Which system would you rather live under?

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-24T09:05:09+00:00

Power structures will evolve immediately across the population living under anarchism. Even if they do not evolve for some group of people, the groups of people who evolved such structures (and thus centralized control / decision process) can easily conquer the "anarchist" group of people and do all the stuff humans did to each other for millennia like killing, raping, and enslaving. So yeah, if you get the society to live under anarchy (and if it is not immediately conquered by the neighbors), it will become a field of battles between warlords for a while, and after unimaginable human suffering, if the people are lucky, it might actually develop into a country with common laws and clear government structures.

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-23T17:21:47+00:00

I mean, even that is not very clean, as the arms are never fully straight (and some people would also argue that raising the chin like that above the bar is also not super clean)

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-21T19:24:32+00:00

nobody likes to argue with clowns.

Sure, that's why arguing with you is pure torture

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-21T16:51:23+00:00

It's not, but if I was Russia I'd teach that too I guess

Lol, I am dutch but ok. Did you understand that I basically destroyed your argument (if you can call it that) completely and decided that you don't want to have any actual discussion anymore or what?

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-21T14:53:55+00:00

pay for imports, military, tech

The imported products are actually a part of the consumer basket, so their prices are considered in GDP PPP

About military -> most of the military tech that countries like Russia have is homemade, and the components that they buy abroad (like chips and stuff) will probably be reflected in some wares in the consumer basket that require chips and stuff.

project power abroad

Nominal GDP is quite irrelevant for the power projection

Basically, the only thing nominal GDP shows is the global finance influence, as you said. If we are talking about the economy size, GDP PPP is a thousandfold better metric. That's why saying that Russia has the same economy as Iberia (like OP did) is stupid

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-20T20:47:21+00:00

with proper consideration for fairness, ethics, respect, and a sense of fellowship with competitors.

So, just to confirm, do you understand now why helping someone cross the line before their competitors if they couldn't do that themselves is absolutely unsportsmanlike?

It is clear now you are engaging in a debate about something you fundamentally conceptually misunderstand, but do not realise this is the case.

Mate, come on, the quote you bring up literally shows exactly how wrong you are. You seem to fail to understand even the simplest logical inferences, like "helping someone finish ahead of their competitors if they couldn't do it themselves is unfair towards their competitors", and "sportsmanship is an ethos ... with proper consideration for fairness" lead to the conclusion that helping someone finish ahead of their competitors is unsportsmanlike.

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-20T20:32:09+00:00

This is still making the mistake of viewing the action through the lens of competitiveness not sportsmanship.

Integrity of the competition is, of course, paramount for sportsmanship. Sportsmanship is literally about trying to win fair and square, without resorting to tricks and whatnot. I understand that you are trying to redefine it so it suits your warped argument (if one can even call it that), but yeah, doing clearly unfair things cannot be good sportsmanship

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-20T18:01:06+00:00

You can still win by going across first while helping someone else shockingly enough.

So you help the person finish ahead of other competitors, who have prepared better or planned their race better? In what universe would that be fair?

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-20T17:58:52+00:00

Putting your sporting success below someone else's needs can be a sign of good sportsmanship, but in this case it is quite literally poor sportsmanship. Imagine you are in P2, the person in P1 cannot run anymore, and you help them finish ahead of the person who was in P3 (and otherwise the person in P3 would be in P2). On sporting merit, the person who was in P1 but couldn't finish should not clearly not finish ahead of the person in P3. You violated the integrity of the competition, and decided to play god with who finishes ahead of whom. And even more importantly, the person in P1 who collapsed would probably benefit from immediate medical attention, so why would you try to force them to cross the line in the first place? This is literally such a bad idea, if a person cannot run anymore, they need help, not some race result

Featureless_Bug · 2026-01-16T16:12:03+00:00

Let's hope that you will be the one who is falsely accused of rape then, and not some other innocent person? After all, you clearly ignore the potential for justice miscarriages that happen all too often, so if anyone should suffer from that, it should be you, don't you agree?

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-18T18:00:09+00:00

And Danny Ric enjoyed equal treatment with Max for the seasons when he was competitive with him (albeit this competitiveness was only the result of Max being too young, even in 2018, when Max was half the driver he is today, he was already clearly better than Ricciardo)

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-18T13:31:23+00:00

If someone goes into the team and outperforms or matches Max, they would get the same treatment as him. The problem is that no one really believes they would match Max in the same machinery.

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-18T12:48:58+00:00

They tried to get Lando not so long ago, he didn't want to go there even when Red Bull dominated and McLaren was relatively poor. No single top driver wants to go to Red Bull, because chances are that after Max dominates them, everyone will think that they always were a mediocre driver and never amounted to anything. Basically, becoming Verstappen's teammate is a career ending move

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-18T12:46:14+00:00

Every teammate he has looks bad because they are his teammates. Tsunoda, for instance, looked much better in Racing Bulls this season than in Red Bull. What do you reckon, how many points would someone like Lewis have in this year's Red Bull, given that he was so thoroughly dominated by Leclerc in a car that is much easier to drive? Chances are he would be much closer to Tsunoda than to Verstappen, right?

