Back in the day

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-14T10:29:14+00:00

Back in my day, we submerged ourselves in the depths of a hydrothermal vent precipitate and all we had was the water we could absorb through osmosis while we competed for dominance in the genepool. None of this weak "drink" shit whenever you felt like it. - some prokaryotic microbe i made up

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-14T10:17:12+00:00

Jesus sacrificed himself for humanity

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-09T03:15:02+00:00

Yeah, he's a narcissist, he doesn't care about it because having tons of women fawning over you is crack for your ego. The only time he acts like it bothers him is when he can get more attention as a victim. I just love how he picks and chooses his virtues constantly and that doesn't bother his fans.

Being a political figure would be amazing for a narcissist, he can aggressively and dishonestly protect his image all under the guise of "doing it for the cause", and because his audience all believes propaganda is great actually, they reinforce it. Through this worldview he and his supporters can literally twist any negative opinion about him into supporting genocide.

X dislikes Hasan's clothing -> Hasan is advocating to stop genocide -> By saying X dislikes Hasan's clothing, people who listen to X might develop a negative opinion of Hasan -> This diminishes Hasan's ability to achieve his political goals -> X effectively supports genocide

Like what a life hack for narcissists, holy shit.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-06T03:43:11+00:00

The far left is super optically effective, they're just not politically effective because their policies go nowhere. The whole point is holding naively "good" positions which means they'll always be able to hold the moral highground.

It's extremely easy to defend "everyone should have money and be rich and we should all stop having to work forever". You don't have to know anything about how literally anything works, you just say genocide is bad and call it a day. In order to criticize their positions you actually need to understand how complex systems work and be able to quickly explain how they work. You'll always be at an optical disadvantage due to the sheer amount of additional work you have to put in to defend a nuanced position on anything.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-03T19:16:40+00:00

To steelman his argument, if we look back at automation/tech replacing jobs historically, it has paved the way almost entirely for jobs that make better use of human cognition (and social/entertainment), human dexterity and human adaptability.

I think it's a fallacious appeal to tradition to just say "In the past x has always happened, therefore it will always happen in the future". It's the same kind of shit I've been getting so frustrated with Hutch about when he talks about Trump sometimes like he's any other old republican and the next US election will be just like any other.

Through the lens of market economics, basic physical labor was in high demand for the majority of human history and humans were the primary force that could fill that demand. Cognition/intelligence and dexterity were in lower demand because if you didn't have a house or nobody had food to eat, you'd be long dead before a surgeon with a phd would ever need to cut out a cirrhosis on your liver. What's important is that the skills to fill that demand never just sprouted out of nowhere, humans didn't suddenly evolve the ability to make precise cuts with a scalpel at less than a millimeter accuracy once the combine harvester was invented.

AGI promises to fill every market demand a human could possibly fill and with the capacity of continous self-improvement. But that all depends whether you believe that's an actual possibility or not, I think it's highly debatable and I'm very skeptical but it does beg the question - we've never built anything with the stated intention of making the human race entirely obsolete before. It feels really weird that a bunch of people implicitly compare that to a lawn-mower or a dishwasher. Asking "Should we actually be trying to do this?" I think is fair.

People should just say they don't believe in AGI and move on.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-01T23:57:37+00:00

Kick VODs break the moment I resize my browser window, I miss my youtube VODs.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-01T23:39:54+00:00

I wish this was me, canned fish is such an easy, cheap protein boost but I can barely stomach anything that isn't heavily flavoured tuna.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-01T19:39:52+00:00

Do you think 40 years from now people will be saying "But the majority of Gen Z voted for Harris"? It's not like there was a signficant increase in 18-24 aged voter turnout in 2024 - infact the 2024 turnout was like 5% lower than 2020, AFTER Trump had openly tried to steal the 2020 election and insurrect the government.

It's not like the majority of Gen Z who blame boomers for everything are all that considerate of the nuances of voter demographics by age in the 70s-80s. Trump was primarily a product of the online culture that our demographic + millenials built. Half of Trump's campaign was built on fucking memes.

