A lot of that nonsense falls under positive rights and the personality types that uphold non-consensual burdens. Negative rights means that charity can take care of many homeless, or that legal immigration is predicated on if individuals are a net gain to the general welfare of existing citizens.
The arguments against many forms of democracy apply when populism devolves to tyrannical mob rule. If it's a bunch of people being NPCs who vote emotionally or tribalistically when their state ballot comes in, all sorts of nasty unintended consequences result from feel good laws. If it's local government, at least some negotiation is going on, and the voting party will revoke such superstitious law if and when resource providers choose more profitable communities, or neighbors leave when they can't access said resource.
My prior argument takes for granted that a functional, somewhat decentralized society will have contracts in place or otherwise be indoctrinated with the importance of vigilantly upholding property rights (within reason, we're talking a person owning a single gas station, not an entire city) and freedom of association. That takes precedence over the regular person's proclivity to economic and sociological illiteracy. The rational person realizes that 5 of them need to stick their necks out to dissuade the mob of 50 idiots, that didnt ration or negogiate in advance, from repercussions if they go ahead with pitchforks. If there are no repercussions, then that means the cyclical theory of civilizational collapse is gradually underway.
Local government, maybe. State government or even county, hell no
Then gas price rises off the chart, because no more is being extracted and produced. If it's only localized breakdown, then wider society should seek feasible punishment or ostracize. Many societal evils stem from deciding homeless, disabled, etc have a positive right to live. Rational people are more incentivized to protect or avenge the shopkeeper if they fear utter isolation of their community from prodctive society.
This is a libertarian position, not a lolbert one. If a community wants guaranteed access to an affordable resource, they should negotiate that in advance. Lolbert is believing in open borders or free speech for those who actively suppress it.
He did mention preferring other platforms a few times, but to have a literal spergout on the way out is indeed weak. Delete your account or keep it, but burn the right bridges in life.
Wanted to see Lethn's comment on this slow cooked situation. Looks like he left and deleted account.
Wonder what the context was back then that would have the NYT publish a conservative article (paid ad?) criticizing it.
Americans have had brief bubbles of freedom. Same applies to Northern Europeans during the Medieval.
I don't know who he is, all I know was that his subreddit was getting updooted by whiggers when he insulted Drake, who I also know almost nothing about. Checks out that he was the bitch that pulled the nigger word stunt.
I ordered the occasional thing off Amazon too. I'll make sure to use google or duckduckgo shopping for the occasional generic product I need.
That makes sense, a majority of pirates are casual or rabid consumers who follow familiar rituals. They aren't interested with in-depth technical understanding, and lack strong social convictions or good taste. Those that do would have to be paid to play today's triple-a slop.
Shifting from the guy's lack of strategic awareness to his all too common sentiment, businesses aren't charities. It's lazy and vindictive to despise an individual, group, or category of people then think they should provide health care, unemployment, other benefits; a form of manufactured cognitive dissonance.
For the sake of completion, I'll reiterate what I presume we all know here, that a person's salary is derived from the value they generate (subjective value, not the labor theory that cultural Marxism has crystalized in our population) and their ability to negotiate (don't support wholesale immigration). Imagine if normie-bait youtubers didn't pander to weak audience sensibilities, and state that the industry never should have never expanded to hire these peasants in the first place.
I've grown to despise discussing these socioeconomic topics with regular people. I usually get a platitude like "politicians and businesses hate workers" which they think are observations which agree with my point. Instead, they are generating cliches to reinforce the status quo.
There's already way less stigma with going minimal or no contact with family than what this article paints compared to a century ago. What I find disturbing is the common theme of halfwit leftists, always oblivious that they are at least as stupid and immoral as their parents.
Biden’s done an incredible job. Accomplished almost the impossible. His stuff on Israel and Ukraine is four-dimensional chess. And what he’s done with the small amount that he has anything to do with the economy
Like GRRM, Penn proves that intelligence oft isn't fungible, and weakly correlates with virtue. The responsible man opposes Biden and Newsom, simple as that.
You might take a qualified IQ test as an adult for curiosity's sake. Start with Mensa's free online test for an idea of the spatial test. The mental-age/chronological-age metric approximates childhood potential but loses accuracy as you reach 18-25 years old.
a 140 IQ person with an LLM can have many times more value output over 100x 120 IQ people with LLMs and 10,000x more output over 100x 100 IQ people with LLMs.
First, 120 is usually just past the pretentious halfwit range. Ignoring machine learning, the only reason this would be true is the difficulty and cost of managing increasing amounts of people. Assuming that there's acceptable leadership, it's better to have 10 people ranging from 140-105 IQ with diverse backgrounds (not the intersectional type) than three 145s of similar background. The Wisdom of Crowds book cites at least 1 study showcasing how important it is for a team strategy to not have blind spots resulting from groupthink.
A rockstar is still capable of unique invention, so 1+ genius shouldn't be discarded if possible.
VIs only benefit is lessening the burden of less virtuous or misaligned individuals on the more productive. The homogeneity they output reminds me of the Irish potato famine, however British oppression plays into it. Certainly not gauranteeing 1 borderline genius to out profit 100 borderline smarts working g together.
A separate study instead used reaction time as a proxy for intelligence, and iirc showed that well-off Victorian English were more intelligent than what we have today. I'd have to hunt down the video I watched or article I read, or better yet find the sourced paper again.