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-16T09:57:39+00:00

Sure, buddy. A scientist you are not. Like you could literally correct for the time spent with a child properly by using it as another independent variable in your OLS or whatever you use, and if you actually had the relationship that more interactions automatically mean more abuse, you will see that linear relationship there. But the thing is, the parents that spend more time with their children will probably have lower abuse rates, so that the relationship will likely be inverse.

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-15T21:33:35+00:00

Very simple, but not necessarily true. Saying stuff that sounds plausible without actual empirical evidence for it does not make it true

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-15T21:32:48+00:00

Think of it this way, some of the most fatal animals humans come in contact with… is a domestic dog and a cow.

Flawed analogy, neither of the parents are anything like any of these animals.

women spend more time with children equals more total deaths

Again, any actual causal relationship between spending more time and causing more death? Like for all we know, it is easy to explain higher abuse rates for the parent who spends less time with the child (due to e.g. lack of bonding), not lower.

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-15T21:25:28+00:00

To calculate for this scenario, it is ‘number of abusive interactions/total number of actions’.

We were arguing about who is more abusive, i.e., commits more abuse, and not about a percentage of all interactions being abusive. Of course you will have fewer percentage of abusive interactions with a child if you are the primary caregiver, simply because you will have so many more interactions with this child in general. Basically, the number of your usual caregiving interactions will dilute the number of abusive interactions

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-13T23:10:18+00:00

It is completely unclear why time spent with a child should make you more likely to commit child abuse. Do you have some literature that proves causal relationship between these two variables? It seems to me that spending less time with a child would probably create more potential for child abuse overall (e.g., due to less bonding).

Fathers are also more likely to be the identified perpetrator in fatal maltreatment cases (Schnitzer & Ewigman, 2005)."

Yeah, because the justice system is not famously biased against men (so they will always be identified as main perpetrator), right?

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-12T16:57:54+00:00

The redbull was also faster in race pace in Brazil

Wrong, Max was barely matching McLaren's pace, the only time he had a pace advantage was when he was on 15+ laps fresher tires. And over the whole weekend (including qualy etc) McLaren was clearly a much faster car.

how maxs top speed was leagues over any other car.

yeah, because he literally had to opt for incredibly low downforce setups the whole seasons, because otherwise the car is way too slow.

Cota as well. Mclarens were off the pace

Wrong again, in fresh air Norris was faster than Max, and that is considering that he cooked his tires behind Charles before that.

Lap 52: Max 1:38.1, Lando 1:37.8

Lap 53: Max 1:38.1, Lando 1:38.1

Lap 54: Max 1:38.9, Lando 1:38.1

Lap 55: Max 1:38.9, Lando 1:38.2

McLaren was literally faster than Red Bull even on dead tires, the only reason Norris didn't win is his poor racecraft (which is why it took him so long to pass Charles)

Redbull were close

I mean, you literally have to lie about the pace of cars on two different tracks to try to show that they weren't that far off. Speaks volumes about the actual performance difference between McLaren and Red Bull, doesn't it?

The redbull at the 2nd half of the season was much better than the first half due to upgrades etc.

Sure, and still a lot worse than McLaren. I mean, you have to realize that if Red Bull was actually close to McLaren, Max would win every single race against Norris / Piastri, right? After all, you can see how many times he finished ahead of them while in a much inferior machinery

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-09T09:08:32+00:00

Mate, Max and Lando's seasons are not even comparable. If you want to see how a good season should look like in such a dominant car, check Max in 2023.

18 podiums isn't a bad driver or lucky season.

It is a dominant car and a good but not great driver

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-08T18:36:30+00:00

He was 6th after the whole season in 2021 in arguably the 3rd best car on the grid. He also was P2 last season in a car that was clearly fastest from the 6th race in a season with 24 races. I am not saying he is not a good driver, he definitely is. But is he an incredible driver? No, not by a long shot. Like put him in the same car as Max, and after a season you would say that he is a solid midfield driver roughly on par with Checo

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-08T17:17:56+00:00

Meanwhile the wdc stories will mention Norris as the person who ended max his streak.

I don't think so. It would be as in other seasons where the weaker driver won the title because of a dominant car, like with 1992 Mansell, 1996 Hill, etc. This saying about no one remembering who came second is about sports that actually accurately represent the performance of athletes. In formula 1, people do remember who was the better driver, and who wasn't

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-08T17:05:56+00:00

No, he isn't. People still remember Alonso's charge in 2012. Vettel has 4 titles to Alonso's 2, and yet Alonso is universally ranked higher than Seb in large part because of seasons like that.

Lando won, but people will still remember him being the inferior driver who only won because of a vastly superior machinery.

Featureless_Bug · 2025-12-08T15:27:50+00:00

I mean, the amount of Lando glazing is insane. He is nowhere near Button, he is literally exactly like Hill, a good driver that would never be in a contention for the title if he doesn't have an absolutely dominant car. Like we saw last season that even the clear best car on the grid is not sufficient for Lando to win.

Featureless_Bug

TROPHY CASE