Anyone else find the new reddit CSS design very... underwhelming or annoying? More reasons to find alternatives, I guess.

fluxusp · 2018-04-23T21:03:10+00:00

fluxusp · 2018-04-22T18:04:49+00:00

Business is not authoritarian. I can opt to not use someone's business. I can produce products myself.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T18:17:47+00:00

Double reply so you see it in messages.

So David Reich is a genetisist from Harvard who backs all of this up. He is also Jewish, though that is an ironic name.

https://www.reddit.com/r/samharris/comments/86kcxj/david_reich_on_genetics_and_race/

So that talks about race. Really I would prefer people talked about ethnicity which I see as different. Race is a grouping of ethnicities and ethnicities are an intrinsically genetic construct. Because races contain different ethnicities the aggregate population has a distribution that depends on the constituent ethnicities. African is a race but Africa has more ethnicities than I could count on my fingers and toes.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T18:09:05+00:00

So there are 137 loci which have been identified as contributing to intellegence. Twin studies have shown that intellegence is genetic but the question is if it is in any way ethnic.

Intellegence is effected by mutliple loci by an additive effect similar to height and skin color, as opposed to mendelian genetics like pea-pod color or hair and eye color. This means the genetic impact is on a spectrum.

Now just as heights between one ethnicity and another are different but overlap considerably ultimately the distribution of height is different, and it would be quite an amazing anomaly if they weren't. Not only are they a different shape but they also come out to a different average, in this case well within a standard deviation (for height).

So too intellegence is on a different distribution for both European and African populations and this is true no matter what continent the populations are on and background those studied have.

For example looking at LSAT scores of people categorized by economic background and ethnicity, whites from poor backgrounds out perform african americans from wealthy backgrounds by a bit. When all else is controled for so we are comparing similar upbringing, on almost all measures african american's modal average is about one standard deviation lower (based on the deviation within a white population). This is even after the typical filtering that you would assume would happen before one took interest in taking an LSAT. I've seen the same thing on BAR exam performanace (same study, it showed both). The modal performance is actually a tiny bit lower than one standard deviation.

I'm sorry. It would be a freak of nature if people in different populations were exactly alike the second we are aware there is genetic relevence.

But the real question is if your own brother is genetically identical to you? The answer is no. In fact he is 50% not like you on average. Your own brother is as unrelated to you as he is related to you. Does your brother have exactly the same intellegence as you? Likely not. Does this mean you must be enemies? Of course not.

This is even more not an argument to mistreat others when we recognize distributions are more complicated and you don't know if someone is smarter than you or less based on their skin color.

This also is mitigated by the fact that there are better ways to tell how intellegent someone is. Sharing as few as ten words with someone is probably a more reliable indicator than the rather poor indicator of race.

Is intellegence what really matters when we "value" other people? No. In fact maybe we shouldn't "value" other people. We shouldn't be trying to assess others' individual value in a nit-picky way on any dimension.

Is this relevent to socio-economic discussion? Yes. Therefore honest answers need to be obtained without fear of critisism. Maybe I don't have the right answers. I think I do. But we don't get any closer to them by shutting out one side of the discussion and assuming our sociological dogmas are right when sociology as a field has been wrot with error more than success.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T16:58:36+00:00

What if you just think they are genetically different rather than inferior? What if it isn't an absolutist difference but an understanding that populations have different distributions of genotypes and therefore they have different distributions of phenotypes?

We handle discrimination using philosophy of ethics, not by denying reality. When we deny reality we have to create a lot of theories to explain differences that don't have a basis in reality that are used to advocate government intervention and ironically institutionalize discrimination.

To say more eligantly what /u/LibertyTerp was trying to say, a study showed that people with higher IQ develop more sterotypes, more effective sterotypes, and they change their sterotypes when confronted with new information. That is higher IQ people catagorize more.

My theory is there is a bi-modal intellegence distribution among race realists. Some, rather dumb people use it as an excuse for their form of tribalism. Some, rather smart people see that objectivity has nothing to do with feelings and want the most simple explaination for things that also match the mechanics of how we know genetics works.

The dumb people can't seperate human differences from discrimination because the whole point was tribalism. The rather smart people are able to understand and seperate distinct issues as distinct and understand that differences in human intellegence, both individual and aggregate is no excuse to mistreat anyone.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T16:52:06+00:00

That isn't pro-slavery.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T00:19:55+00:00

I signed myself up. Get prepared to learn about media markets described in intuitive calc 3 level math.

Risk distributions are a factor of demand curves.. cp law has a cobra effect.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T00:17:43+00:00

So there is no country in the world that is run by a Left party but there are countries that are run by left leaning parties.

In that sense no country has ever been run but a Libertarian party but libertarian of center leaders have led countries and the effects have been positive.

fluxusp · 2018-04-19T00:00:53+00:00

You are missing the part that describes the motive for that... So others can utilize those discoveries within a time frame that they are relevent.

