|
Skittle Prickle posted:I'd be interested in your thoughts! I actually thought the post wasn't that bad by "Scott posting about feminism" standards. He barely even called feminists all evil! But as someone else put it far more succinctly than I could have, "Ctrl-f for 'power'." "Ignoring structural issues" is what most of my complaints boil down to. Nothing you don't already know!
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 23:45 |
|
|
Syd Midnight posted:If your AI is never going to be more intelligent or reliable than a Youtube sorting bot, yes, but that is kind of the nature of the problem right now. Self-learning bots are not predictable, and children whose education consists of staring at pictures, without an active educator to explain and answer questions, that's not ideal either. And neither of them should be allowed to make important real-life dog-based decisions without supervision, because you don't know what the hell they're actually thinking. They're just algorithms, don't anthropomorphize neural nets so much
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 01:17
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:They're just algorithms, don't anthropomorphize neural nets so much But I don't know what my notes are thinking when I multiply two matrices and send the result through a nonlinearity. The matricies might be secretly hating humanity
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
People like to think that ai will be this complex organic beast but even the idea of self preservation requires a strict definition of "self" if a machine is going to be able to handle it, and we don't even have one of those for humans yet. Hundreds of really smart people have spent centuries trying to figure one out. Just for example, our definition of a person is fundamentally based on the idea of birth being difficult and copying being impossible. A program can copy itself in a second and unless we deliberately gently caress with that process the copy is going to be provably identical. That's not a thing our current personhood models survive.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 04:46
|
|
|
DACK FAYDEN posted:I will give him that he's not wrong. Men are victims of sexual harassment too; but I think nearly every bit of lovely Scott's article here is pretty dumb and wrong, because he's essentially an MRA who is pathologically individualist to boot, so he can't really reason well about this poo poo. Like, this paragraph that devolves into weird nonsense: lovely Scott posted:(The “structural oppression” model is false, by the way. Homosexual male harassment is more prevalent than the percent gay men in the population would imply, suggesting that gay men harass men more often than straight men harass women. The obvious explanation for gender differences in harassment has always been that men constitute 80% of sexual harassers for the same reason they constitute 83% of arsonists, 81% of car thieves, and 85% of burglars. Since most men are straight, most victims are women; when the men happen to be gay, they victimize men. Men probably get victimized disproportionately often compared to the straight/gay ratio because society views harassing women as horrible but harassing men as funny. If this theory is right then it’s men who are the structural victims, which means it’s your harassment that doesn’t count and you’re the ones who shouldn’t be allowed to talk about it. The “it only matters if it’s structural” game isn’t so much fun now, is it?)  SSC dude is jerking off to the idea that gay men sexually harass each other so much that women lose overall #1 victim status. It's a fun illustration of how straight white MRA types try to co-opt the oppression of black men or gay men.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 05:40
|
|
|
Improbable Lobster posted:They're just algorithms, don't anthropomorphize neural nets so much Yeah, they really don’t like that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 09:28
|
|
|
One of the endless Scotts posted:If this theory is right then it’s men who are the structural victims, which means it’s your harassment that doesn’t count and you’re the ones who shouldn’t be allowed to talk about it. The “it only matters if it’s structural” game isn’t so much fun now, is it?) ...is it common in the real world for women to shut down men talking about being sexually harassed? I live under a rock, and the only thing I've seen has been Terry Crews talking about it, and people seemed to generally support him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:03
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:SSC dude is jerking off to the idea that gay men sexually harass each other so much that women lose overall #1 victim status. It's a fun illustration of how straight white MRA types try to co-opt the oppression of black men or gay men.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:06
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:...is it common in the real world for women to shut down men talking about being sexually harassed? I live under a rock, and the only thing I've seen has been Terry Crews talking about it, and people seemed to generally support him. No, its not, but these dipshits see women shutting down "but what about MEN?!" idiots and then decide that must mean that they're shutting down discussions of sexual harassment too. Because they're incapable of separating those two arguments and also agree with the "but men!" people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:10
|
|
|
Puppy Time posted:...is it common in the real world for women to shut down men talking about being sexually harassed? I live under a rock, and the only thing I've seen has been Terry Crews talking about it, and people seemed to generally support him. He's doing that thing St_Rev loves to do where he briefly pretends to care about male victims of sexual harassment or prison rape victims in order to own feminists* Which is why you never seem them mention the horrors of the carceral state or the unlamented male victims of sexual harassment when they DON'T feel the need to own feminists, and in fact, you will see people who call themselves feminists bring it up more often and with less prompting *His idea of
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 16:41
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/St_Rev/status/608664045193826304 https://twitter.com/St_Rev/status/715001646904918016
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 17:24
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:He's doing that thing St_Rev loves to do where he briefly pretends to care about male victims of sexual harassment or prison rape victims in order to own feminists* That can't be right, these are definitely what feminists are.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/matthew_d_green/status/938553190953385985
|
|
#
?
