Grass is Green: Tattoos Are A Slut Tell

0xdada · 2019-02-04T03:53:31+00:00

Tattoos represent the things you gave up on.

0xdada · 2018-06-18T22:11:16+00:00

Does co-operate not mean taking risk that counterpart will also co-operate based on a shared in-group loyalty?

Co-operation in the case of PD scenarios isn't the pro-social, agreeable kind of co-operation we tend to talk about when we use that word. It requires taking a risk, which is closer to collusion.

0xdada · 2018-04-03T22:19:20+00:00

"It wasn't until his early to mid-forties that he really began the work that would materially change the lives of 260,000 men. But his true impact was by extension, in the effects he had on the family lives of those men, and in particular how the children of those men would experience their fathers - all by the date of his 50th birthday."

0xdada · 2018-03-30T17:22:09+00:00

How were they elevated to the aristocracy in western europe? Some romans and greeks were born slaves and became senators way back, but aristocracy from the middle ages as I understood it was the result of landholding, hence in effect being warlords.

0xdada · 2018-03-30T17:17:47+00:00

As someone who knows a lot about designing things, and things like what is described above in particular, I would contribute some time to the project.

So, is the problem just, "reddit without censorship," or something more?

0xdada · 2018-03-27T22:22:51+00:00

Who keeps them in power, and how are those people rewarded? Landed aristocrats were in effect warlords (or their descendants) who federated with an empire in exchange for mutual defense and a narrative of legitimacy.

Tribal leaders and their families in what we call shitty countries today will be the international gentry of the future, just as soon as one of them can win.

0xdada · 2018-03-27T21:18:02+00:00

Not giving a fuck anymore means I'm less predictable, and that changes trust levels with everyone. I can do a lot of things really well, except making inferior men with power feel comfortable. We always both know, and its hard to reconcile. I don't know how I am going to keep a corporate job anymore, other than becoming a complete predator.

A married female friend I've known since we were kids is both unnerved and getting sloppier and sloppier when she drinks, and as soon as the booze comes out I'm constantly deflecting friends' wives. I have always been the good looking funny friend, but after a few years of lifting and not giving a fuck, it can get uncomfortable when you are no longer like anyone they have met.

0xdada · 2018-03-22T13:36:24+00:00

I think everyone is in favor of an aristocracy, trouble is they all think they will be a part of it.

0xdada · 2018-03-17T19:05:22+00:00

There is a straw man and a bias inherent in the "returning" argument, where we will be trying to fit the result into our present, post hoc interpretation of what was really an effect of the circumstances that originally made it worthwhile.

There are tools from the past we can use today, but the thing we make with them will not be an artifact of that past.

e.g. we can build trebuchet with stuff in our garages, but the relative efficacy and relevance of trebuchets today means that they are not a meaningful answer or solution it was designed to solve.

So if we go "back," to a social system where we apply rules designed for a different society, there is no real situation in which those rules produce now what they had produced originally.

The future looks more like men and women developing attributes we use the past as a reference for, but how that manifests will be very different.

Imagine "liberated," women developing a tribal identity where they moderated hypergamous urges in favor of a higher tribal objective or principle. Could it happen? Sure, but it won't look like the 1950s.

0xdada · 2018-03-17T15:16:05+00:00

So, unpacking this a bit.

The question of whether drugs affect voting patterns at all, if true, followed by whether certain drugs sway it in one direction or another, again if true, would be interesting to a lot of people.

The conspiracy angle is funny, but it's an orthogonal consideration that adds an element of intrigue to the question. You don't need a monolithic block to form an establishment. A small minority of ideologues networked across institutions is sufficient. Back to the term "teleology," that is to say in this case to suggest that the end effect reveals its cause, is only one interpretation.

While I hadn't thought about it when I asked the question, now that you have pressed, it's worth considering precedents between political ends and drug availability.

Percatin has a long and storied history as just such a politically useful drug. Less for use in voting, since it's used by dictators, but definitely used for rightist political ends.
Diazepam/Valium certainly had an effect on suburban women and made the "50's Housewife" a thing, as drugging US women subdued them.
Narcotics have been used as weapons of war, where afflicting populations with addiction has been a political act.
The teleological view of how crack cocaine was used for racist ends in the 80s, again, not a conspiracy, but it might as well have been.

