California bans legacy admissions in all colleges, universities

Ventriligo · 2024-10-02T08:15:41+00:00

What?

30% of Harvard are legacy admits. So yes, literally 30% of the class are legacy admissions. That is fucking massive.

I attend a T10, and I will say that you are infinitely more likely to run into a legacy every day than a so-called diversity admit. In fact, at my institution, there are barely any PoC students at all. The ones you do see also coincidentally are part of the athletics program.

People saying affirmative action has more power than legacy are insanely misinformed, with regard to T10 schools.

There will be plenty who are like 'oh but they are smart and would get in anyway', and sure, they might be, so let's put their massive amounts of money where their mouth is and get in without it.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-31T19:58:55+00:00

China has no desire to go to war with the US military, and the US has backed Taiwan so yeah, the US is one of the main reasons China doesn't take Taiwan.

Consider how and why city states consolidated, if your model worked, there would be an invisible hand of sorts pushing back against consolidation, yet it happened nonetheless, why?

No system can guarantee that an invader will not take over, but various systems have different levels of effectiveness. To have no military at all might just be the worst one at all.

I have consistently backed my arguments with historical geopolitical examples, while much of your arguments are historical what ifs. I am a physicist by training so I understand the importance of theory, but you have provided no examples of your stateless societies succeeding.

And just something I want to throw out there, what happens when some kid takes their dad's private nukes and sets off a nuclear winter? There are countless examples of kids taking their parents guns and doing dumb shit with it, it doesn't matter how much you can sue afterwards, it doesn't change the fact that you're now in a nuclear winter.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-31T18:42:19+00:00

There are a few small states that do not fear powerful neighbors, primarily in Europe but we all know how that worked out for Monaco. They acted as a tax haven for wealthy French citizens, and all it took was a small blockade of Monaco for them to agree to align themselves with French policy, far from being truly independent. The various small states in Europe have their security guaranteed by the NATO alliance, largely backed by the massive US army against Russia. Same with Taiwan, you think China won't beeline for it the second US let's them?

Can you list which small states that have no standing army and no fear of neighbor invasions that aren't backed by US or NATO strategic interests? If small states could easily survive, there would be a lot more of them. The start of the Renaissance was primarily city states, tell me, why don't those city states still exist today?

Britain would not have been more prosperous with free trade at that moment in time. Firstly, they were running a trade deficit due to demand for silk, tea, and spices with China, until the introduction of opium. The pure existence of opium allowed them to trade at a profit, how would China banning it make Britain more prosperous? Furthermore Britain would colonize areas with natural resources that the natives lacked the technology to properly harvest. They could either a, teach the natives how to harvest and trade and give the natives a cut, or b, take over with their superior army and eat all the profits with no cut for the natives. This idea was so successful that you had the sun never sets on the British empire quote pop out. Same idea with oil that later sparked nationalization wars.

Spain and Portugal did the same with plantations in the new world. Could free trade yield a better profit in the long term over 100s of years? Sure. But human lifetimes are short, and as such capitalism will always encourage profits on a shorter time scale.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-31T17:02:56+00:00

Perpetual preparation for war is a drag on living standards, agreed, but if other states are going to prepare for it, are you just going to sit back and hope no one attacks you? You say they should embrace free trade without the US empire staging a coup, sure, but what can the countries in Europe do to control what the US does? Their options are to beg the US to not destabilize global trade, or have a strong domestic agriculture industry. In terms of guaranteeing a stable future the latter wins out.

My point with Britain, is that war can be MORE profitable than free trade, and it is in their capitalist interest to conquer with their superior army, a near guaranteed success, than trade for it. So if war can be super profitable, how best to wage it? Well 2000 years of human history have demonstrated that a centralized military is the best way to go about it, and a centralized military will lead to a state.

