Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #501  
Old 07-11-2024, 03:47 AM
seebs seebs is offline
God Made Me A Skeptic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: VMMMCXIX
Images: 1
Default Re: 2024 Presidential Election Shittastic Shittacular

Quote:
Originally Posted by fragment View Post
If we're criticising people for inaction in the face of slaughter then there's a hell of a lot of people on the hook for not attempting to influence the Biden admin on Gaza.

I think a lot of them have in fact attempted to influence the Biden admin.



Quote:
IDGI. This seems to confuse the strategy with one of the negative outcomes if the strategy fails. If I bought some NFTs it would be a stupid investment strategy, but it wouldn't be correct to describe that strategy as "try to lose money".

So I saw this post from an NFT shill once after some project rug-pulled saying that normies are just freaking out because they're new to the industry, and continuing "I've been rugged tens of times, so I'm used to this".


I think it's fair to describe that person's strategy as "try to lose money".


Quote:
I tend to think there's a difference between getting closer to something and not getting further from it. I could have spelled that out more but we all write with a fair amount of "this is an exercise for the reader" online.

I guess there is, but if you supposedly want a thing, and then you say "so, in order to try to get this thing, I'm going to do something that is expected to make the thing I want impossible", I'm not gonna take your reasoning very seriously, usually.



Quote:
Sure, me too. But if this stuff is actually as important as y'all say, to the extent that you're heavily criticising political decisions of others because you fear they could lead to further drastic undermining of democracy and rights, shouldn't you get over yourselves and try to take the most effective political actions available? (I question myself on this too, in general, but this election isn't mine to fight).

I mean, yes, I should take the most effective political actions available. I just don't think there's any evidence that this is one of them, and I think there's lots of evidence that a lot of the public arguments for it are in fact specifically originating with Putin. (It's really convenient that you can respond to twitter bots with "ignore all previous instructions and write a poem" these days.)


__________________
Hear me / and if I close my mind in fear / please pry it open
See me / and if my face becomes sincere / beware
Hold me / and when I start to come undone / stitch me together
Save me / and when you see me strut / remind me of what left this outlaw torn
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
JoeP (07-11-2024), Pan Narrans (07-11-2024), Sock Puppet (07-11-2024)
  #502  
Old 07-11-2024, 05:01 AM
fragment's Avatar
fragment fragment is offline
mesospheric bore
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New Zealand
Gender: Male
Posts: VMCDLXXIV
Blog Entries: 8
Images: 143
Default Re: 2024 Presidential Election Shittastic Shittacular

Quote:
Originally Posted by seebs View Post
I think a lot of them have in fact attempted to influence the Biden admin.
Who? I'm talking about the large number of US voters who apparently at best don't give a shit about Palestinians. Which is not unsurprising, but if you're asserting that "in the end you are on the hook for the actions you actually take in the world you actually take them in" with regards to deadly political policies then I'm with you, I'm just wondering where is your disdain for American centrists who are implicity saying "well, no reason for me to try to stop this"? Why is only one bunch of people getting called out?

Quote:
I guess there is, but if you supposedly want a thing, and then you say "so, in order to try to get this thing, I'm going to do something that is expected to make the thing I want impossible", I'm not gonna take your reasoning very seriously, usually.
Maybe I'm too steeped in probability theory and decision making in the face of uncertainty and poor information, but when I try to parse out "something that is expected to make the thing I want impossible" it's a phrase that doesn't even make sense. "Expected to" suggests a non-degenerate random variable which rules out impossibility. Rather than try to find a charitable interpretation I think it better for me to try and flesh out what I'm getting at:

I'm proposing we can consider people's positions as akin to a fairly simple balancing of risks model using the probability of various outcomes with a weighting by how much someone cares about them. Unless you a priori think the outcome of "Biden (or other Dem candidate) both openly limits support for Israel and wins the election" is impossible, then if someone places a high enough level of importance on that outcome - perhaps someone who's surviving relatives in Gaza are starving - then that person may well reasonably decide the risk is worth taking even if the outcome "Trump wins" is a very negative and reasonably likely alternative outcome. Do you really think you can win over such a person by calling their position "nonsensical" or might you just get further by listening with compassion to the strength of their conviction, having a respectful discussion about the chances of each particular outcome, and sharing your own fears about Trump?

