Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 331

On July 16 2022 05:41 Santafairy wrote: only reason these pulchritudinous vixens are successful is their looks

I don't know any of them except t-foot, but my guess is all of them have an actual advanced science background. I know t-foot has a PhD. I also know that his early success did not come from him being a science educator specifically, but because he was part of a niche that critiqued/mocked creationists online at a time where that was in vogue. Then he did the same with feminism.

Liv's a dilettante. She's not an idiot, but let's stop the bullshitting, most people don't gravitate to her for her intelligence alone or her research skills, it's the complete package of her looks + speech + her interests.

Loco: Liv Boeree looks like shit
Loco: Liv Boeree is only more successful than me because of her looks

She gets a lot more views than the average man who has her intelligence/interests/editing skills, i.e. someone who makes equivalent videos is what I said. I don't do them, so it's not about me.

On July 16 2022 05:52 Loco wrote: I have every reason to be cynical of grand talk of revolutionizing finance and bringing greater freedom to people. I have said that I don't believe in human progress many times, aside from technological progress (which is not a good in and of itself). Again, that doesn't mean that I "don't support a technology." It depends on the context and the type of power backing that technology. I don't even know what you mean by support. I have several thousands of dollars invested in ETH, does that count as support? In my mind it doesn't, but it also probably doesn't mean I don't support it. There is no "crypto club" where you vouch to support any actor. How do you support ETH? I don't know why you use centralized political terms like "support" to refer to a thing that you can buy and own and transact with privately. You seem to be convinced this is Star Wars with the crypto kiddies on one side and the establishment on the other.

I don't remember you saying that you don't believe in human progress, strange thing to say for somebody who wants a put a system in place that requires massive leaps in human behavior for just a small chance to work and that has obviously ended in horrors beyond comprehension before. Are you either a cynical realilst of the human condition or a hopeless idealist?

yes buying ETH is (for the most part) a way to show support, but weird that you buy it if you think its scorching the earth.

I dont think its "starwars", some people in traditional finance want to merge with new tech, some people in crypto also want to integrate into the system like Sam Bankman or CZ, the space is filled with many people with many beliefs and desires, funny that you mention that though because your cosmovision has always gravitated towards the childish binary, I know you believe its oh so complex but you brainwashed yourself into a fascists, good guys and useful idiots world view, hopefully as I'm begining to feel you've grown out of it a bit.

For PoS vs PoW, there are obviously arguments for both, it's not a black and white issue of "oh yeah PoS, it's easier, it's cleaner, it's already here and ETH can't have any problems". Obviously if that were the case Ethereum would have transitioned a long time ago. And if Bitcoin was such a great thing it also would, but it never will due to its rigidity and concentration of power, right? So much for freedom. In the meanwhile, every ETH transaction consumes more energy than what, 9 days of consumption for the average US household? Bitcoin more than that. With more and more people buying coal farms to run these machines. That's far from trivial. In the current context I can confidently say it's not doing the world any good.

There are many argumenst for and against PoS/PoW, in fact I think (as most of the community afaik) that BTC should remain PoW and scaling in Layer 2, mainly due to decentralization and incentives and other things I won't get into.

haha I was wondering where did you get those ridiculous numbers so I googled it: https://fortune.com/2021/10/26/bitcoin-electricity-consumption-carbon-footprin/

Yeah... a BTC tx uses $100 bucks of energy, but actually costs cents, I hope I dont need to say more for you to realize those numbers are obviously wrong.

The lack of centralization and regulation can and will lead to serious problems, because there will never be perfect technology that deals perfectly with malicious behavior, and because humans are faulty creatures. If you transact with the wrong person, make a mistake or get scammed or get screwed over by one of those giant crypto lenders that go bankrupt, no one will be able to help you.

Oh absolutely, there are many negative sides to crypto, and there is space for centralized parties in crypto, but you overestimate the recourse people have in traditional finance, do scamming hedgefunds pay when they steal money? because afaik only 1 dude went to prison in the real state bubble of 08 also if you bankwire to the wrong account you are basically fucked, actually like half the boomers I known have been scammed using regular banks, in fact a few months ago some scammers got my grandparents business for like 40k, obviously the transactions weren't reversed nor the scammers were identified despise banks requiring KYC.