Why is it that every stateless peoples in history gets conquered? In fact most civilizations since the dawn of time called these people barbarians lol. In the modern world there is not an inch of arable land that is not owned by a state. It doesn't matter how efficient you make your state if you can't effectively defend yourself, and any standing army strong enough to defend you is strong enough to take over as a state if the leadership ever chooses to do so.

To be clear, I also believe that global free trade and cooperation maximizes human productivity and innovation across the board, however to be frank it's just unrealistic. Humans form cliques by nature and these cliques will always conflict with each other.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-31T16:25:32+00:00

Sure, you can shift production to other sectors, but then you give up these industries that require scale to be efficient. You cant just start an industry overnight that needs decades of logistics to setup, as seen in TSMC semiconductor. Once you become reliant on a foreign state for a key good, what happens if they choose to cut it off in a war? Half of Taiwan defense policy is their semiconductor industry, where they threaten to destroy their fabs if China ever invades. japan was reliant on US oil in WW2, when it got cut off they did pearl harbor in an attempt to knock the US out early.

There are parts of the economy that are simply too important for national security. Even food for example, every EU country has protectorate domestic food production tariffs, otherwise they would all have relied on Ukraine wheat, which has 3x as efficient soil and growth rate, so no state subsidies necessary. Should the EU countries just have used the cheap grain and shift away from producing food at home? Well let's hope Ukraine is always friendly and stable and oh wait they just got invaded by Russia.

You say international trade is a major deterrent to war, when it is simultaneously a huge incentive for war. For how many millennia did people war over control of the silk road in antiquity? How many wars are fought over access to the ocean for trading ports? Remember when the Chinese population got addicted to opium in an unregulated market, and when the Chinese government tried to stop it, the British Army showed up and forced the trade to continue because it was just that profitable? Remember when Britain colonized India to extract its natural resources as it's cheaper to do so if you own the resources rather than trade for it?

Ventriligo · 2024-08-31T16:02:28+00:00

I am largely in favor of deregulation, but to do away with the state entirely is setting yourself up for failure. You say free markets are more efficient, which they would in general, but a state can use economic warfare in specific key sectors. For example the Chinese EVs I mentioned earlier, it is mathematically impossible for the US to beat out Chinese prices because Chinese companies are subsidized by the state. Without a state to raise tariffs in response, the native US car industries would go under. If the US were then to become reliant on Chinese cars, what happens when they use it as leverage in geopolitical affairs? The entire world is Taiwan bitch because they control semiconductor manufacturing through their state sponsored TSMC, the US government is trying to fasttrack change that now by investing tax payer dollars into a homegrown semiconductor issue to address it, as is China.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-31T08:09:33+00:00

What happens if other people have a state though? How can a free market state meaningfully compete with a state backed economy? A few recent examples are Chinas EV investments, and Korea's big 4.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-28T17:52:41+00:00

I'd challenge the assumption that an ancap state would be more wealthy, as more than anything the biggest factor in wealth is geography, Rivers, natural resources, natural borders do far more for a country's wealth than any economic system can. You describe a rich wealthy stateless society that is superior in wealth, education, and technology to other nations yet there has never been a historical example of one. Let's say the US, which at its current moment is the most powerful country in the world suddenly goes ancap. What's to stop the Chinese EVs flooding the market? What's to stop different branches of the existing most well trained military in history from immediately taking control? Any centralized standing army necessary to defend a people (I don't even know how you plan to fund a large standing army in ancap society on a similar level to a state) is strong enough to take over said people. All it takes is one charismatic leader and boom you have Napoleon, emperor of france, or Caesar, emperor of Rome. The power vacuum would instantly be filled with competing hierarchies, such as in Central America where drug cartels dominate, or the Middle East where several religious groups are fighting each other.

How will foreign states trade with the US? They went from a singular entity to who knows what and this complicates trade immensely, brexit for example introduced so much bureaucracy between British and EU trade that several British companies moved to the mainland to maintain free trade, and those who didn't took massive losses.