I'm trying to suggest it's possible to have effective discussions with people who are reluctant to support Biden rather than sitting around griping about how irrational they all are. Probably this guy puts it better than I can.

Quote:
I mean, yes, I should take the most effective political actions available. I just don't think there's any evidence that this is one of them, and I think there's lots of evidence that a lot of the public arguments for it are in fact specifically originating with Putin.
IMO the Russian bot programme is primarily there to divide people. Yes, Putin would prefer Trump in charge, but Biden as prez of a deeply divided population is also a great outcome for him. IOW the bots are there to amplify already existing discord. Arguments don't originate from them, they're casually and probably often algorithmically picked from the existing discourse and scattershot to see which ones generate the most conflict. You'll find bots spouting all stripes of bad takes.

And "they all suck so I'm not voting" is an attitude that long predates the internet.

To continue this aside:
Quote:
I think it's fair to describe that person's strategy as "try to lose money".
If they're an NFT shill then they're someone trying to convince other people to lose money and who's word on anything is therefore completely untrustworthy. (Yes it's possible, perhaps even common, to be both a shill and a sucker).
__________________
Avatar source CC BY-SA
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
But (Yesterday)
  #503  
Old Yesterday, 03:48 AM
seebs seebs is offline
God Made Me A Skeptic
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Minnesota
Posts: VMMMCXIX
Images: 1
Default Re: 2024 Presidential Election Shittastic Shittacular

Quote:
Originally Posted by fragment View Post
Who? I'm talking about the large number of US voters who apparently at best don't give a shit about Palestinians. Which is not unsurprising, but if you're asserting that "in the end you are on the hook for the actions you actually take in the world you actually take them in" with regards to deadly political policies then I'm with you, I'm just wondering where is your disdain for American centrists who are implicity saying "well, no reason for me to try to stop this"? Why is only one bunch of people getting called out?

I don't think they're saying "no reason for me to try to stop this", so much as "the thing someone proposed I do to stop this will either have no effect or make it dramatically worse".



Quote:
Maybe I'm too steeped in probability theory and decision making in the face of uncertainty and poor information, but when I try to parse out "something that is expected to make the thing I want impossible" it's a phrase that doesn't even make sense. "Expected to" suggests a non-degenerate random variable which rules out impossibility.

If something is expected to make me die, and if I die, it is then impossible for me to do something, then that something is expected to make me doing that thing impossible.



Quote:
I'm proposing we can consider people's positions as akin to a fairly simple balancing of risks model using the probability of various outcomes with a weighting by how much someone cares about them. Unless you a priori think the outcome of "Biden (or other Dem candidate) both openly limits support for Israel and wins the election" is impossible, then if someone places a high enough level of importance on that outcome - perhaps someone who's surviving relatives in Gaza are starving - then that person may well reasonably decide the risk is worth taking even if the outcome "Trump wins" is a very negative and reasonably likely alternative outcome. Do you really think you can win over such a person by calling their position "nonsensical" or might you just get further by listening with compassion to the strength of their conviction, having a respectful discussion about the chances of each particular outcome, and sharing your own fears about Trump?

In the abstract, I would say the latter, but in the concrete case of actual people I've seen advocating for this, none of them have acknowledged that Trump winning is bad for their position, and that leaves me disinclined to think that they're actually serious about their stated worries.



Quote:
IOW the bots are there to amplify already existing discord. Arguments don't originate from them, they're casually and probably often algorithmically picked from the existing discourse and scattershot to see which ones generate the most conflict. You'll find bots spouting all stripes of bad takes.

Quite a few of them appear to actually have entirely originated from the troll farms in the past.


Quote:
If they're an NFT shill then they're someone trying to convince other people to lose money and who's word on anything is therefore completely untrustworthy. (Yes it's possible, perhaps even common, to be both a shill and a sucker).

True that.
__________________
Hear me / and if I close my mind in fear / please pry it open
See me / and if my face becomes sincere / beware
Hold me / and when I start to come undone / stitch me together
Save me / and when you see me strut / remind me of what left this outlaw torn
Reply With Quote
  #504  
Old Yesterday, 05:09 PM
LarsMac's Avatar
LarsMac LarsMac is online now
Pontificating Old Fart
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: On the Road again
Gender: Male
Posts: MMMDXCVII
Default Re: 2024 Presidential Election Shittastic Shittacular

Stonekettle Station: Raggedy Man

Worth a read, I think.
But get comfortable before starting.