I don't see how you're taking power away from the state right now with crypto, or how anyone really is. I also don't see how blockchain technology is "capitalistic in nature"? I also don't see how you can possibly imagine that there is such a thing as "sticking it to the capitalists" in this world and how you can sincerely believe that that is some kind of deep motivator inside me. You have a very distorted perception of reality and my psychology. I work for Google, I actually don't hate my work, I purchase shit that enriches capitalist organizations every day, how am I sticking anything to "them"? I've even told you once something about how I'd keep buying from Amazon and use the Kindle if Jeff Bezos had personally murdered and raped my family lol. Just amazing how off the mark you can be.

Well for example if you live in Argentina, Venezuela etc the government obviously forbids or limits to like $20 a day the purchase of foreign currency to avoid further debasement of their coin, so you are trapped into an inflationary nightmare, with crypto you can escape this and instead of losing 65%, BTC drops and you lose 90% lol, nah you buy USDC, thats how you take power away from the state.

You want to stick it to the capitalists in thought, It's well established that unsurprisingly you don't do it in action, you won't move to Cuba because you can't get your daily testosterone shot there or something.

Stop circling around the question. You can do research can't you? Is he a leftist or not? He's not obscure, he's one of the most widely read philosophers in the world today, and he's pretty big in Latin America. If he's not a leftist but I am, why I am so interested in his books? If he's a leftist, what about him makes him a leftist? And what about someone like Foucault whom you've mentioned before, what makes him a leftist and how is he different from "the leftists" you continually winge about (which I'm supposedly a part of)?

I'm not circlinlg about the question lol, I simply can't be bothered to read about him because who the fuck cares what he is?, you described yourself not long ago as left-wing libertarian so I found weird that you don't think you are a leftist, but if you evolved out of it then con-gra-tu-la-tions keep it going, come to our side, we have cookies and Elon will assign you an engineered waifu with cat ears.

On July 16 2022 05:57 Loco wrote: Show nested quote + On July 16 2022 05:41 Santafairy wrote: only reason these pulchritudinous vixens are successful is their looks I don't know any of them except t-foot, but my guess is all of them have an actual advanced science background. I know t-foot has a PhD. I also know that his early success did not come from him being a science educator specifically, but because he was part of a niche that critiqued/mocked creationists online at a time where that was in vogue. Then he did the same with feminism. Liv's a dilettante. She's not an idiot, but let's stop the bullshitting, most people don't gravitate to her for her intelligence alone or her research skills, it's the complete package of her looks + speech + her interests.

I'm pretty sure the guy on the bottom right has no background in science at all. High school education maybe. He has 15million subscribers. I genuinely hate his videos, they are obnoxious.

Although Liv is not a scientist, she is probably more legitimate of a scientist (or scientific source of information) than say Kaku (last paper put on arxiv was two decades ago, known for claiming speculative theories are 'science'). You do not need anything beyond a bachelors degree (she has a 1st class honours degree) to be a good science communicator, since pretty much everything after that is just specialization-which is fairly useless for science education unless your trying to educate the 7 other people in the world that can understand you.

Quite frankly, a lot of the awful science 'educators' out there are egotistical men who want to spread their personalized "theories of everything", or crank string theories. (steven wolfram, eric weinstein, kaku, greene) to name four of them. They all have way more views than Liv, and are much worse looking.

loco you should be more proud of your accomplishments and dont compare urself to others.

alot of people on here including myself would snap follow you on twitter.

On July 16 2022 13:04 hiems wrote: loco you should be more proud of your accomplishments and dont compare urself to others. alot of people on here including myself would snap follow you on twitter.