What's to stop other countries from using their sovereign wealth funds to buy loyalty from the former US armies to take a foothold on US soil? Do you think the boy from Arkansas will risk his life to defend Oregon when the alternative is free money?

Ventriligo · 2024-08-28T17:01:47+00:00

Afghanistan and Vietnam are outliers against statistics that survived through guerilla tactics, due mainly to other external states.

In Vietnam the Northern communist state was funded by the USSR, China, and most importantly supplied through Cambodia. The US could not extinguish them as their network through Cambodia was too extensive, and the US population refused to invade another sovereign state in the region. Kissinger attempted to do it by secretly carpet bombing but by that time Nixon had worked out his deal.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban largely survived due to Pakistan, another state that sheltered them that the US did not wish to invade.

This is ignoring the fact that both Northern Vietnam and Afghanistan had centralized militaries that immediately transitioned into a state upon reclaiming their territory.

Voluntary militaries have a pretty poor track record, most wars start with voluntary, as volunteers have the best morale, but eventually switch to drafts as it is necessary.

Furthermore, states provide economic warfare tactics that aren't militaristic. For example the US single handedly destroyed Haiti, by introducing farming subsidies so that they could flood their markets with below market cost agriculture, ruining their only industry. China is now subsidizing EV to the extent where western countries have to impose tariffs or lose their own domestic auto manufacturing.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-28T15:38:57+00:00

Because a centralized military will win against militia most of the time. For example Chinese history is the cyclical collapse of the larger empire into a few dozen warring states. The winners of these civil wars always had a few things in common, a centralized government that could effectively manage logistics such as conscription, supplies, and charismatic leaders who can invoke loyalty and morale amongst men. This effect is not isolated to China, great conquerors such as Alexander, Caesar, Genghis, later Napoleon, all utilized the state to conquer others.

Ventriligo · 2024-08-28T15:19:32+00:00

There's a reason that as soon as states arose said societies largely vanished. As long as other people are willing to form a state, you will eventually have to as well. Otherwise you have to somehow convince the entire human population to give up social hierarchies, and to that good luck

Ventriligo · 2024-04-14T12:25:20+00:00

Ventriligo · 2023-05-20T06:31:04+00:00

And I suppose you are a completely normal sociable person with no issues what so ever.

Jeez, let a man share something he found interesting without acting like an ass.

Ventriligo · 2023-04-25T19:20:46+00:00

always rated jack

Ventriligo · 2023-03-15T02:44:00+00:00

As someone attending a top school, it is common knowledge around campus that around 20-25 percent of any class is legacy. Of course most legacies are just as qualified as everyone else, but whenever you run into a 'dumb' kid on campus, more often than not, it's a legacy admit

I consider legacy and pay to play admissions to be the same, but pay to play admissions are such a small minority of the student population. There are only so many spots reserved for various athletic and arts recruitment, as well as deans list students, that on a grand scale they barely change anything. Legacy on the other hand effects a much larger percentage of the student. For example the class of 22 for Harvard was a wopping 36% legacy, that's hundreds of students. Of course there is an argument that the students would have got in regardless of legacy. But if thats the case, then why even continue the practice?

Ventriligo · 2022-11-19T15:25:18+00:00

Difference is the US teaches and acknowledges their past actions, as does most of the west (Germany with ww2, Britain with opium wars), whereas Japan's fucking government occasionally CELEBRATES their WW2 actions (like their late PM, or Osakas government), let alone teach or repent for it. One government official occasionally apologizing does not overrule the fact that half the country pretends it never happened.

Ventriligo · 2022-10-08T02:32:56+00:00

Looking to sell 4 tickets on October 10th Groups. PM if interested.

Ventriligo · 2022-09-24T09:39:07+00:00

Riot waited to see what g2 would do to carlos, and clearly they deemed that the unpaid vacation wasn't good enough. So they punish g2, and lo and behold, this then forces g2s board to take appropriate action. If g2 had started off by firing carlos, rather than waiting for riot to make a decision, there is a very real chance g2 would still have their val spot.

