Lottery of Babylon posted:

A Man With A Plan posted:

There's some quote that goes something like "Silicon Valley has a near-infinite capacity to mistake social and political problems as technological ones" that comes to mind all the goddamn time when interacting with these people. While Yud isn't really part of SV, there's definitely a shared worldview of a technical messiah.

I have a friend who's posted on facebook about how cryogenics is the only rational choice and how a benevolent powerful AI is imminent. I'm trying so hard not to engage but it's difficult.

Fututor Magnus posted:

Grondoth posted:

Christ where did you find this

Peztopiary posted:

Scott Alexander thinks it's performance art or something and regularly referenced it, (though not to my knowledge linking to it) but that's because his own beliefs prevent him from accepting that smart people (and Jim writes well enough, though like much of the Alt-Right it's gossamer constructions that fall apart at the slightest touch of critical inquiry) could ever seriously hold views so hosed up (presumably as a form of self-defense).

Peztopiary posted:

Jim's blog, which is literally every terrible strawman anyone has ever made of the alt-Right talking about how they're going to kill each other right after they've killed the normies. They've all got completely incompatible world views, held together by the tenuous thread of Jim's (deeply hosed natch) views on women. It is exceptionally nsfw and probably gets you put on some kind of watch list. Scott Alexander thinks it's performance art or something and regularly referenced it, (though not to my knowledge linking to it) but that's because his own beliefs prevent him from accepting that smart people (and Jim writes well enough, though like much of the Alt-Right it's gossamer constructions that fall apart at the slightest touch of critical inquiry) could ever seriously hold views so hosed up (presumably as a form of self-defense).

Grondoth posted:

Christ where did you find this

Lottery of Babylon posted:

sexual consent is not sufficient to make sex right.

Lottery of Babylon posted:

nor lack of sexual consent sufficient to make sex wrong.

Night10194 posted:

Well, that's reasonable and true enou-


Oh. Forget I said anything.

Lottery of Babylon posted:

...my oldest sister, recently widowed, and a good wife all her years to the best of my knowledge, told a story of how she and a bunch of other politically active women had investigated a girls religious school for pedophilia...

Her evidence that these rape convictions were real strikingly resembled the SUN’s evidence that Santa Claus exists:

Nobody sees Santa Claus, but that is no sign that there is no Santa Claus. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see.

I have no idea what really happened in these alleged rapes. But I know what my sister told me happened. According to her:

“They expected to be loved and cherished, they expected to be treated kindly. But instead …”

But instead really really terrible things were done to them.

According to her, it was all regret “rape”. The girls consented, then regretted consenting but the girls were not regretting trivially or foolishly. According to her the girls had really good reasons for regret, up to and including serious physical injury...

And that is what women mean when they say that most rape complaints are real, that most rape convictions are just. Like Santa Claus, it is an emotional truth, not seriously intended to be a factual truth. Virginia will not be able to see an actual Santa Claus coming down the chimney, and the SUN is not really saying that she will be able to. Men are convicted because women suffer, not because anyone really thinks that those particular men personally did anything in particular to cause the suffering of those particular women.

Annointed posted:

Wooden club, his face, now. I can't make a joke of this I just want to beat his loving piece of poo poo head in until he stops twitching.

DarklyDreaming posted:

There was another time more recently where he willingly entered into a formalized debate with a feminist professor.

The results... Were not pretty. She kicked him to the curb

Lottery of Babylon posted:

Emancipating women, allowing them to choose who to sleep with and who not to sleep with, is like setting ten year old children loose in the jungle to live by hunting bears. When menarche hits, women become less capable of consenting competently, not more capable. The age of consent should be menopause. Women should not be allowed to consent to sex except under male supervision.

Tesseraction posted:

I finally finished this today - had to take a day off from the sheer dumb given by Carlgon.

Amazing. An entire video of him humiliating himself while smugly assuming himself right. He's literally the 'tumblrite' histrionic moron that he attempts to portray his enemies as but somehow fails to realise that he himself is doing the same thing. Genuinely worth watching in full.

My favourite bit is him saying that feminism cannot be a theoretical framework because it's a biased ideology, and then saying that you can examine gender studies without requiring the ideology of feminism, but when asked what alternatives exist he just proudly declares he doesn't know and doesn't realise how stupid this makes him look.

Jack Gladney posted:

He doesn't define feminism or make any claims about it being good or bad for the world, and the debate resolution is "feminism has been a force for good in the world." It's amazing. He says that no social science can be trusted because results can't always be replicated then abandons that claim entirely when the Ph.D. debating him explains that social science methods are the foundation of marketing and customer service. He takes no notes and makes faces at the lady, who takes notes on every lunatic thing he says, even though most of her responses consist of her saying that he doesn't understand the things she's saying.

