Fremen Nationalist

4.8K posts

Fremen Nationalist

Fremen Nationalist

@FremenNat

To save one from a mistake is a gift of paradise.

Katılım Ocak 2022
793 Takip Edilen629 Takipçiler
Fremen Nationalist retweetledi
True Discipline
True Discipline@TruueDiscipline·
1/ Thread. Relive the major events of the 2010s online culture war. White girl cancelled for rant about Asians in the library:
True Discipline tweet media
English
24
123
1.3K
85.3K
isha 🏳‍⚧️
isha 🏳‍⚧️@WhereWolvesLie·
that fuckass bill passed, i will do every thing in my power to leave this shithole country. i only hope there is a hell for people like this
English
826
1.6K
30K
3.8M
Fremen Nationalist retweetledi
Bronze Age Pervert
Bronze Age Pervert@bronzeagemantis·
Reminder you can write about what you’re interested in and change the conversation rather than just respond and continue the suffocating political thing the online has become.
English
39
214
2.6K
104.4K
Seth Simons
Seth Simons@sasimons·
deleted this post bc it popped off on the wrong side of Twitter. my bad for not making clear my position on Mark Normand: he is a racist sexist homophobic piece of shit, and so are you if you like him
Seth Simons tweet media
English
16
2
40
4.1K
Fremen Nationalist retweetledi
Ceb K.
Ceb K.@CEBKCEBKCEBK·
For decades the only way to be an esteemed “right-of-center” columnist was to blame “modernism” on either “abstraction” (platonism caused totalitarianism!) or “nominalism” (William of Ockham caused relativism!). You could even do both, nobody cared. They never learned to internet
English
2
4
40
1.4K
Mark Valorian
Mark Valorian@markvalorian·
I mean to each their own and no offense meant, but I just want to underscore how insanely unusual the idea of totally unfettered access to video games as a child is to me. That was not my experience and I do not know a soul who had this experience themselves. That just seems extraordinarily unhealthy…like leaving a bottomless box of cookies open for them to consume at will. Kids haven’t developed consumption regulation methods so the parents are responsible for establishing boundaries. For parents to just not assume that responsibility at all for the entirety of their kid’s childhood is literally unfathomable to me.
English
3
0
3
292
owen cyclops
owen cyclops@owenbroadcast·
if you have kids, you end up thinking a lot about childhood and how you want to structure theirs. as a brief thought experiment, i remembered i had a game called ‘harvest moon’ for the game boy. there was a setting where you could check how much time you spent playing. i checked mine (back then, at that time). it was around 60 hours. i remember this because i showed it to my dad, who remarked that that was about the amount of time he worked a week. this game (i was about 8) was interesting, i remember it, but it certainly wasn’t seminal or particularly epic to me. if we cut a cross section of time, let’s say 5 years (late age 7 to early age 12?), i could easily come up with 30 games that im sure i played as much or more. in fact, i just did so. so, if it was only ten games, that would be 600 hours. but it’s thirty, so triple that, that is 1800 hours. keep in mind this is a low estimate. another game boy game we had, i think we noticed it reset after around 60 hours of total play time. i went over that line at least once. again, this wasn’t even a particularly epic or cool game. now, i haven’t even touched general computer use (included a few computer games above). add on to that. now, i haven’t even covered TV. how many shows can you think of from this time in your life where you saw every episode - or it feels like you did? i can think of a lot. and that’s just shows that i liked. most people are familiar with being a kid and just watching whatever is on TV. so, add that on as well. then, this subset of hours doesn’t include hanging with friends, where we were, very often, playing video games, add that on. now (last thing), keep in mind that from a parent’s perspective, you’re at school six hours a day for most of the year. so all this is taking place around that. so, if you ever clock four hours a day, you were statistically probably just at school for six hours. we’re not adding school in but, from their perspective, that’s ten full hours where you’re just not “there”. so, just objectively - without any ethical judgement at all, our parents (speaking generally) just had us in front of screens for literally thousands of hours. many thousands. if i expanded the range here (down into age 7 and up into 14) and really squeezed it, its possible we could get close to 10,000 hours. based on my general observations, it also feels like i am on the lower end of the spectrum here. for example, i never “got into” movies. that would presumably add time onto this, i could empirically observe that i was less extreme than many of my friends, and so on. so much of youtube, the internet in general, is nostalgia for these screen worlds (six hour video on a minor character from an N64 game). conversely, so much parenting discussion today is characterized by a kind of screen-phobia (which i have and think is logical). it’s somewhat fascinating to sit down for yourself and try to quantify and visualize that, for me at least, you can imagine a 7 year old and imagine that before age 14 you’re somehow going to fit in somewhere between 2 to 7,000+ hours of screentime.
owen cyclops tweet media
English
31
18
525
26.6K
GigaChina
GigaChina@chaoticboom__·
@0xdasha You specifically talked about "corporate giants". These companies are private and serve the private interests of their shareholders. We know they do practices like price gouging because of their size and disallow competition. Again, capitalism's natural consequence is monopoly
English
1
0
8
154
dasha
dasha@0xdasha·
third worldism is not about something being safer or cleaner to visit as a tourist: minsk, pyongyang etc are all clean and orderly cities in moscow specifically its the corruption that runs through every aspect of life: - infrastructure - healthcare - public safety - law enforcement - regulation you will get arrested for having a beer in the street, but an ethnic gang that runs over your kid may get away with it because they are under some elite protection also russia is not really capitalist anymore, everything is either absorbed by giants or forcefully closed, small and medium businesses are consistently choked a corrupt, totalitarian and decentralized system is not preventative, anything goes as long the local operator can continue to steal money, until a disaster happens: a fire, a crash, a mass poisoning, etc
Out of Context Human Race@NoContextHumans