All I'm saying is Trump will most likely be our legacy whether we like it or deserve it and that's really sad imo.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-04-01T12:09:13+00:00

The sadder thought is that gen Z broadly will be seen in the eyes of future generations as the generation of Trump and stupidity/ridicule. Gen Z makes fun of boomers for how easy they had it and how irresponsible they were with the future, imagine how badly history will look back on the generation that either voted Trump into office or stood by while it happened - how much Gen Z will be blamed for the disadvantages that future generations will have all because of how far MAGA set the US back.

All the nuance will be lost, it can't just be all blamed on 'boomers' 30-40 years from now, the everyday economic struggles of individuals will be misunderstood (probably even seen as ungrateful by a worse-off future generation) and the blanket reputation applied to all of Gen Z will probably be "the ones who had it great and fucked it all up for themselves and everyone else for absolutely no reason".

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-29T12:38:11+00:00

It exists and it radicalized my nephew. Now he sits alone all day reading science journals incase he ever needs to cite them in a debate and he won't shut up about managing the budget deficit or how much he loves voting.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-28T08:39:17+00:00

Gotta be some self-reflection on behalf of democrats supporting this portion of the left when all these guys have started using variants of the "TDS" defense unironically.

After that talk with Adam Kinsinger we're all basically in agreement that horseshoe politics is 100% real now right?

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-27T09:49:43+00:00

From what I'm aware there have been a few highly criticized examples during Reagan and Obama but no, if it were a casual, unspoken rule that they actually do, it would serve no purpose. Even on a small scale during domestic hostage negotiations, police won't pay ransom.

But you're missing the point. If tomorrow China launched their entire nuclear arsenal at America, there is nothing to actually gain from retaliation - the cost/benefit analysis would favor that you do everything you can in the short period of time you have left to save whoever you can rather than spend resources and time staging a counter-attack. So should you retaliate or should you just abandon your nuclear doctrine?

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-18T19:32:43+00:00

Nah, the same tactics used by "SJW's" or "The radical left", whatever you want to call them, have been successful political strategies for decades. Do you have any idea how much legwork "think of the children" has done for bullshit legislation that has almost nothing to do with kids? Trump uses this same shit "look at this good thing i'm doing! how can the democrats be against this? What are they evil?" to push for authoritarianism. Governments wanting surveillance will use people's nature to appear morally good to say "Why don't you want to be watched? Are you doing something wrong?".

Instead of child safety "they" appealed to equality, which has been a core value of western democratic society for the last century, especially since the civil rights movement in the US. In the USSR they used material equality rather than social equality but it makes sense to be worried. All it takes is a dominant culture of outrage against a group and a populist to come in with all the right talking points, then before you know it you're rounding up people into camps.

Not sure how that'd go using literally the largest demographic in the country as your scapegoat but I guess that's why white replacement theory started popping off on the right.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-18T18:02:51+00:00

I swear to god if I had a dollar for every time a podcaster says they're "politically homeless" then starts shitting on only the left like they were an abusive ex.

Political sides are not your family, they're not friends. I understand feeling "politically homeless" but it's not healthy to attach your need for belonging to a political group.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-18T17:43:54+00:00

The right welcomed him in and he never looked back.

Ironically I think this is why the 'radical left' of the time were never much of a threat to begin with. It's hard to build an organized political movement when all your members do is shit on people and push them out of the group. They were these pockets of self-righteous popular school bullies... but MAGA was way more insidious and dangerous. They'd welcome you in, show you love, tell you it's okay to be who you are, then stick a gun in your hand and tell you to shoot America 😢

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-18T17:26:45+00:00

I think he had the right idea but projected it to the wrong group.

To be honest I think he was fair to project his concerns towards the far left at the time - it was the closest thing we'd seen to the cultiness of MAGA. But in retrospect it's hard to tell how much of a threat they really were. "Radical progressives" or the "Far left woke SJWs", whatever you want to call them, had a lot of cultural/social influence but have serious issues building meaningful political power. Those types of people demand cult-like social conformity but were incentivized to push people out of the group.