Dec 8, 2017 00:36
|
|
|
*psst* (pb in a few days)
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
divabot posted:*psst* Wait is this just same book as an ebook or is this the bunch of kickstarter stretch goal essays he said he was writing? The new little tagline is throwing me off
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 17:45
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Wait is this just same book as an ebook or is this the bunch of kickstarter stretch goal essays he said he was writing? The new little tagline is throwing me off It's the final polished version of the main essay (now with footnotes!) plus six other essays, four of which have not previously been published in any version (Jack Graham's been putting up an excerpt and outtakes from the Austrian School essay). I believe Kickstarters on the "bonus essays too" level plus all Patrons get an ebook of the whole shebang. Big publicity push in a coupla days. Also, if you buy it review it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 18:50
|
|
|
Oh yeah I just got a kickstarter email with a link to a copy of that ebook, cool. Does anyone know if this includes the TERF essay because that's the one I was especially looking forward to and I don't really see any coy mention of it in the amazon description... e: Since I actually have the loving thing I could have just looked at the table of contents: it does in fact have it Shame Boy has a new favorite as of 19:47 on Dec 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Oh yeah I just got a kickstarter email with a link to a copy of that ebook, cool. Does anyone know if this includes the TERF essay because that's the one I was especially looking forward to and I don't really see any coy mention of it in the amazon description... I got to do one of the final proofreads. Goddamn this is a good book. Also, my name's in the first sentence, how could I not love it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 10, 2017 21:15
|
|
|
You ever wonder about our old buddy Michael Anissimov and what he's been doing since he got kicked out of the dark enlightenment for being too obnoxious even for them? https://hatreon.net/MichaelAnissimov/ Hatreon posted:Michael Anissimov is on the run from the United States government while he works on his new book describing core Alt Right ideas. The draft is already over 170 pages long and includes over 300 references. The final version will be over 350 pages and include over 50 pages of references. This will be the definitive book introducing the Alt Right to America.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 01:13
|
|
|
Page 451 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 01:18
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:You ever wonder about our old buddy Michael Anissimov and what he's been doing since he got kicked out of the dark enlightenment for being too obnoxious even for them? I want to be clear, this is a website specifically saying they're aiding and abetting (what they claim themselves is) a known criminal
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
See, that'd be a potentially awesome book, unless you'd read anything Anissimov had ever written.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 01:28
|
|
quote:written at a standard of quality the movement deserves Found the one part of it that will be true.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 01:28
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:I want to be clear, this is a website specifically saying they're aiding and abetting (what they claim themselves is) a known criminal I think Mikey A has an undiagnosed mental disorder and isn't actually a known criminal Or he's trying to make himself sound cool and dangerous and is just really bad at it
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 02:31
|
|
|
quote:"Three-month-olds, but not newborns, prefer own-race faces" (2005) Assuming this study from an unspecified source is even accurate, how is it supposed to support racism? Wouldn't it be evidence that bias towards one's own race is learned, not innate?
