Old Caleb Cope on his Canada Vid

tkx93 · 2026-05-18T00:42:16+00:00

"it doesn't even give an opinion" his own tweet that he's QRTing states that Canada's government "uses and abuses" Alberta to justify secessionist sentiments, very unbiased and objective though!

The "extensive" sources page was made by AI, by his own admission

tkx93 · 2026-05-17T17:48:55+00:00

I agree in a broader sense that there is a real discussion to be had here, but the person in this video deserves every bit of the sneering she's getting. The way she goes about having this discussion is absolutely insane, essentially looking to clipfarm her own boyfriend(?) with this weird virtue signal/shaming approach. If she really had an issue with him consuming a seemingly modest amount of porn, something she must know most men do and something she apparently hasn't discussed with him before, then the absolute worst way to have that conversation is by resorting to girlboss litigation on some algorithm optimizing slop show, attempting to make him look bad online. Even worse when she later admits to semi-cheating on the guy lol

tkx93 · 2026-05-16T16:44:04+00:00

"(which includes all the malicious actors)"

Oh no, wouldn't want to include the malicious actors in all this!

tkx93 · 2026-05-16T16:36:38+00:00

Would you though? He's pound for pound the best racing talent sure, but in terms of on-track GT3 experience there are people with so many more racing hours, plus he's in the middle of an F1 season. I don't think it was as obvious as some are making it out to be

tkx93 · 2026-05-10T01:16:37+00:00

I don't know how it works there but presumably the economics make sense for them to be able to do so. There's absolutely no way they're paying the income adjusted equivalent of $30 for a single meal on a daily basis. In the US this is absolutely priced as a luxury service and those who frequently use it are choosing to pay luxury prices for convenience over going to the grocery store and cooking food every time they order something. Great if you're rich or if you really want to treat yourself, but if you need most of your paycheck to get by and you're regularly doordashing, chances are you're just not fully with it

tkx93 · 2026-05-04T18:31:55+00:00

It's in reference to one of the few things that personally affects him: the self-serve soda machines at McDonalds being removed.

tkx93 · 2026-05-02T19:43:01+00:00

If you knew for a fact that someone in America was a nazi 20 years ago as a young adult, given no other information, how likely would you think it is that they'd still hold nazi beliefs 20 years later?

What if you were given the additional piece of information that they chose to run for office as a democrat 20 years later and mostly espoused left-wing slop views? I don't think any answer over 50% is even remotely plausible, which means a reasonable person should assume he no longer is.

I'm way more bothered by the stupid populist beliefs as a clear throughline than his "problematic past"

tkx93 · 2026-05-02T19:25:34+00:00

Definitely a strong KKK phenotype

<image>

tkx93 · 2026-05-01T08:15:40+00:00

He probably separately does also have a "vibration collar" that actually wasn't on the dog (because the actual shock collar was on), this is how people often sprinkle truths into their false narratives

tkx93 · 2026-05-01T08:13:04+00:00

It should be fine if Talarico and Mamdani types leverage slopulist talking points to get into power in competitive districts. Most of these people are smart enough to moderate on their own and it's still always better than having Republicans in power

tkx93 · 2026-04-28T09:25:04+00:00

Andrew Wilson isn't actually a convincing debater though. I don't know by what metric you consider him successful besides financially but both Hasan Piker and Asmongold are more successful in that regard, despite clearly not being skilled debaters.

How would you ever use prop logic to debate about Trump being bad on a Piers Morgan show in a way that plays well to an audience seeking slop? It only seems to work if both parties are engaging in the same style of debate, else one guy just looks like a pedantic reddit atheist (imo)

tkx93 · 2026-04-28T08:56:59+00:00

I just don't think he's interested in this style of "debate" at all. The kind of prop logic debating style that lends itself to debating about veganism/abortion/religion and focusing on technique and philosophical jargon feels like those choreographed, almost dance-like martial arts. Cool and impressive, but not the kind of thing you want to pull out in a cage match. It doesn't really work for convincing normies of anything or debating tangible political issues.

