3 ms·

> These RCSR guys dump thousands of pages of guidelines, making it impossible for any meaningful work to progress. This always reminds me of Darwin’s discover

by kindkang2024 1y ago

> These RCSR guys dump thousands of pages of guidelines, making it impossible for any meaningful work to progress. This always reminds me of Darwin’s discovery — survival of the fittest — especially in the ruthless and highly competitive world of commerce. Yet this truth is often misunderstood or even outright rejected by those with a so-called "woke" mindset. In such a competitive world, the only inevitable outcome for a business that isn’t fit enough is failure and eventual disappearance. Always remember: no one can be forced to buy a product or service if they live in freedom. Deals won’t happen because of burdensome frameworks like "RCSR." Trade flows naturally toward what creates the greatest value for both parties — usually better products or services at lower costs. From a Darwinian perspective, this kind of trade helps make the parties involved more fit. So why wouldn’t they choose it? Hope all come to recognize this natural/divine will with reverence — and try our best to align with it and stay fit (while helping to keep those we love fit as well). This can truly help foster a competitive market and benefits all.

Moomoomoo309 1y ago
Stop using the word "woke". No one agrees what it means, so when you use it, people interpret it differently. The people I think you meant when you said "woke" probably aren't actually the people you meant. Seriously, just say what you mean, because "woke" is meaningless.
- mvdtnz 1y ago
  You're responding to AI slop. Just so you know.
  - kindkang2024 1y ago
    It is not. Just so you know. But I do have, at times, used AI to help the writing, primarily for checking errors and fine-tuning the wording to express my thoughts/wills precisely. Does it considered AI slop? And I was quite offended by your comment. Your choice of words seems to suggest a malevolent intent. It appears your real objection is to the views I expressed but you hide in a smart way - If it is so, it is indeed disgusting. And, I truly hope the 'Free Will' behind the name 'mvdtnz' can transcend the 'Representation' of mere words and symbols,and grasp and judge the underlying 'Will' directly— never become ensnared by the Representation ("The World as Will and Representation.") And I sincerely hope you can avoid such attacks in the future and choose to state your points directly. My karma dropped by 2 points due to your response—a powerful reminder that we should all be cautious with our words - the human mind is perpetually trained by the words it consumes, not unlike an LLM. I'm taking the good advice I received about 'Woke', adapting it for the term 'AI slop', and sharing it with you: Stop using the word "AI slop". No one agrees what it means, so when you use it, people interpret it differently. The people I think you meant when you said "AI slop" probably aren't actually the people you meant. Seriously, just say what you mean, because "AI slop" is meaningless.
- kindkang2024 1y ago
  First things first, I need to clarify what I am referring to when I use the term 'woke.' My critique targets an ideology that, under the guise of good intentions—whether genuine or feigned—ignores fundamental realities and ultimately causes more harm than it prevents. It’s a form of idealism where noble goals, ungrounded in reality, consistently lead to destructive outcomes. > Seriously, just say what you mean, because "woke" is meaningless. Advice accepted. After all, there are genuinely good intentions behind the ideology — or at least we can assume so, since no one can truly verify them.
  - dragonwriter 1y ago
    > First things first, I need to clarify what I am referring to when I use the term 'woke.' > My critique targets an ideology that, under the guise of good intentions—whether genuine or feigned—ignores fundamental realities and ultimately causes more harm than it prevents. That's not a clarification of what you are referring to, that is just stating (without support, or even the kind of definition of what you are referring to that would allow supporting or refuting evidence) your conclusions about what you are referring to.
    - kindkang2024 1y ago
      > That's not a clarification of what you are referring to, that is just stating You're right, that was a conclusion. And the context was clear from my original post. To be precise, when I describe that ideology, the concrete example I have in mind is the kind of burdensome framework detailed in the RCSR. My conclusion about that framework is that it ignores reality and causes harm, despite its intentions. and 'Tough news' is the evidence for that specific conclusion.
- ksec 1y ago
  Even without a precise definition most people knows it refer to people on the left side of the spectrum that does not believe in what the OP described, the survival of the fittest.
  - Moomoomoo309 1y ago
    Yes, it generally includes people on the left side of American politics, but exactly where those lines are drawn is all over the place - including who exactly is on the left. It's overly broad, including in the context it was used. It is so imprecise it's as bad as just saying someone's "anti-american". Most terms you have a clear delineation about who it applies to, woke, it's more emotional and vibes than anything else, and that makes it a useless term in my opinion.