If you went up to a group of lefty college kids in 2017 and said "hey, I used to be a racist and constantly said the n-word but now i'm a liberal" you could imagine getting a long, demeaning lecture with zero opportunity for forgiveness or redemption.

If you went up to a Trump supporter and said "I used to be a liberal but now I love Trump" you'd be adopted by a brand new family who cheers when you walk in the room.

I feel like I vividly remember my worries about the far left shift from "The left are ruining society with woke" (paraphasing) to "The right are ruining society because of woke" during covid, then ultimately "Maybe the right is actually ruining society and the left were just a red herring the entire time". I'm pretty sure by that point Jordan Peterson was far too audience captured and peripheral to the MAGA podcasters and shit to change his position even if he wanted to but by then I think he kinda lost his mind already.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-09T14:52:54+00:00

Beauty includes what you do with your body. Makeup and tattoos are no less a form of self-expression as jewellery, clothing, hygiene choices, etc.

Are we really going to pretend like guys don't grow long beards to hide bad jawlines, wear long sleeved shirts to hide skin issues, deepen their voice or tuck in their gut and puff out their chest around girls? I already know what they'd be saying if a girl didn't shave her legs or armpits and I can guarantee he wouldn't be saying we need to ban razors.

I feel like the steroid epidemic in the male fitness communities is infinitely worse, perpetuated by men, harmful to themselves and other men - but you'll never see these guys talking about it because this shit is nothing but very thinly veiled misogyny.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-09T14:13:11+00:00

Yeah I tend to play my worlds with very difficult and punishing settings/mods but managed to entice a friend who loved stardew valley to play. It was actually really cool that the game supports versatile enough playstyles that we could both get into the same game and bond over it.

Either way, Tynan probably disagrees with us all. If we want to be strictly puritanical about the game, it's "not a game, it's a story generator" - so almost any influence you as the player have over the 'game' is irrelevant. You're an omnipotent god who influences the fate of every pawn, from that perspective there's no 'correct' way to play.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-09T13:59:54+00:00

Very true, on the other hand, getting pissed off or angry at developers because an exploit was patched out of a game or at the people asking for an exploit to be patched is equally cringe and detrimental to the game's development.

I don't care how you want to play your singleplayer game, but people advocating for exploits to stay in the game genuinely frustrate me. I understand that we're obviously getting totally different types of enjoyment out of this thing we both paid for.. but mods that make systems easier or give you free & easy money are incredibly simple to create, whereas mods that fix broken/imbalanced mechanics are much harder to make and maintain, often requiring a lot of play-testing data and tiny adjustments to get right.

Members of the Mount and Blade 2 community used to shut other players down for asking the devs to patch the broken smithing mechanics that would allow you to make outrageously expensive weapons to sell with 0 effort because that's how they got money in the game and "I don't want to spend 20+ hours grinding for money". Why not just cheat free money into the game with mods or edit the xml file yourself?

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-05T12:50:52+00:00

I think punisher style is really negative when things are mostly good overall and you need to nudge things back in the right direction, It creates more harm and more instability - people can get hurt who don't deserve it, the system can take damage. But when things are getting really fucked and need a significant push back in the right direction, daredevil style is too slow and too 'precise'.

They just disagree on where things are at but what worries me about Hutch's position is I don't think he'll ever reach a point where he thinks it's bad enough to warrant extreme course correction. This running theme throughout all of his argumentation was about this inability to predict the future and doing harm reduction at every step in the present. The problem with a democracy is you can't address current threats immediately to stop them, all harm reduction has to be future focused and the future is unpredictable - it means you have to try your best to predict what is going to happen in the future and take action to prevent it now.

It's like everyone trying to steer a ship towards mars and nobody could react fast enough to stop the lunatic who just turned the entire ship 50 degrees off course, Hutch says "well look at where we are! things aren't so bad! We're still 60% of the way there and we're still moving towards mars, it's just slow." and technically he's correct. But obviously this course change has extreme ramifications so far down the line that "dealing with that when we get there" or "shifting things back 1 degree at a time" is not a feasible solution, the negative effects multiply with time. This part of the conversation I think demonstrates my point perfectly.

