Want to wade into the rainbow-ridden surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid.
Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful youāll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cutānāpaste it into its own post ā thereās no quota for posting and the bar really isnāt that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned so many āesotericā right wing freaks, but thereās no appropriate sneer-space for them. Iām talking redscare-ish, reality challenged āculture criticsā who write about everything but understand nothing. Iām talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. Theyāre inescapable at this point, yet I donāt see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldnāt be surgeons because they didnāt believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I canāt escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this, and happy 4th July in advance.)
LWer: politics is really hard to be Rational about, so how about we just forget all about it?
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FBXvMEwzTknN26NZp/that-which-cannot-be-poked-with-a-stick-is-the-mind-killer
Bad: arguing about prison abolition
Good: arguing about how to fastest get to the closest Muni station
This gets dangerously close to acknowledging that the rationalist method isnāt actually very useful for any area where it isnāt trivial.
I keep bouncing back to this one and I think that the core objection is that the method of discourse that theyāre trying to advance here is fundamentally incapable of handling people actually disagreeing. Like, the whole concept of āidentifying a cruxā basically requires that thereās a central point of agreement somewhere. In my experience a lot of these issues are better understood as tradeoffs and compromises. It is simultaneously true that some people will do terrible things left to their own devices and locking them up seems to be one of the only things society can collectively agree to do about it and also that locking people up is fundamentally cruel and itās bad that we do it. The challenge isnāt in identifying the central point of agreement between those two but in managing their fundamental incompatibility.
This could have been a tweet. I seriously 100% believe that this logorrhea could have been a single Xart. What the fuck is wrong with these people?
It could. Thanks elon for allowing walls of text as tweetsā¦ ;)
til soyweiserās current char build is chaotic semi-evil
(I jest I jest)
Chaotic annoying.
E: now im wondering, did musk destroy the saying on purpose? Did he overhear somebody complain about some long meeting of his they just attended with āthis could have been a tweetā and go: āwe will see about thatā. He is petty enough for it, after all he most likely went after USAID because USAID was going after starlink.
So, the default for any PC
Love the second example of immigration because not only does it completely miss the crux of the issue (free movement is a human right and must not be conditional) but also boils down to āactually this IS measurable and provable but Charlie doesnāt like the outcome so lalala whatabout Germanyā