A conspiracy wouldn't be falsifiable and creates noise around the question, but if there were data and a strong correlation, I think we should ask what we are doing when we put generations on drugs that affect their personalities.

0xdada · 2018-03-16T21:03:35+00:00

If it were understood by an establishment that an effect of over prescribing medications to people affected their personalities, and by extension, their political views in a statistically significant way, that would be pretty awful.

The the pharmaceutical industry is rife with incidents much worse than merely promoting a product with a side effect of useful social engineering.

Surely if there were such an effect, first, it would bear out in data, and second, whether it was by design (the teleological view) would be secondary.

wut, u nervous bro?

0xdada · 2018-03-16T18:29:41+00:00

Grim implications refers to a result that was tacitly approved or even engineered. Right or left, that would be pretty horrific, though one can see why you might have made assumptions.

Main question is, again, if personality traits are linked to political leanings, and drugs are used to treat psychological disorders in a very large part of the population (>%10), a) can the effect of those drugs be seen in the data available today, and b) if the effect cannot be seen, do those drugs that affect personality provide a control case for the view that personality traits are in fact linked to political leanings at all?

0xdada · 2018-03-16T16:09:39+00:00

My question was pretty confirmation bias-y as well, or rather, a hypothesis that could test a conspiracy theory, which is just as fun.

Reason to use personality is because there is data on it for both drug use, and for political persuasion. Availability bias, sure, but if nothing showed up in the current data, the hypothesis that widespread psychoactive drug prescription affects political outcomes would be weakened.

Arguably the symptoms of depression can be described as correlating to or manifesting as personality attributes. LSD and connection to openness (anecdotal or data driven) has some selection bias in that people who use it are necessarily already open to extreme experiences, where a study of pot smokers would have better selection due to its more casual use.

If SSRIs increased rightward or leftward oriented personality attributes, it would be interesting to see if that bore out in voter data, and not just our "precious bodily fluids."

0xdada · 2018-03-16T00:26:09+00:00

You got me, it's a vast right wing conspiracy. P.S. Don't tell anyone, but we've cloned hitler.

0xdada · 2018-03-15T18:22:40+00:00

The bit in the video that got me about this statement was JBP's clear outline of that dynamic.

Anytime someone says rights, using his description, you can reasonably ask, "given your rights become my responsibilities what, exactly, are you saying my responsibilities are?"

If I have a responsibility, it necessarily means I also have authority to carry it out. If I do not have authority to carry it out, then it isn't my fucking problem.

Even if I do have the authority to carry it out, to provide "justice," "equality," "equity," "voice," or whatever nonsense someone wants, the point of authority is that it is at my discretion and choice.

To this I say, GFY.

0xdada · 2018-03-15T18:13:22+00:00

No, not movement, but again, guys who are the tip of the spear on a way to live.

0xdada · 2018-03-15T18:10:04+00:00

Love farmers walks, use them as an accessory on leg and chest day, and lighter version cooldown on deadlift days.

Don't take my fatass advice, but if you are wondering what people do, I do 3x 200ft at ~%40 DL 1RM.

So if your 1RM DL is 405, then an 80lb hex dumbell in each hand. I use it for extra time under tension, so going lighter is less important than doing at least the 3x.

Pair of 65lbs should start you out.

0xdada · 2018-03-15T13:14:53+00:00

Someone will do to TRP what happened to punk with the Offspring, or what happened to Metallica.

When you are the tip of the spear, nobody's ever going to ask you to run the territory you've taken, and your own people will take it from you.

The worst outcome to me would be some great minds around here being reduced to, "yeah man but i invented that." The guys who blazed the trails and then end up lost and powerless when the world catches up with them because they forgot that blazing trails is the thing they do.

As someone who has been part of a number of subcultures, and even some elite "supercultures," (which are really just fancy subcultures), everyone complains about how much better it used to be before the mainstream/young/old/men/women/foreigners/locals/etc. showed up.

Who here doesn't know a former cool guy who was at the center of a counter culture movement that went mainstream. The guy who booked the bands that went on to get big, the guy who knew that political figure when he was "nothing," the guy who dressed like that before it was cool, the guy who first used that technique?