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:I think Mikey A has an undiagnosed mental disorder and isn't actually a known criminal Yeah, I just want to point out the stupidity of their actions should they ever be intellectually honest
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:I want to be clear, this is a website specifically saying they're aiding and abetting (what they claim themselves is) a known criminal $0 per month 0 patrons Looks like there isn't much aid or abetting occurring here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
SerialKilldeer posted:Assuming this study from an unspecified source is even accurate, how is it supposed to support racism? Wouldn't it be evidence that bias towards one's own race is learned, not innate? Basically any justification will do for these people, as tenuous as any of them are. See also: Him citing a statistic saying 61% of Americans don't like immigrants as proof immigration is bad, then turning around and yelling about the evils of majority rule and the folly of the masses
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 03:44
|
|
|
I've never actually looked around Hatreon after hearing it existed, but their about page is great: Gosh it's so nice of them to take their cut out of the end of the bar! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:I've never actually looked around Hatreon after hearing it existed, but their about page is great: To be fair patreon's bar of that sort kinda sucks balls. Fees and profit are now on top of backer amount
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:To be fair patreon's bar of that sort kinda sucks balls. Fees and profit are now on top of backer amount Yeah I know how patreon hosed poo poo up recently, I just like that they're treating taking the "last" 5% as somehow kind of them
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 06:39
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:Yeah I know how patreon hosed poo poo up recently, I just like that they're treating taking the "last" 5% as somehow kind of them it's on loving fire. Everyone is looking for someone to jump ship to. SerialKilldeer posted:Assuming this study from an unspecified source is even accurate, how is it supposed to support racism? Wouldn't it be evidence that bias towards one's own race is learned, not innate? Here is the study. Here's the abstract: quote:Adults are sensitive to the physical differences that define ethnic groups. However, the age at which we become sensitive to ethnic differences is currently unclear. Our study aimed to clarify this by testing newborns and young infants for sensitivity to ethnicity using a visual preference (VP) paradigm. While newborn infants demonstrated no spontaneous preference for faces from either their own- or other-ethnic groups, 3-month-old infants demonstrated a significant preference for faces from their own-ethnic group. These results suggest that preferential selectivity based on ethnic differences is not present in the first days of life, but is learned within the first 3 months of life. The findings imply that adults' perceptions of ethnic differences are learned and derived from differences in exposure to own- versus other-race faces during early development. emphasis mine
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 11:21
|
|
|
SerialKilldeer posted:Assuming this study from an unspecified source is even accurate, how is it supposed to support racism? Wouldn't it be evidence that bias towards one's own race is learned, not innate? It’s evidence that racism is the sign of being a complete loving baby and also probably lovely yourself daily
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 13:28
|
|
|
divabot posted:Here is the study. Here's the abstract:
|
|
#
?
Dec 11, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
The official propaganda link for Neoreaction a Basilisk. Paperback and ebook links. Super-important thing to do now: PROPAGANDISE. Word of mouth is the only way this thing's gonna get promoted, so work it for all it's worth. Amazon reviews! Blog reviews! Tweets! Facebook shilling! FLY, PHIL'S WINGED MONKEY ARMY!
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Amazon gave me enough free credit the other day to buy a copy. So I did.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/stefanmolyneux/status/940789257249153024 Ooh yes, daddy, pour some more salt on my fries.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
TinTower posted:https://twitter.com/stefanmolyneux/status/940789257249153024 Does Molyneaux (and other Moore supporters) actually believe that the allegations are a vast conspiracy against Moore, or is it just a convenient thing to pretend to believe?
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:38
|
|
|
InfoWars are claiming “they straight up deleted votes!” because half the Republican vote in a normal election just didn’t turn out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 05:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 23:45 |
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Does Molyneaux (and other Moore supporters) actually believe that the allegations are a vast conspiracy against Moore, or is it just a convenient thing to pretend to believe? Molyneux has loving crazy ideas about women so I have no doubt he genuinely believes they are all lying.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2017 06:00
|
|