Libertarianism is heterogenous and goes much further back, at least to Bastiat in the early 19th century.
Support abortion on demand and any form of relationship between 'consenting adults'.
The more important part was that such policy should not be decided at the federal govt. level, which is almost what the Trump appointees achieved by repealing that piece of judicial activism. Some libertarians believed in the way the US handled the issue before Roe V. Wade was amended in the early 90s was ideal and consistent with Rand's objectivist philosophy, where sentience and/or heartbeat is the strong determining factor in which an abortion is illegal or immoral. This contrasts with abortion at any time including after birth, or pro-life that begins at conception.
since they believed in abolishing marriage
Yes, government shouldn't be involded with legislating morality, only enforcing contracts.
Whether child labour should be legalized
Such laws were always enacted after child labor was on its way to extinction. I'm pretty sure the more paleolibertarian stance is ensuring economic conditions where a free-associating society will never desire child labor, or would be penalized (i.e. risk ostracization from a polity)
driving licenses
Rigorously defined libertarian-ism is decentralized law. Privatized or public roads aren't a pure, solved issue.I would certainly like more stringent license testing procedure so fellow commuters would drive faster and respond quicker. This is harder under the current system where transporation on govt/crony engineered national highways is an assumed human right.
Another dipshit copypastad gotchya example
Maybe they were booing the premise or presentation of the topic, I'm not sure.
The 'national libertarianism' ... <more short parapgraph> ... it's Hollywood White nationalism.
I believe the earlier commenter's point could be better expressed as 'any functioning governing system requires shared, learned values/virtues that are vigilantly uphold by constituent members'. This isn't unique to libertarianism. It's over-simplified to say 'white-only allows this principle to work', but this heterogeneous libertarian society roughly describes 19th century USA (relative to rest of world), depending on time and place. Moving on, Hoppe makes it very clear that certain behaviors will see a person excluded or otherwise punished by their polity. However, if John McAfee want's to do cocaine on his own independent property, so long as he can upkeep the property and not harm others on his property. Gong in depth with how he could be punished is beyond the scope of this comment, but could include violent retaliation by other polities (who again share common understanding on certain universal rights) or a cessation of trade.
I could have made a post compiling and making a case for the right kind of libertarianism, but I assumed enough of this message board realizes certain observations of libertarians have merit. Working off that assumption, I just felt like venting about a certain example touching two topics (lpusa and brainwashing language technique) of which real-world occurrences really peeve me.
Yup, I've put less than 100 hours of csgo/cs2 in the past 5 years because devs forget adults who don't watch e-sports or buy skins exist. Because of the type of person that buys cheats, a competitive shooter is in a catch-22. Go niche and reduce revenue to attract a self-selecting audience, or go big and get all the human NPCs (who Eternal September organic indie successes) and tech-illiterates that can't bother to install hacks in a VM or seperate machine.
As a side-note, I hate how the delusional fad of tannyism got mixed in with sci-fi inspired transhumanism. With New Age, we got ritualistic women with make-believe magic beads. Right now, we got some severe cognitive dissonance and willful ignorance going on with the physical realities of genital mutilation. We've got to accept it, else be charged with the high treason of bigotry. The real societal upheaval when we have the biomedical technology, or AI+robotics, to transcend modern humanity has no substantial relation to the barbaric, pseudo-scientific fad Western society entertains today. To repeat for emphasis, sci-fi or fairy-tale sex-changes thoroughly alter the body's composition to actually change the person's sex.
Tim Cain certainly was not thinking of Valve when he made that statement about workplace mediocrity.
Ex valve devs have commented on code maintainability and workplace mismanagement. Still, I wouldn't denigrate the technical prowess put into a successful twitch shooter sequel on a custom engine (or if they went the UE/Godot route) as beneath a moderate sized triple-a team. Did the Godot hobbyist come up with a superior smoke implementation? I have my own complaints outside the core gameplay, about the hidden away server browser and retarded official matchmaking systems, so I'm not giving Gaben special treatment, and have held my negative csgo review since trying cs2.
Triple-A gaming is far from the most secretive industry. Think of the secrecy measures put into a federal contractor like Palantir. Or even hardware companies like Micron or AMD. Would be an unnecessarily costly burden that constrains creative output.
"The aphorism "you can't tell a book by its cover" originated in the times when books were sold in plain cardboard covers, to be bound by each purchaser according to his own taste. In those days, you couldn't tell a book by its cover. But publishing has advanced since then: present-day publishers work hard to make the cover something you can tell a book by." - Paul Graham
There's also at least 1 thinkbeforeyousleep video explaining that you should judge people by how they talk and present themselves. It's all signalling theory. Not the same thing as being superficial, perfectly illustrated by how Patrick Bateman only cares about suit labels for self-justifying social status. Richard Feynman is the perfect example, he had a 'low-class' east-coast accent, but was articulate and substantial. He presented himself with the desired effort to attract the audience he wanted.
Or did the video hit a little close to home?
We don't take too kindly to shotgun gossip techniques around here.
Positive right means compelling others, under threat of prison, to provide to the unfortunate, while putting a halo on his own head for voting "compassionately". I would take services offered by government or charity, but never campaign or vote for said government services.