TBH I think it’s pretty fucked up that boys get circumcised in America but it really isn’t something to have a super strong principled position on
It just seems like a really weird topic to fixate on
When it goes bad… well, worse, I guess… it can cause some pretty serious damage. Assuming all the people that reaaaally get into the Discourse against it are those dudes, can you say you wouldn’t do the same?
this would be a better thread if it had less occurrences of the word “dudebro”
but the disagreement over death is really the central issue here.
meh. I agree that the not dealing well with the source material and smugness are issues, and for sure it did have a sense of ‘i’m gonna pick HP because it’s popular’ and the treatment of ron and hermione did kinda suck. I really liked HPMOR overall but it certainly had a ton of flaws. for example, it started out doing stuff like investigating the system of magic and there were allusions to atlantis or the source of magic etc. and then it just…stopped. And that was one of my favourite bits.
but i can’t get over the ‘death is a part of life and thinking death is bad is the REAL bad thing uwu’ stuff here. death is bad and sucks, we can work on improving quality of life sure, but improving quantity of life is not bad because ‘then we don’t appreciate how special the tiny bit of life we actually do have is’. and yeah fuck off with the dudebro bullshit.
I didn’t read all of that but I seriously doubt it could contain anything more insufferable than just being in long-form Twitter.
manverbing is the new manshaming
Meat industry has major global warming issues, but meat an important source of nutrients. Should work to help global warming by accelerating vatmeat development. Also valuable for vegans, vegetarians, some kinds of Consequentialists.
Here’s a fun question I got asked during a job interview. (I will not, of course, say where.)
Ten prisoners are going to be executed at dawn. The executioner gives them one chance at survival. In the morning, the prisoners will line up in single file, and the executioner will place a white or black hat (randomly selected) on each prisoner’s head. He will then ask each prisoner the color of the hat they are wearing, starting at the back of the line. The prisoners can only respond with “white” or “black.” If the prisoner is correct, they will go free; if they are wrong, they will be executed.
Each prisoner can see all the hats in front of them, but not their own hat or the hats behind them. Each prisoner can hear everything; they know the responses of the prisoners behind them and whether or not they were executed.
The prisoners can meet beforehand to decide on a strategy.
What is the maximum number of prisoners you can guarantee will be saved, and with what strategy?
Hint #1 [rot13]: Gurer vf n jnl gb thnenagrr gung avar bs gur gra cevfbaref jvyy fheivir.
Hint #2 [rot13]: Vs avar bs gur gra ner thnenagrrq gb fheivir, gurve nafjref zhfg or qrgrezvarq ol gurve bja ungf. Bayl gur svefg cevfbare pna neovgenevyl pubbfr jurgure gb fnl “juvgr” be “oynpx.” Jung fbeg bs vasbezngvba pna ur pbairl hfvat bayl bar ovg?
There is a real-world technical problem that can be solved using a similar strategy.
you know what would have been cool is if, given that it was a job interview, they’d asked the question in the context of the real-world technical problem that resembles it
Here, bonus hot take @ranma-official might agree with:
Actually, employees burning out or dying is an externality.
The company profits from the temporary boost in productivity while destroying the future economic value of up to an entire lifespan, denying other companies and the economy as a whole future production. As employers do not own employees, this creates a Tragedy of the Commons situation, justifying the existence of state interference. (etc)
neoliberalism-nightly said: consider this. the state would like this to happen in order to prevent a fiscal crisis
That only works if you kill them near the end of their career, not near the beginning and while they’re still raising children, and it’s a dumb plan relative to alternatives.
neoliberalism-nightly said: well, why can’t it
It costs a lot of money to raise and educate a kid. If the fiscal crisis is a rising portion of elderly retired relative to workforce, reducing the size of the workforce or destroying your investment before the costs can be repaid is not what you want to do.
Anonymous asked:
argumate answered:
Good point!
Here, bonus hot take @ranma-official might agree with:
Actually, employees burning out or dying is an externality.
The company profits from the temporary boost in productivity while destroying the future economic value of up to an entire lifespan, denying other companies and the economy as a whole future production. As employers do not own employees, this creates a Tragedy of the Commons situation, justifying the existence of state interference. (etc)
neoliberalism-nightly said: consider this. the state would like this to happen in order to prevent a fiscal crisis
That only works if you kill them near the end of their career, not near the beginning and while they’re still raising children, and it’s a dumb plan relative to alternatives.
Sometimes right-wingers must be really kicking themselves for denouncing the term ”micro-aggression“ instead of co-opting it.
Nah, right-wingers can’t co-opt that, that isn’t how it works. You have to wait for the kinds of violence and broken promises you can associate with careless previous rhetoric, then use it ironically. Like “cultural enrichment”.
Like “Happy Holidays”
It’s not “PC gone mad”. It’s a *micro-aggression*
Nah, Happy Holidays can’t be used ironically politically in that way.
Left-wing people don’t treat socon offendedness seriously and in fact revel in it. They can’t win by co-opting microaggression, progressives will just argue white people aren’t allowed to use it so it doesn’t count blah blah blah. It’s not even a very powerful word.
I mean you’re probably mostly joking, but the alt right and some of the other right wing shitposters are a lot better at this weaponized language thing. You have to either offend the lefties or use language that makes them look bad to others even if they aren’t offended - like “cuck”. (And I know rattumb thinks it’s lame, but as an insult it’s brilliant.) But don’t offend the normies. It’s a careful balance.
I now have a Twitter (which is to say, I remembered the e-mail for my old Twitter), and I don’t understand how to use it.
do i just… start posting things no one has any capability of seeing in the first place? i replied to people, but it doesn’t show on my timeline and “joins in on already existing twitter war” is a niche clearly filled
I thought you enjoyed yelling at people that you think are doing politics stupidly, as a recreational activity? Wouldn’t Soldier in the Great Twitter War be perfect?
Sometimes right-wingers must be really kicking themselves for denouncing the term ”micro-aggression“ instead of co-opting it.
Nah, right-wingers can’t co-opt that, that isn’t how it works. You have to wait for the kinds of violence and broken promises you can associate with careless previous rhetoric, then use it ironically. Like “cultural enrichment”.