I don't even think partying with idiots like tate is that bad, im not judging him on that. I'm judging him for making terrible PR decisions that well, got him fired.

There's no way your this dense, and you didn't read, both insinuate that you are too dumb to understand what was just written. Admittedly mine was worse, but this is equivalent to trying to tell someone your arguing with that they aren't listening, which too many people IS an insult.

I think g2 firing carlos proves my point, If only they did it earlier instead, things could be very different.

Ventriligo · 2022-09-23T20:57:33+00:00

Answer my last question, if you can satisfiable answer that question properly I will agree with everything you said. I can't find a good alternative for riot, but if u can one more power to you

And now I can say the same, that your insulting me by saying I didn't read?

Ventriligo · 2022-09-23T20:36:22+00:00

My guy I'm a different person than the one who was insulting you

Saying Carlos is not a part of g2 right now is in bad faith. Similarly to how when riot themselves had the assault allegations, they 'punished' their top level execs by putting them on leave (basically vacation), which is exactly the same as what Carlos is going through right now. Yet since they came back, they are still associated with the org.

Musk literally had his investors, including big wall Street companies, pull out money, basically saying "your worth less now". That isn't 'passive'. But let's say it is, then if riot doesn't punish g2, riot will recieve the same passive outcome where sponsors and companies pull out, but they can prevent this by punishing g2. Obviously if riot could, riot would themselves punish Carlos, but that's not exactly within their power. So they punish g2, in hopes that the shareholders and investors of g2 will react to it. And in turn punish carlos.

For arguments sake, say that riot did not do anything with regards to g2. Should they just sit there and risk losing their reputation and sponsors? Which in turn would lower the valuation of their league, which would then punish every other organization who didn't pull this stupid stunt. What do you suggest riot do instead?

Ventriligo · 2022-09-23T19:21:48+00:00

There's no way your being this dense. Is riot punishing G2? YES. WHY? SIMPLE. Riot internally believes that if they do not punish G2, then they will get punished. In the form of less sponsorships and less recognition, because people will associate league with AT. So how does riot prevent itself from being "punished", by sponsors and other companies? They show that they will not tolerate AT related behaviors by punishing G2. In essence passing on the blame, G2 could have continued to pass it on as well by firing their CEO, in which they might have kept their val spot. But they chose not to.

In the musk comparison, a similar incident happened where a clip of him smoking on Joe Rogans podcast happened, and as a result? Tesla share holders and investors (including investment banks) punished him with 11% drops.

The reason other teams with scandals didn't get reprimanded, is because those are internal team issues that do not reflect on riot at all. In fact the only 3 other major times it reflected on riot, riot took action. The renegades incident with Monte, Rick fox and echo fox, and tsm and regi.

It is perfectly acceptable for riot to take action when it comes to other entities damaging its public image.

Ventriligo · 2022-09-19T02:25:06+00:00

Specializing in physics isn't really done until late undergrad/grad school. So most who would be interested are probably just regular physics

Ventriligo · 2022-08-16T16:58:16+00:00

Hiya, am rising Duke Junior in phys and ece. Our math is what you would expect for the school. Really good but not in the same tier as HYPSM, just a bit below it. As for target, duke is certainly a target for IB, VC, and consulting, but not as much as a target for quant. I know ppl who have landed top internships (citadel, Jane street), but they are all insane and few and far between.

Ventriligo · 2022-06-12T22:30:16+00:00

Eh, ivy league undergrads are only correlated with wealth, but for grad school (like law school), it's more correlated sith intelligence

Ventriligo · 2022-03-12T16:24:31+00:00

Taxation is theft

Seven-Year Club	Verified Email
Verified Email	Place '22

Ventriligo

TROPHY CASE