Sure, follow me: https://twitter.com/theoneandonlyloco

On July 16 2022 07:31 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On July 16 2022 05:57 Loco wrote:   On July 16 2022 05:41 Santafairy wrote: only reason these pulchritudinous vixens are successful is their looks I don't know any of them except t-foot, but my guess is all of them have an actual advanced science background. I know t-foot has a PhD. I also know that his early success did not come from him being a science educator specifically, but because he was part of a niche that critiqued/mocked creationists online at a time where that was in vogue. Then he did the same with feminism. Liv's a dilettante. She's not an idiot, but let's stop the bullshitting, most people don't gravitate to her for her intelligence alone or her research skills, it's the complete package of her looks + speech + her interests. I'm pretty sure the guy on the bottom right has no background in science at all. High school education maybe. He has 15million subscribers. I genuinely hate his videos, they are obnoxious. Although Liv is not a scientist, she is probably more legitimate of a scientist (or scientific source of information) than say Kaku (last paper put on arxiv was two decades ago, known for claiming speculative theories are 'science'). You do not need anything beyond a bachelors degree (she has a 1st class honours degree) to be a good science communicator, since pretty much everything after that is just specialization-which is fairly useless for science education unless your trying to educate the 7 other people in the world that can understand you. Quite frankly, a lot of the awful science 'educators' out there are egotistical men who want to spread their personalized "theories of everything", or crank string theories. (steven wolfram, eric weinstein, kaku, greene) to name four of them. They all have way more views than Liv, and are much worse looking.

being dumb and annoying is a great way to have a lot of views on YouTube too - just depends on your target audience.

I disagree, I think she is very Kaku-like. She's obsessed with niche topics, as most people on lesswrong/slatestarcodex are. They have their own lingo and think they have figured stuff out that the average scientist/philosophers haven't, and they are typically very obnoxious neoliberals. Effective altruism is basically a hybrid of utilitarianism + neoliberalism. Fun fact: grimes used to be a bleeding heart leftist chick who had "anti-imperialist" in her bio before reading this stuff and it's what led her to meet Elon and become a oligarchy apologist and have a kid with him.

Loco seems so heartbroken by elon/grimes lol

Poll: Did Loco have a crush on Grimes before Elon?
(Vote): Yes
(Vote): No
(Vote): Loco doesn't even have a car

You wouldn't understand. Grimes circa 2010 to 2012 or so was a Montreal diamond in the rough. I am not quite sure what she has morphed into though. It is beyond my wildest imagination in a bad way.

For the people that don't read. It's an extremely rare public event and he kills it.

+ Show Spoiler +

On July 16 2022 22:38 hiems wrote: Loco seems so heartbroken by elon/grimes lol

On July 17 2022 02:08 RiKD wrote: For the people that don't read. It's an extremely rare public event and he kills it.

Oof. That must have been torture for the girls browsing insta waiting for it to end.

On July 16 2022 06:15 Loco wrote: She gets a lot more views than the average man who has her intelligence/interests/editing skills, i.e. someone who makes equivalent videos is what I said. I don't do them, so it's not about me.

i think what you said was if a man made her videos he'd have 1k subscribers. now what you're desperately trying to say is, if a man who made videos that were worthy of getting 1k subscribers made her videos, he would only have 1k subscribers

and now you think she is unintelligent because she isn't a postgraduate

you seem to have youtube confused with a research university

the ability to present is the whole fucking point

i also showed you demonstrably ugly men with the same interests, similar skills, who are far ahead of her, and no answer.

like if you go to liv's youtube channel she has made 1 science video in the last year and this is what you're sperging about

where is your phd in meaningless commie philosophy? if you had one would your walls of text get more traction here do you think?

doug polk has over 4 times as many subscribers as liv boeree in his crypto channel. and yet doug polk doesn't even have an UNDERGRADUATE degree in cryptocurrency, let alone an advanced degree or professorship. is his channel successful only due to him being such an irresistibly hot piece of ass?