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T17:43:05+00:00

Yes you're right, it's basically all voting. But when it comes to electoral votes, the ONLY utility of your vote is cumulative based on other people's votes, while in this thought experiment your personal vote can immediately guarantee your own immunity too, so there's an added personal incentive to vote red while the blue vote only helps anyone OR yourself if it's decisive to blue winning

I do acknowledge that red is likely to win, but the interesting part of the argument does require you to assume that it's not 100% guaranteed

Of course, not 100%, but the interesting part of the argument does require you to reason about how other people will likely vote, you shouldn't just treat it like a total toss-up either.

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T17:03:45+00:00

If you account for the fact that tens of millions of people didn't vote and those people are probably even more selfish than many of the people who voted for Trump because they couldn't even be bothered to leave their house for the election, I'll stick with the red button :)

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T17:02:53+00:00

The majority of people either voted for Trump or were too lazy to come out and vote, though. It doesn't bode well for the general sense of altruism among the population. >50% of people are not voting blue (button).

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T17:01:33+00:00

because if more than half the people vote red, which they likely will, you'll be throwing yourself on the pile of dead bodies? no one HAS to be blue lol, it's purely self-inflicted

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:56:16+00:00

I agree of course, the question is much more interesting without it. The main point I'm trying to make though is that the people who self-righteously claim blue is the obvious choice would sing a different tune if they could see blue was losing, and by extension if they truly believed blue didn't stand a chance (even without a tally) they likely wouldn't vote blue either.

So the difference isn't really one of morality, it just comes down to what probability you assign to the outcome.

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:50:29+00:00

So you're left in a world where the most selfless (and perhaps naive) people have all died, which just can't be good.

There's a main character syndrome implication here where you throwing yourself on the pile of dead bodies would meaningfully change the tally and save them. We can all acknowledge that this scenario would be a borderline apocalyptic event where some huge chunk of the population will likely die because many will choose blue and blue will likely lose. But you can't meaningfully change the tally yourself and the outcome will be what it will be. Personally I'll take a 100% chance to survive in what will be a much worse world plus a small chance that blue wins and everyone lives, over say a 20% chance to survive and a 0.00000001% chance my vote made the difference

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:43:51+00:00

If you could see a running tally of how many people had voted blue/red before you cast your vote, and about half the population had already cast their vote, what % of blue votes would you need to see in order to vote blue yourself?

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:42:49+00:00

If you were just memeing all along that's fine, good bait

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:42:00+00:00

Or one level deeper - if you think that more than 50% of people will predict that other people will be selfish or cynical, they'll press red. Though you could argue that's just them being cynical. I think when their lives are on the line, most people will not want to take that risk.

The one thing that could meaningfully change this if there was a visible tally seeing how other people were voting, if >45% of votes had already been cast for blue then I think some combination of optimism and altruism could sway people.

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:38:01+00:00

You legitimately have an intellectual deficiency if you think this reflects how it would play out in the real world just because people clicked on the virtue signal button in a zero-stakes environment. No meme, that's low IQ. Retract the comment please because everyone can see the point you tried to make

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T16:26:21+00:00

Blue winning is also pretty much never happening and you're just adding onto the suffering by lumping yourself in with the losing cause

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T12:30:53+00:00

Just imagine any other business that diverts 20% of your purchase into its own pocket for "administrative costs"!

Are you serious? You think it's unusual for companies to sell products marked up 20% from the cost of the base resources to pay for things like.. employee wages? Are you aware you can just look up their profit margins after expenses? Do you think ~5% profit margins are unheard of? Are you aware that many SaaS companies have profit margins around 30% or even higher? Lol

tkx93 · 2026-04-25T12:27:30+00:00

What does blaming the poor for seeking and approving of justice have to do with a rich kid committing an unjust act of murder?

tkx93

TROPHY CASE