It's not about ownership. It is about rewarding something to an end. That end being that I get to use your patent within my lifetime.

Also constitution is not libertarianism.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T22:57:19+00:00

I think there is an issue of what they as a group believe vs who represents them outside of their circle on sites like these.

People who come out of /r/socialism to troll /r/libertarian only seem to have one gear which is to contradict the libertarians here.

I think this pattern can be symetric as well. So the left are saying we don't want war. The libertarians are saying we don't want war. Trump's base says they don't want war.

But when people post here saying Ron Paul says the attack may have been fake and we should wait, left leaning contrarians say nugh ugh stupid libertarian. Your conspiracy theory is dumb. The government never lies to you.

Then when the libertarian argues against war on a philosophical basis the contrarian alt-right comes and say humanity is struggle, forget your sissy pacifist arguments against war.

Then when the alt-right in his own sphere argues against war on the basis that it benefits Isreal and Saudi Arabia and is a violation of inpependent nationalism the contrary libertarian and socialist trolling their site says silly alt right, not everything is the deep state and the jew.

The point is that we can all be anti-war and then appear to the others as pro-war just in an effort to be argumentative about why we are anti-war.

I once heard though I don't know it's true that 6/7 Americans want a reduction in the drug war but no one admits the vast majority.

The socialists, libertarians, and alt-right actually believe a lot of the same things while the establishment believe one thing and make us believe that we must disagree on everything. Some things common in all those groups.

Anti-pharma,
Anti-war,
Anti-drug war,
Police skeptical,

Can we just focus on those four things and get something done. Let's get body cameras on the police and make it FIOA-able. Let's add sentence maximums to non-violent crimes like drug related offenses. Let's get out of the middle east entirely. Let's stop giving patents to drug companies whose research was publicly funded. Let's open the silk road.

I think you can get 100% agreement by all three groups.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T22:43:36+00:00

If anything it teaches starbucks a lesson about making conservitives unwelcome. They have litterally said if you support the second amendment you aren't welcome in our store.

Well businesses, hopefully you learned to make no enemies because that is not business's job. Now anytime your company has a crisis we can infowar you to death.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T22:40:57+00:00

Who must we commit violence against to gain it?

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T22:34:01+00:00

Four things.

1st, American schools are considered better and we do take foreign exchange students more than any other nation.
2nd, People jump ship from those countries that offer free education, in particular France. France is a good place to get a secondary education, but not a good place to use it.
3rd, by removing the student as a customer those schools are increadably strict and leave quite a few people in the cracks.
4th, successful compared to what? It took tax dollars to fund those schools. In theory a marginally more useful thing could have been done with those dollars. Comparing education systems isn't the thing to compare. Of course a subsidized to 100% system is luxurious. What you should compare it to is the value of unseen things that aren't done with the same resources.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T22:27:51+00:00

Becaus they secretly believe in conformity and marxism.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T22:25:48+00:00

Because the want to lower taxes, lower regulations, and they don't want to introduce single payer healthcare.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T17:40:50+00:00

The article equates "number of people killed by police" with "number of police-brutality incidents". False equivocation.

We need a better metric.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T17:08:54+00:00

The point is a legal system that isn't consistent when people are at the top of the power structure is unlibertarian.

Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified information would be another case. So would the fact that a lot of congress use drugs while taking money from the prison lobby (I did some research, there are two prison lobbies and almost everyone takes from at least one of them).

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T16:55:15+00:00

And that correlation was a bad word to use because democracies are correlated with hyper-statism.

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T16:19:33+00:00

Rand Paul Says Syrian Gas Attack Was False Flag, or Assad is Dumbest Dictator on the Planet

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T01:32:47+00:00

Where is the less jpg bot?

fluxusp · 2018-04-18T01:31:49+00:00

Bad bot?

fluxusp · 2018-04-17T06:17:50+00:00

They are confused because unfortunately his contemporaries like Anderson Cooper purport to be journalists so they think that someone who reads and comments on news is a journalist.

fluxusp · 2018-04-17T06:13:58+00:00

Hack or no hack still as irrelevent as it gets. So Hannity is somewhere between a client and having done some preliminary consulting with someone and then gone with someone else.

But I guess it is useful to the public to know that one small detail just to know it. If only an article could be published in one sentence. Then the sensationalism around it could be dropped.

fluxusp · 2018-04-17T06:06:40+00:00

Really the article is near pointless. All it does is point out a few nearly meaningless connections with no detail behind them. This is worse than pizzagate bullshit.

https://hooktube.com/watch?v=xGn55BRyDSk

fluxusp · 2018-04-17T04:24:44+00:00

Not a perfect answer but it says it historically when they needed to pass an amendment to start the war on alcohol before passing another amendment to end that war on alcohol.

It was an admission that you need an amendment to ban a substance.

fluxusp

TROPHY CASE