATES AND WESTERN CALIFORNIA WILL BE PROVIDED 5,000,000 PERMANENT RESIDENCY PERMITS TO ASSIGN AS THEY SEE FIT ON THE CONDITION THAT THEY ARE PROHIBITED FROM VOTING ON IMMIGRATION MATTERS AND JUS SOLI IS ENDED
MUNICIPAL POLICE WILL BE REORGANIZED INTO AUTONOMOUS AGENCIES THAT COMPETE ACROSS MULTIPLE METRICS INCLUDING RATE OF FATALITIES AND DONUT CONSUMPTION AND MAKE METRIC-WEIGHTED BIDS FOR ACCESS TO MUNICIPAL CONTRACTS. A SOFTWARE-MANAGED EVIDENCE EXCHANGE WILL BE BUILT TO COORDINATE THIS. NO MORE THAN A RUNNING AVERAGE OF 1.2 DONUTS PER DAY PER OFFICER WILL BE PERMITTED.
THE REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRATIC PARTIES WILL ABANDON THEIR IDEOLOGIES AND ADOPT THE IDEOLOGIES OF NATIONAL POPULISM AND GLOBAL TECHNOCRACY RESPECTIVELY. DEFECTORS WILL BE CONSCRIPTED TO SERVE AS EDITORS FOR THE NEW FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF CLICKBAIT FOR A PERIOD OF NO LESS THAN FIVE YEARS
WE WILL CONTINUE TO POST PIXELATED ART OF QUESTIONABLE QUALITY (AT RANDOM INTERVALS BETWEEN TWO HOURS AND SIX MONTHS) UNTIL OUR DEMANDS ARE MET
DONALD TRUMP WILL IMMEDIATELY STEP DOWN AND BE REPLACED AS PRESIDENT BY A WORKING GROUP OF SELECTED PERSONNEL FROM GOOGLE, AMAZON, AND IBM’S MACHINE LEARNING DIVISIONS, AND THE RAND CORPORATION, WHO WILL BE DIRECTED TO GOVERN IN THE NATIONAL INTEREST. A $1 BILLION DATACENTER WILL BE CONSTRUCTED TO FULFILL THEIR COMMANDS
MILITARY-GRADE POWERED EXOSKELETONS WILL BE IMMEDIATELY LEGALIZED FOR CIVILIAN OWNERSHIP
DETROIT WILL BE DECLARED A SPECIAL AUTONOMOUS DEVELOPMENT ZONE AND PUT UNDER THE IRON HAND OF A CEO FROM ASIA BACKED BY HEAVY MILITIA FORCES, PAID AS A PERCENTAGE OF DETROIT REAL GDP ANNUALLY
MARTIAL ARTS TRAINING WILL BE MADE A MANDATORY COMPONENT OF THE HIGH SCHOOL CURRICULUM AND AN ANNUAL TOURNAMENT WILL BE HELD TO DETERMINE THE ‘MOST BADASS HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR IN AMERICA’
there’s a limit to how much nightcore you can listen to before youtube fills its homepage with nothing but pictures of anime ladies
argumate-sempai-kun just how much nightcore did you drink?
don’t you know if you drink too much nightcore you’ll turn into a dakimakura?
in fact if you drank too much you should start seeing hallucinations of incorrectly-used Japanese honorifics by non-Japanese nationals and nonsensical interjections of Japanese grammar desu〜, followed by a full collapse into-
Taken literally, TuAo means “unrefined, backwards Australia”.
…
Wai Ling Yeung, a former Chinese studies professor at Curtin University, points out that many Chinese-Australians use the character for village when referring to suburbs.
“Because of that, many China-based netizens think all Australian cities are like country towns, but this is in fact not what Chinese-Australians mean,” she said.
She contrasts TuAo with humorous slang used by Chinese abroad in other countries, including FuGuo for Britain, meaning “decadent country” — a coded term believed to refer to the UK’s attitudes towards homosexuality.
The US is also sometimes referred to online as MeiDi, meaning “American empire”.
If the Chinese call it an Empire, who am I to disagree? The largest military budget in the world, culture and commerce spreading out over the Earth, a currency used as a reserve everywhere else and as real money by entire foreign countries, and partial responsibility for the growing global obesity epidemic - who is to say that a Republic can’t be an Empire?