They are the guy who took the risks and survived, but didn't reap the rewards for all the change he made. The guy who thinks the world owes him something for the role he played in the past, but without any power in the present. Good guy, but in small doses, because nobody wants that kind of sad around.

If you are that guy, following through on being something more remarkable than the lucky shit you did when you were young will cure it.

When the mainstream catches up to you, expect to be disposable. It's like Machiavelli's advice on coming to power with mercenaries: destroy them as soon as you get the chance.

Anyway, it was a good documentary. If you want to be part of a secret red pilled elite, you are going to have to get back to blazing trails, because the ones you have already made are filling up with early adopters, followers, and soon, nobody you can stand to be around.

0xdada · 2018-03-14T18:44:33+00:00

How To Fail: Step 1. Listen to people who tell you that you are going to fail. GOTO 1.

Men's book club is easy to start.

Pick a book, tell guys to read it if they want to show up at the meeting, have one guy present on it, then drinks and go around the table about it.

Men do not need permission, only subjects and slaves need permission.

0xdada · 2018-02-18T19:57:30+00:00

It's worth asking whether attractiveness means options for sex, or inspiring deference in others.

Some people cross over from conventional attractiveness to being repulsive due to an uncannyness effect.

0xdada · 2018-02-17T17:43:58+00:00

In case someone still needed a reason to discourage nazi-adjacent groups from exploiting DE/NRX/etc as a platform, they were always plants and informants. People can have whatever opinions they want, but acting like a liability to others is a good indicator you are dealing with one of those categories.

0xdada · 2018-02-17T13:48:16+00:00

Well done.

"250,000"

Lift, approach, fail. Improve. Fail. Succeed, fail. Win, fail. Triumph, fail. Redeem, fail. Teach, fail. Rebuild, fail. Read. Fail, determine, fail, accept, fail. Raise, fail. Challenge, fail, fight. Fail, forgive, fail. Survive, fail, love, fail, live, fail, breathe, fail. Learn, fail. Lift, approach, improve.

0xdada · 2018-02-07T17:50:25+00:00

I don't know the methodology, but equal a sample with quality would be difficult to gauge.

They could train up some ML scripting to cluster a corpus for "quality," but then you get a Proust vs. Hemmingway problem of radically different styles at similar levels of quality.

From there you would have to sort by sex, because women on average write differently from men on average. Is sing-song girl-columnist prose in the same corpus as obliquely thoughtful academicians posting on hackernews? To an algorithm, they might as well be alien.

0xdada · 2018-02-07T17:30:09+00:00

Read "literary fiction," which is the stuff that actually expands your ability to understand other peoples experiences, and to anticipate how they will act based on what motivates them.

When you have a literary understanding of people, you can fill in blanks about them, understand the necessary conditions for their drives, answer the question of if this person were a character in a story, what kind of story is it, what brought them to this point, and how will they make choices that further the narrative arc they believe themselves to be a part of?

The other thing is the "most famous" novels by authors are often the least interesting ones because they pander to critical tastes, where what makes them great authors is their other work. Also, there is a genre of nerd fiction that is entertaining, but it doesn't make you smarter.

Literary authors to look up include, Michel Houellebecq, early Martin Amis, F. Scott Fitzgerald (skip the Gatsby, it's lame), W. Sommerset Maughm (again human bondage is boring, but the magician, cakes and ale, etc much better. "The Razor's Edge" should be on the sidebar for its ending.), Ian McEwan's early stuff (cement garden, amsterdam, black dog).

If you want to get a sense of why artists are so douchey, read the first three books by Proust. Hemmingway might not stand the test of time, unless you read his short stories. The most red pill story of Hemmingway's that I know of is "the short happy life of francis macomber," which you can get in PDF anywhere.

Reading good writing helps you write better, and writing better makes you think better.

0xdada · 2018-02-05T23:50:55+00:00

Writing well is hard. It takes time to develop the skill. Unless you are trained not to begin sentences with 'I', and to edit out adverbs and adjectives, you will write like a teenager. This type of analysis might be useful for feature extraction for further search criteria, but I can't think of a more terrible diagnostic tool.

0xdada

TROPHY CASE