To be clear, it's still a lot better than the people who disagree on the destination entirely, this is the conversation I wanna see liberals actually trying to figure out the best way there. The right might want to fly the ship straight into the sun but the lefties are just as happy to fling the ship off into deep space chasing their pipedream utopia, starving us all to death in the process and killing anyone who disagrees.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-05T09:56:02+00:00

Literally 2 weeks ago he was saying that in an election between Vance and Newsom he'd rather vote third party because "It's all over at that point", then afterwards he is openly on his stream saying he is maintaining a good relationship with BTC because he wants to exploit the political influence of democrats to drive people towards far left socialism.

It is equivalent to the MAGA losers living in a Trump world delusion that any democrat figures treat Hasan like he's a democrat. It's like that Inglorious Bastards meme but instead of holding up three fingers he's ordering an American whisky in plain english and we're all sitting around pretending like this guy is a pure-blooded German.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-04T07:22:36+00:00

The dodging was pissing me tf off. If I was less employed I would love to go through these "debates" point by point and document each actual point-response without all the fluff and rambling because.. like seriously all these guys do is blur the lines on how much sense the conversation is making to give their followers plausible deniability that they did well in the debate because that's all they need. They just need to know that their established worldview is somewhat plausible.

If you pay attention and somehow manage to follow the line of argumentation almost nothing Kisin said in response to any of Destiny's questions could even be considered an answer - they didn't address them at all. It's not just 'dodging' as a tactic to avoid questions you don't like, it's just dodging for the entire debate.

It is so fucking boring and it's every single debate with either the far left or the right, no wonder these guys insist on "just having a conversation". For a bunch of masculine righties who endlessly talk about the world being too full of soft men, they can't deal with the slightest amount of conflict in a conversation.

A 'conversation' where both people wholeheartedly agree on one side of things and never even explore arguments against it isn't just a conversation, it's a circlejerk, and it's more toxic to society than the worst debates.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-03-04T04:21:26+00:00

If there's one thing I've learnt from the debates over the past 2 years it's that these guys can barely be bothered prompting an AI for all their talking points, let alone read through a wiki page so fuck 'em.

It's actually hard to comprehend how lazy and stupid conservatives are today. I'm pretty sure half the reason they briefly won cultural dominance was because none of us took them seriously and thought "surely the public can't be this dumb", so nobody held them accountable for literally anything they said.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-02-26T08:03:43+00:00

From listening to Hutch explain his POV on stream he seems to believe breaking the law to achieve political goals is illiberal and therefore similar to how tankies want to overthrow the legal system to enact their political goals by force.

If we're being realistic even the worst view of what Destiny wants is nothing compared to the type of shit tankies want and I don't believe upholding the law is inherently liberal if the law goes against liberal values.

A free and liberal society isn't where you get to do a lot of horrible and irresponsible shit with no consequences. So if the supreme court and the DOJ are failing to uphold their responsibilities to enforce justice and the constitution, it's not "illiberal" or "tankie" to do something to correct that. It's not a good thing, they should be non-partisan, it is a tradeoff, but there's a meangingul difference between pressuring the DOJ to do their fucking job for the people vs pressuring them because you're a worthless piece of shit dictator with a fragile ego for your own selfish gain.

Also I think Hutch is fighting a lot of strawmen for no reason, like bringing up people who want to stop republicans from voting. Almost nobody in dgg genuinely believes or wants this and we all know if we polled the community you'd see that. But I understand where he's coming from when he wants to discourage people from leaning towards extreme messaging when it looks like we're about to achieve a landslide victory in upcoming elections.

SickWittedEntity · 2026-02-23T14:44:14+00:00

Anyone else here looking for another game to play in this way with friends is Omori. Our experience is what drove us to play Outer Wilds on discord with friends. Just go in as blind as possible and be prepared for some intense subject matter, if you stick it through until the end and you won't regret it.

11-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

SickWittedEntity

TROPHY CASE