On July 16 2022 06:58 Baalim wrote: I don't remember you saying that you don't believe in human progress

I've said it multiple times. It's silly to think that humans make constant progress over time. It's an obvious ideological claim that is found throughout capitalist ideology which I've always criticized, but it's not a left vs right issue, both have ideologies that believe in linear human progress, and I have always stood against that, as the historical evidence against it is absurdly clear. Modern humanist/neoliberal capitalism and Hegel-inspired Marxist materialist ideologies are exactly the same on that front. One side uses one-dimensional, biased statistical analysis (like Pinker), and the other a philosophical "material analysis" (Marxists/Maoists). But it's ironic to see that on the right the people who believe in this type of progress idealize someone like Elon Musk who basically already considers this planet to be a lost cause and their main priority is spreading humanity elsewhere when the technology is obviously not there. So much for progress.

You could say human progress resembles more two steps forward and one step back, but even that I'd say is inaccurate, and it's probably more accurately the other way around, or one step forward and one step back. That is not cynicism to me, it's realism. And it's what informs my antinatalism. I cannot be optimistic about the future and I'd feel bad imposing it on someone. In fact I am anti-idealistic, because I recognize that the human brain did not evolve to understand and solve complex, wide-reaching issues. It limits everything we can do as a species, because the few people who are able to focus on these issues are not taken seriously, and there is no external brain/intelligence/authority to rely on to advance society. Artificial intelligence isn't intelligent, it can compute, but it can't think, and thinking is necessary for advancement.

strange thing to say for somebody who wants a put a system in place that requires massive leaps in human behavior for just a small chance to work and that has obviously ended in horrors beyond comprehension before.

Yeah well that's the same kind of simplistic garbage Peterson brought to the Zizek debate only to realize he was arguing against a strawman and that Zizek is more pessimistic than him and has more criticisms of Marxism than him. When it really came down to the meat of it, Zizek said he could not conceive of market forces being able to solve climate change, and that this was what pressed him to say that international social cooperation was necessary. Peterson himself was forced to admit that more unbridled competition cannot be the answer either.

I have no system to impose, I've never presented a blueprint to anyone, I only care that people learn to think for themselves and come up with possible alternative ways to live than this dystopia. Create something new, either in their own individual lives, or experimentally if given the chance socially, because there is nothing to lose, the losing trajectory is the status quo and the repetitions of history.

yes buying ETH is (for the most part) a way to show support, but weird that you buy it if you think its scorching the earth.

Crypto appeals to working class people as a simple high-risk/high-reward venture, independent of any ideological constructs behind it. Money rules the world, and it's a way to make money, pure and simple. It's not exactly joining the mafia, even if it's environmentally destructive, that cost is not felt nor seen, and it promises the ability to maybe make a score like you would with the mafia in the comfort of your home. I don't see it any differently as I do making purchases on Amazon. As I said before I am not a boycotter. I am not an consumer-society-individual-actions absolutist like you. I am fine being an "impure" sinner who participates in the harm that my society has created, but just not doing so silently, because I'd prefer having alternatives.

I dont think its "starwars", some people in traditional finance want to merge with new tech, some people in crypto also want to integrate into the system like Sam Bankman or CZ, the space is filled with many people with many beliefs and desires, funny that you mention that though because your cosmovision has always gravitated towards the childish binary, I know you believe its oh so complex but you brainwashed yourself into a fascists, good guys and useful idiots world view, hopefully as I'm begining to feel you've grown out of it a bit.

If it's such murky waters then aren't you admitting it's not taking power away from the state? In leftist thought there is the term "recuperation" which is the transformation of something new/radical that once held the promise of change, and which has been captured by power and fed back to the collective as something harmless. Seems to me the space is filled with actors that will turn crypto into something that can't harm them, at least for what most people will do with it, rather easily.

For PoS vs PoW, there are obviously arguments for both, it's not a black and white issue of "oh yeah PoS, it's easier, it's cleaner, it's already here and ETH can't have any problems". Obviously if that were the case Ethereum would have transitioned a long time ago. And if Bitcoin was such a great thing it also would, but it never will due to its rigidity and concentration of power, right? So much for freedom. In the meanwhile, every ETH transaction consumes more energy than what, 9 days of consumption for the average US household? Bitcoin more than that. With more and more people buying coal farms to run these machines. That's far from trivial. In the current context I can confidently say it's not doing the world any good.