Utterly unbelievable. Is it true that he's a college dropout?

The Vosgian Beast posted:

Thanks to Scott Alexander for providing this excellent 1920s news article to make fun of Scott Alexander with!

Tesseraction posted:

I finally finished this today - had to take a day off from the sheer dumb given by Carlgon.

Amazing. An entire video of him humiliating himself while smugly assuming himself right. He's literally the 'tumblrite' histrionic moron that he attempts to portray his enemies as but somehow fails to realise that he himself is doing the same thing. Genuinely worth watching in full.

My favourite bit is him saying that feminism cannot be a theoretical framework because it's a biased ideology, and then saying that you can examine gender studies without requiring the ideology of feminism, but when asked what alternatives exist he just proudly declares he doesn't know and doesn't realise how stupid this makes him look.

Jack Gladney posted:

He doesn't define feminism or make any claims about it being good or bad for the world, and the debate resolution is "feminism has been a force for good in the world." It's amazing. He says that no social science can be trusted because results can't always be replicated then abandons that claim entirely when the Ph.D. debating him explains that social science methods are the foundation of marketing and customer service. He takes no notes and makes faces at the lady, who takes notes on every lunatic thing he says, even though most of her responses consist of her saying that he doesn't understand the things she's saying.

Utterly unbelievable. Is it true that he's a college dropout?

Archer666 posted:

Dude's a good representation of your low educated loud mouth who thinks he's smarter than he actually is. He thinks his opinions are smart and educated because he read the same books as smarter people did, but it clearly shows he has zero understanding of the subject matter.

Archer666 posted:

It's why I'm subscribed to him. He's a good barometer for "what opinions do idiots have this week?".

Tesseraction posted:

Even if you follow him you shouldn't subscribe, it inflates his figures for advertising revenue. That said, how can you bear watching him, he looks like someone's arse hair grew eyes to swivel in bewilderment as it farts angrily about women.

Archer666 posted:

If I can bear looking at Jim Sterling and Moviebob every week, I can bear him. Then again, I mostly just leave his videos on while I'm doing something more interesting and half-listen to his strange ramblings. If he touches on a subject I find interesting or he says something absolutely crazy about something interesting, I'll look it up myself. Its healthy to listen to opposing opinions. Thanks to Sargy's blathering about rape and feminism and such, I actually sat down with a ladyfriend of mine and had an interesting talk about the issue. Because I never actually actually thought about such things until Sargy started raving against "dem feminists".

Archer666 posted:

If I can bear looking at Jim Sterling and Moviebob every week, I can bear him. Then again, I mostly just leave his videos on while I'm doing something more interesting and half-listen to his strange ramblings. If he touches on a subject I find interesting or he says something absolutely crazy about something interesting, I'll look it up myself. Its healthy to listen to opposing opinions. Thanks to Sargy's blathering about rape and feminism and such, I actually sat down with a ladyfriend of mine and had an interesting talk about the issue. Because I never actually actually thought about such things until Sargy started raving against "dem feminists".

divabot posted:

FWIW I nicked Woollie Wool's theory of why nerds fear and despise culture for Tumblr (with credit).

Tesseraction posted:

Has he ever addressed that debate and admitted he hosed up royally? Surely he can't look at that and feel like he did anything other than poo poo his pants on camera.

Tesseraction posted:

Has he ever addressed that debate and admitted he hosed up royally? Surely he can't look at that and feel like he did anything other than poo poo his pants on camera.

Woolie Wool posted:

On the one hand I'm flattered that someone actually gives a poo poo about my hypothesis, on the other hand nowadays I feel compelled to be more #NotAllNerds because this whole internet Kulturkampf is basically nerds fighting nerds, and the biggest victims are nerds who happen to not have white skin, a penis, and the desire to ram that penis into the nearest vagina with or without consent. Just ask Zoe Quinn. How an ordinary nerd becomes a turbo-nerdlord who considers "that ending in Tsukihime" to be superior to most literary classics is a subject for someone more educated and knowledgeable than me to write a senior thesis on.

Goon Danton posted:

Watch a few Sovereign Citizen "victory" videos on youtube. Self-deception has no limits.

Curvature of Earth posted:

Regarding #NotAllNerds: It's the curative vs creatives sides of fandom.