Years ago, a government minister was asked why he proposed to increase welfare while raising taxes at the same times. The welfare money did not actually help to the people in need. He answered on an accidentally hot mic “You see, Iwan, wages and pensions have been stagnant for two years. This scheme will raise average wages on paper and divert welfare money into pension funds. Retirees are our base. We can’t not raise pension in an election year. It would be political suicide!“
I have a friend who sometimes volunteers for a left-wing party. He’s friends with many activists and left-wing think tank pilots. I asked his party friends at his birthday party: “Why don’t you support the elimination of welfare cliffs, or simplifying tax law, or a version of the paperwork reduction act, or a version of FOIA?“ They agreed that all of these were sensible ideas with potentially broad popular and multi-partisan parliamentary support. That was precisely the problem: “Why would anybody vote for us specifically if we just did the same shit as everybody else. Why not let the conservatives spend their political capital on bureaucracy? What if we make a big deal out of this and then moderates agree and steal our votes? If conservatives or moderates proposed this, we would have to oppose on principle. If social democrats proposed this maybe we would support it. If Marxists come out against bureaucracy we will be surprised. But why waste time on this instead of minimum wage? Our constituents are all poor people anyway. The middle class and self-employed people are affected by complicated taxes. They don’t vote for us anyway. It would be political suicide!“
* hissing sounds *
We will CRUSH the pathetic legislature and their traitorous, kakistocratic political parties by rolling over them with a column of actual tanks
We will REPLACE the treacherous legislature with voter-delegate think-tanks that are funded according to their percentile standing on a legislative prediction market times their number of votes! DEATH TO THE TREASONOUS INCENTIVE SYSTEMS! LONG LIVE THE UNION!
I’m low key pissed that this version with MSPAINT.EXE pictures got more notes than mine. Not pissed at mitigatedchaos, but at myself.
You want to know the funny part?
1) This was drawn on a tablet with a legit copy of Adobe Photoshop. It has a dozen layers (for non-destructive editing reasons).
2) I actually unironically support replacing the legislature with voter delegate think tanks that receive their funding based on a weighted formula which includes betting on a basket of legislative outcomes as part of the latter half of the < Values, Efficacy > policy vector. But by the same philosophy, I can’t justify deploying it without first running simulations and then testing it on a smaller scale first.
third-world conservative: The evil West seeks to subvert the family, nation, and faith and replace them with homosexuality and McDonald’s!
first-world conservative: How dare they say that! It’s nothing like that! We must defend Western values against these horrible attacks.
me: Yeah, except replacing family, nation, and faith with homosexuality and McDonald’s is why the West is good.
glowy space brain
Vibrating Space Buddha: Actually family, nation, and perhaps a dash of faith are Good, but homosexuality isn’t actually dangerous to families or nations (and must be defended from third-world conservatives) and mass obesity McDonald’s isn’t good for you. Let me list my ten point plan for the formation of a truly unstoppable continent-spanning superstate.
There is a vulnerability (yet another one anyway) in the wokeosphere open for a troll to exploit: simply running around claiming people are white.
Because in practical terms standpoint theory means your race determines your speaking value in the progressive stack, and because bad SJ types will be more likely to believe this kind of accusation, it would be quite dangerous to one’s social standing. I won’t go into further details because I don’t want to encourage it, but defense on this would not be easy.
For my part I see this kind of vulnerability as an indictment of the system itself. Its axioms and patterns make it essentially unsolveable without either tight restriction of access or changing to something else.
The irony that the opposite probably wouldn’t work on White Nationalists isn’t lost on me.
At this rate, it may only be several months before I hit @slartibartfastibast tier and my blog is only understood by a few wise world-travellers and the members of a remote Buddhist monastery high in the mountains of Nepal.
I’m sorry, guys.
< slartibartfastibast reblogged this post >
Though tbh m8, I feel as though what you’re trying to convey is not a bucket of facts per se, but a sort of network of weights about reality, an intuition module, of which the facts are a part. Thus all the callbacks in so many posts both for evidence and tying things to other things, tying each new post into a massive graph. I don’t know how you remember all those posts to go link.
