Snargorf

11 ms·

1.
by Snargorf 10y ago
I've actually found it works a lot better if both people just allow the contentious statements. Just let each person say, "Oh that's ridiculous because..." and the other replies with "You're totally missing thi
2.
by Snargorf 10y ago
It's pretty trivial to apply these signals to nearly any collectivist social movement. 1. Action for action's sake - Black Lives Matter protests to block highways. 2. Exploit the fear of difference - Those horrible racist uneducat
3.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Wait wait. So: 1. White people commit racism and violence against blacks causes 2. White people flee to the suburbs causes 3. Urban centers to deteriorate. Let's examine: 1->2 So white people were fleeing... their own violence again
4.
by Snargorf 10y ago
>If women are disadvantaged Except they're not. In fact, in tech, they're advantaged. Female names on resumes get more callback than male names. This has been studied. The reason there are fewer of them is because fewer of them
5.
by Snargorf 10y ago
You don't even need to look that hard. Poor eyesight has no adaptive benefit. Yet many, many people need glasses. I guess it's just 'difficult' for our genes to grow a sharp eye focusing system, so they often get it wron
6.
by Snargorf 10y ago
There are reasons. China has a long history of advanced (for the time) civilization and a high-IQ population (~105). They were backward for just a few centuries because of a series of bad ideologies - isolationism, followed by communism. Fo
7.
by Snargorf 10y ago
The hypothesis I put forth (implicitly) is that homosexual genes are still around because of the massive social pressure to have children and to never admit being gay. Now that this pressure is gone, we could see a huge drop in these traits
8.
by Snargorf 10y ago
It's not in every culture, it's between cultures as well. Africa adds 30 millions people every year. Pretty much everywhere outside of Africa is below replacement fertility. In the 20th century, Africans were 10-15% of the world p
9.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Not in 200 years. What we're seeing now is a partial die-off. Eventually, evolution will re-assert itself. The sub-populations who, for whatever reason, continue to grow in population will come to dominate the numbers, after the non-
10.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Families breed with other families similar to themselves.
11.
by Snargorf 10y ago
My old hypothesis is that in a reasonably free society, families reach their "destination" socioeconomic status after 3 generations. Even if they immigrate as refugees on rusty boats, or lose everything in a holocaust or internmen
12.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Everything you described is simply ways that rich people avoid living around poor people. Yes, it generally excludes blacks, but that's incidental and only because blacks tend to be poor. On the flipside, these policies keep out poor w
13.
by Snargorf 10y ago
A Baphomet pentagram hidden under the arrow would've been a lot more amusing.
14.
by Snargorf 10y ago
If there ever was a major war between civilized nuclear powers, and it didn't immediately go nuclear, we might end up with a weird sort of gentleman's agreement where it's accepted to fire nukes into your own country (at inva
15.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Those rates were basically fiction. All they led to (and the only reason they could be levied) was a huge system of fake on-paper money-losing schemes. People would arrange all sorts of business ventures and other schemes to appear to be lo
16.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Actually, wealth inequality in the West was higher before World War One. They called it the 'gilded age' for a reason. It only got a lot more equal because WW1, the Depression, and WW2 combined destroyed most of the stuff the rich
17.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Markets don't exist without states? Do you not believe that markets existed 1000, 2000, 5000 years ago, in areas that were tribal or feudal or in anarchy? Do you not believe that markets exist in Somalia and other conflict zones today,
18.
by Snargorf 10y ago
"(generally)" ? But you're right, it's sad how many people insist on feeling smart by taking a general statement as a universal statement and nitpicking it. It's so tiring.
19.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Hong Kong, perhaps? Or Chinese-American? I was really focusing on mainlanders; I've not noticed this from people born in the West. And less in Hong Kong (though still present).
20.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Non-Chinese students also have those same problems, but they don't cheat like the Chinese. Chinese students cheat because cheating is part of Chinese culture. Go to China and you'll be shocked at how little people care about other
21.
by Snargorf 10y ago
By this logic, I can just murder anyone I like, and then demonstrate that I won't do it again. After that, no reason to keep me in prison any more right? It's not like the dead person or their family count for anything - it's
22.
by Snargorf 10y ago
No, the ultimate goal of prison is to prevent crime. Both by deterring would-be criminals, and by keeping future lawbreakers behind bars where they can't do harm.
23.
by Snargorf 10y ago
It's quite a stretch to know that one group has a higher average IQ (by ~10 points) and yet still insist that there is some other explanation for why they are economically successful in every society. I mean seriously. Question is th
24.
by Snargorf 10y ago
I don't necessarily disagree with your analysis. Or that of others here. My point is that it's irrelevant in terms of how history affects peoples' actions. You're engaging a detailed study of historical reality, but the
25.
by Snargorf 10y ago
What you said would also apply to, say, the British Empire, which was very Christian for its entire existence. Most people don't really care about the details of history that much - just whatever narrative they can spin that satisfies
26.
by Snargorf 10y ago
On that time scale, I'm guessing IQ differences would come into play. I'd be fascinated if they did a study on whether noble lineage predicts intellectual performance. As a piece of side-data, Jews have, for many centuries, been a
27.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Is there any evidence at all that "so many robots designed to resemble women"? Has there been any attempt at all to actually survey this and understand the numbers? Is it more than half? What about IBM's Watson? HAL 9000? T80
28.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Inigo Montoya
29.
by Snargorf 10y ago
Great! Hey lusen - you've got a guy here willing to pay a few pennies to the social justice virtue signaling fund! This guy really puts his money where is mouth is! Just find a billion more people at his level of commitment and you&#
30.
by Snargorf 10y ago
You're proposing that Amazon's employees, customers, and shareholders pay out of their pockets to fund your social engineering project. How about this instead: You get together with a bunch of your social justice-y friends, pool a

More ›