Moomoomoo309 1y ago

Stop using the word "woke". No one agrees what it means, so when you use it, people interpret it differently. The people I think you meant when you said "woke" probably aren't actually the people you meant. Seriously, just say what you mean, because "woke" is meaningless.

mvdtnz 1y ago
You're responding to AI slop. Just so you know.
- kindkang2024 1y ago
  It is not. Just so you know. But I do have, at times, used AI to help the writing, primarily for checking errors and fine-tuning the wording to express my thoughts/wills precisely. Does it considered AI slop? And I was quite offended by your comment. Your choice of words seems to suggest a malevolent intent. It appears your real objection is to the views I expressed but you hide in a smart way - If it is so, it is indeed disgusting. And, I truly hope the 'Free Will' behind the name 'mvdtnz' can transcend the 'Representation' of mere words and symbols,and grasp and judge the underlying 'Will' directly— never become ensnared by the Representation ("The World as Will and Representation.") And I sincerely hope you can avoid such attacks in the future and choose to state your points directly. My karma dropped by 2 points due to your response—a powerful reminder that we should all be cautious with our words - the human mind is perpetually trained by the words it consumes, not unlike an LLM. I'm taking the good advice I received about 'Woke', adapting it for the term 'AI slop', and sharing it with you: Stop using the word "AI slop". No one agrees what it means, so when you use it, people interpret it differently. The people I think you meant when you said "AI slop" probably aren't actually the people you meant. Seriously, just say what you mean, because "AI slop" is meaningless.
kindkang2024 1y ago
First things first, I need to clarify what I am referring to when I use the term 'woke.' My critique targets an ideology that, under the guise of good intentions—whether genuine or feigned—ignores fundamental realities and ultimately causes more harm than it prevents. It’s a form of idealism where noble goals, ungrounded in reality, consistently lead to destructive outcomes. > Seriously, just say what you mean, because "woke" is meaningless. Advice accepted. After all, there are genuinely good intentions behind the ideology — or at least we can assume so, since no one can truly verify them.
- dragonwriter 1y ago
  > First things first, I need to clarify what I am referring to when I use the term 'woke.' > My critique targets an ideology that, under the guise of good intentions—whether genuine or feigned—ignores fundamental realities and ultimately causes more harm than it prevents. That's not a clarification of what you are referring to, that is just stating (without support, or even the kind of definition of what you are referring to that would allow supporting or refuting evidence) your conclusions about what you are referring to.
  - kindkang2024 1y ago
    > That's not a clarification of what you are referring to, that is just stating You're right, that was a conclusion. And the context was clear from my original post. To be precise, when I describe that ideology, the concrete example I have in mind is the kind of burdensome framework detailed in the RCSR. My conclusion about that framework is that it ignores reality and causes harm, despite its intentions. and 'Tough news' is the evidence for that specific conclusion.
ksec 1y ago
Even without a precise definition most people knows it refer to people on the left side of the spectrum that does not believe in what the OP described, the survival of the fittest.
- Moomoomoo309 1y ago
  Yes, it generally includes people on the left side of American politics, but exactly where those lines are drawn is all over the place - including who exactly is on the left. It's overly broad, including in the context it was used. It is so imprecise it's as bad as just saying someone's "anti-american". Most terms you have a clear delineation about who it applies to, woke, it's more emotional and vibes than anything else, and that makes it a useless term in my opinion.