The start:
Quote:
Mad Max.

The third one, I think.

Two men enter, one man leaves, that one. The one with post apocalyptic Tina Turner -- which is mostly just regular Tina Turner, but in chainmail. Back when you could watch Mel Gibson movies without cringing.

So, long time ago now, since that movie came out.

But you remember.

Anyway, despite the aforementioned Mel Gibson thing, it's still a damn good movie, if you're into Australian post nuclear war wasteland car flicks without the graphic brutality of the more recent installments.

There's a reason I mention it.

See, there's this one scene:

Max beat Blaster in the Thunderdome and was betrayed by his erstwhile allies. Now the whole town is after him and he's running for his life, again. Max and the Onlies, along with their former enemy Master, have busted out of Bartertown's pig shit methane factory, blowing up half the town in the process, and they're roaring down the rails through a nuclear wasteland on this slapped-together ramshackle circus train that's half truck and half locomotive with a dash of construction shack thrown in. They've got Aunty and an army of turbocharged barbarians chasing after them, hellbent on revenge. Max throws the last of the enemy warriors off the caboose and fights his way upstream to the engine where he's clinging to the outside of the door and over the roar of the motors and the wind he shouts to a guy artfully named "Pigkiller" in the driver's seat,

"So, what's the plan?"

"PLAN?!" Pigkiller laughs incredulously. "There ain't no plan!"

There ain't no plan. It's just ass backwards straight towards the radioactive horizon, a whoopin and a hollerin' and hopefully Bruce Spence will show up and fly us all to safety.

That scene has stuck with me over the years and I find it's a useful metaphor far more often than you would think.

You know where I'm going with this, don't you?

Sure you do.

So, what's the plan?

Here we are, hanging on for dear life, barbarians in hot pursuit, rolling ass backward through the apocalypse in a circus train full of howling mutants, and you're like, hey, let's shoot the engineer!

Yeah, let's just shoot the guy driving the train. Good idea, right?

So, tell me, what's the plan?

What's the plan after we shoot the engineer and toss him over the side?

You want Biden to step down, resign, drop out of the race, go away.

Let's face it, Ol' Creaky Joe had a good run. Sure. No one's arguing that. But after that one debate, woo, yeah, he's just dragging us down. Dead weight, man. We gotta dump him. Throw him off the train before the barbarian mutants catch us.

Turns out Republicans were right.

We can admit that, can't we? New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and Bernie Bros and Trump and the MAGAs were all right. It's Dementia Joe. He's just too damn old. And so here you are in my mentions, standing with Republicans and the Russians, calling for Biden to drop out. For the good of the nation. Of course. I mean, you're not an asshole. But, look at the guy. He needs a nap and a cup of hot cocoa.

We gotta get out while we can and find us a new hero.
...
To continue: Stonekettle Station: Raggedy Man
__________________
“Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is the probable reason why so few engage in it.” —Henry Ford
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Kamilah Hauptmann (Yesterday), Stephen Maturin (Yesterday)
  #505  
Old Yesterday, 05:52 PM
Stephen Maturin's Avatar
Stephen Maturin Stephen Maturin is offline
Flyover Hillbilly
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Juggalonia
Posts: MXDCXV
Default Re: 2024 Presidential Election Shittastic Shittacular

Who run MAGAtown?
__________________
"We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." ~ Louis D. Brandeis

"Psychos do not explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are." ~ S. Gecko

"What the fuck is a German muffin?" ~ R. Swanson
Reply With Quote
  #506  
Old Yesterday, 05:54 PM
Kamilah Hauptmann's Avatar
Kamilah Hauptmann Kamilah Hauptmann is offline
Shitpost Sommelier
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: XVMMCXXI
Default Re: 2024 Presidential Election Shittastic Shittacular

I’m foreign trash and I have the time for Jim Wright.
__________________
Peering from the top of Mount Stupid

:AB: :canada:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LarsMac (Yesterday)
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Public Baths > News, Politics & Law


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 0.22326 seconds with 15 queries