The curative side is obsessed with details—they're the tedious sort who exhaustively catalog every detail of a show into a wiki and have endless debates about "who would win"*—and owning all the poo poo they can get their hands on. It's the source of the "fake geek girl" accusation: for curative nerds, fandom is about collecting stuff and memorizing a litany of obscure facts, so anyone who doesn't do these same things is considered "fake". Curative nerds also worship canon and worship Very Serious Mature interpretations of that canon, so they cannot abide anything other than Very Serious Mature Action fanfiction and fanart. (Case in point: Naruto fanfiction, which largely consists of shameless fluff, comedy, and a shitload of romance, but if you sort by "most reviewed" on Fanfiction.net, you'll get the mistaken impression that Naruto fic writers are predominantly dudes who mostly write Very Serious Mature Action stories.)

Then there's the creative side of fandom, which pumps out loads and loads of fanfic, headcanons, there's lots of shipping, and a bunch of cute fanart. Creative nerds do things like giggle among each other about what characters whisper to each while in bed, or talk about headcanons like who enjoys baking or who's always very neat and who's messy, and they post fanart of people kissing. It's a side of nerddom that prizes having fun and using existing stories as a vehicle for self-expression, and heavily emphasizes the relationships between characters. Curative nerds loving HATE this, because it's not Very Serious And Mature, which they consider the only true way to be a fan.

This conflict between curative and creative nerds is exacerbated the very obvious gender divide in play. It's further exacerbated by the fact that curative nerds spend shitloads of money on merchandise, so copyright owners tend to love them, while creative fans are often treading on thin ice.

*I hate all "who would win in a fight" debates because it misses the fact that all characters and fight scenes take place in the context of a story, and therefore "who would win" is influenced by the needs of the story above all else. Fight scenes don't take place in a vacuum, so you can't judge them in a vacuum.

Curvature of Earth posted:

Regarding #NotAllNerds: It's the curative vs creatives sides of fandom.

The curative side is obsessed with details—they're the tedious sort who exhaustively catalog every detail of a show into a wiki and have endless debates about "who would win"*—and owning all the poo poo they can get their hands on. It's the source of the "fake geek girl" accusation: for curative nerds, fandom is about collecting stuff and memorizing a litany of obscure facts, so anyone who doesn't do these same things is considered "fake". Curative nerds also worship canon and worship Very Serious Mature interpretations of that canon, so they cannot abide anything other than Very Serious Mature Action fanfiction and fanart. (Case in point: Naruto fanfiction, which largely consists of shameless fluff, comedy, and a shitload of romance, but if you sort by "most reviewed" on Fanfiction.net, you'll get the mistaken impression that Naruto fic writers are predominantly dudes who mostly write Very Serious Mature Action stories.)

Then there's the creative side of fandom, which pumps out loads and loads of fanfic, headcanons, there's lots of shipping, and a bunch of cute fanart. Creative nerds do things like giggle among each other about what characters whisper to each while in bed, or talk about headcanons like who enjoys baking or who's always very neat and who's messy, and they post fanart of people kissing. It's a side of nerddom that prizes having fun and using existing stories as a vehicle for self-expression, and heavily emphasizes the relationships between characters. Curative nerds loving HATE this, because it's not Very Serious And Mature, which they consider the only true way to be a fan.

This conflict between curative and creative nerds is exacerbated the very obvious gender divide in play. It's further exacerbated by the fact that curative nerds spend shitloads of money on merchandise, so copyright owners tend to love them, while creative fans are often treading on thin ice.

*I hate all "who would win in a fight" debates because it misses the fact that all characters and fight scenes take place in the context of a story, and therefore "who would win" is influenced by the needs of the story above all else. Fight scenes don't take place in a vacuum, so you can't judge them in a vacuum.

Curvature of Earth posted:

*I hate all "who would win in a fight" debates because it misses the fact that all characters and fight scenes take place in the context of a story, and therefore "who would win" is influenced by the needs of the story above all else. Fight scenes don't take place in a vacuum, so you can't judge them in a vacuum.

Brainiac Five posted:

Curative stuff sounds pretty good. Someone's gotta keep people from doing all the illegal ships.

pookel posted:

"Who would win" debates are awesome.


.... but only if you're a child under the age of 10. FFS, are there grown adults who still care about that other than as a fun mock debate to have with their kids?

pookel posted:

"Who would win" debates are awesome.


.... but only if you're a child under the age of 10. FFS, are there grown adults who still care about that other than as a fun mock debate to have with their kids?

Small Frozen Thing posted:

Exactly. Unregulated shipping just leads to the introduction of invasive fanon, and may have dire longterm consequences for the environment as a whole.


okay grandma

divabot posted:

FWIW I nicked Woollie Wool's theory of why nerds fear and despise culture for Tumblr (with credit).

Lady Naga posted:

You don't have to be in a fandom to be a nerd tho

Peel posted:

I knew I recognised your name from somewhere WW.