There are many argumenst for and against PoS/PoW, in fact I think (as most of the community afaik) that BTC should remain PoW and scaling in Layer 2, mainly due to decentralization and incentives and other things I won't get into. haha I was wondering where did you get those ridiculous numbers so I googled it: https://fortune.com/2021/10/26/bitcoin-electricity-consumption-carbon-footprin/ Yeah... a BTC tx uses $100 bucks of energy, but actually costs cents, I hope I dont need to say more for you to realize those numbers are obviously wrong.

No time now but I'll read that article later.

Oh absolutely, there are many negative sides to crypto, and there is space for centralized parties in crypto, but you overestimate the recourse people have in traditional finance, do scamming hedgefunds pay when they steal money? because afaik only 1 dude went to prison in the real state bubble of 08 also if you bankwire to the wrong account you are basically fucked, actually like half the boomers I known have been scammed using regular banks, in fact a few months ago some scammers got my grandparents business for like 40k, obviously the transactions weren't reversed nor the scammers were identified despise banks requiring KYC.

No disagreement here but at least a lot of people were aware of this. Less so with the techno-optimists who lost a lot of money in crypto thinking it couldn't be like that.

Well for example if you live in Argentina, Venezuela etc the government obviously forbids or limits to like $20 a day the purchase of foreign currency to avoid further debasement of their coin, so you are trapped into an inflationary nightmare, with crypto you can escape this and instead of losing 65%, BTC drops and you lose 90% lol, nah you buy USDC, thats how you take power away from the state.

Well I guess that makes sense, but I don't know that any state would let you get away with it for very long. You think law enforcement agencies can't crack blockchain encryption systems and eventually identify people when the transanctions are public and immutable?

You want to stick it to the capitalists in thought, It's well established that unsurprisingly you don't do it in action

Anything that restricts or constrains my power/freedom to develop as an individual is something I should oppose, regardless of what letters come before the 'ism'.

I'm not circlinlg about the question lol, I simply can't be bothered to read about him because who the fuck cares what he is?, you described yourself not long ago as left-wing libertarian so I found weird that you don't think you are a leftist, but if you evolved out of it then con-gra-tu-la-tions keep it going, come to our side, we have cookies and Elon will assign you an engineered waifu with cat ears.

I care and I think you should care. If you can't easily find out within a minute that he's a leftist or not then I'm satisfied in assuming that you are in reality not able to put me in that box either, regardless of the language you use on here, and what terms I have used to outline my political views to you in the past. But I think you should want to be accurate with your language (Peterson would agree).

Another reason I'm asking (genuinely and not rhetorically) is to know what you consider to be leftism or not. You seem to be particularly against two things: identity politics wokeness and any suggestions to create a society that moves away from free market capitalism. But someone like Foucault for example wasn't advocating for a system, quite the opposite, if you have ever listened to the debate with Chomsky I'm sure you remember it. Byung-Chul Han is similar in that way. There is zero wokeness nor is there talk of ushering communism, so can that still be leftism to you?

On July 17 2022 00:19 RiKD wrote: You wouldn't understand. Grimes circa 2010 to 2012 or so was a Montreal diamond in the rough. I am not quite sure what she has morphed into though. It is beyond my wildest imagination in a bad way.

Lol! So its true!! Loco got cucked by elon!!!

Maybe. Maybe not.

I will admit I had a crush on Grimes. I love her album Visions and this idealist version of Grimes of this free artist that was squatting in houses and having parties. I also more recently had a manic/psychotic episode where I thought Grimes was my guardian angel or a "New God" and basically listened to her music and influences all day and created art. It was fantastic until I thought people were coming to kill me and ended up in the psych ward where it was like 1 sec to midnight all day long... The real bummer is some of the voices that showed up then still show themselves when I'm normal.

Anyways, let's focus on Byung-Chul Han in the future. Grimes is a freak and a very weird dude.

Rikd will admit he had a crush on grimes but I don't think Loco could ever admit that lol.