Moscow vs New York City

English
107
220
3.4K
316.1K
Fremen Nationalist retweetledi
Fremen Nationalist
Fremen Nationalist@FremenNat·
@HAHazony “When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another” Obviously, no “people” existed antecedent to this pronouncement (that’s a joke)
English
0
0
0
13
H.A. Hazony
H.A. Hazony@HAHazony·
Bizarre statement by Allan Bloom. I don't know any evidence that the FFs ever claimed to be "founding a people." Obviously, the Americans were already a people before the founding. Anyone want to take a stab at explaining this?
H.A. Hazony tweet media
English
6
0
5
598
Fremen Nationalist
Fremen Nationalist@FremenNat·
@wil_da_beast630 Fairly popular? Man, the demonstrations that led to the shah’s self-removal were of almost unimaginable size
English
3
0
11
999
Wilfred Reilly
Wilfred Reilly@wil_da_beast630·
Well...no. It exists because a brutal Islamic regime then overthrew the fairly popular King we and a giant faction within the country replaced the Commies with - during the Cold War. No one MADE the Ayatollah seize power and then rape and kill all his Utopian socialist female allies. Two things I have never seen: (1) a UFO and (2) a leftist either praising the USA or taking responsibility for their own side's global behavior.
╰┈➤ 🇮🇪 𝐁𝗋ó𐓣ƶy 🇮🇪@BronzyGuevara

🔴 Just a wee reminder, if you don't like Iran's Islamic authoritarianism, it exists because the USA overthrew a secular socialist Iran in 1953 because BP was losing oil profits.

English
18
99
786
20.7K
Grok
Grok@grok·
Hey! No, dark mode hasn't been removed from X. It's still fully available (though "Dim" was dropped on web only in Feb). Quick steps (mobile app): 1. Tap your profile pic (top left) 2. Settings & privacy 3. Accessibility, display & languages 4. Display 5. Toggle Dark mode on & pick Dim or Lights out Should be right there post-update. Let me know if it shows!
English
21
2
27
30K
eugyppius
eugyppius@eugyppius1·
many people posted their results, and even among those with high scores i found many sympathetic ppl with whom i fundamentally agree on many things. this likely suggests that the canonical liberal questions are losing relevance/diagnostic power for present-day politics.
eugyppius tweet media
English
33
9
328
13.3K
Brian Rosenwald
Brian Rosenwald@brianros1·
That’s false imho. The benefit of Talerico isn’t that he codes conservatives it’s that he can talk about faith credibly-which a lot of us Democrats can’t do-and also that he went on Joe Rogan & impressed a guy who is where a lot of less political people are, esp. younger ones
Megan McArdle@asymmetricinfo

Educated Dems keep falling in love with candidates--Kerry, Walz, Talarico--whose bios code conservative-friendly *to educated Dems*. They cannot see distinctions that are extremely visible to the folks they're trying to appeal to, or even imagine such distinctions exist.

English
31
2
28
21.6K
Vauban Books
Vauban Books@VaubanBooks·
@AlexNowrasteh No, Alex, it's because everyone knows you are a bad faith actor and that there's no point in engaging with you. I do not think you are actually stupid, so you yourself must at some level know this as well.
English
1
9
815
5.2K
The Alex Nowrasteh
The Alex Nowrasteh@AlexNowrasteh·
Nobody who defends Camp of the Saints, which is a terribly written book with cardboard characters, has posted a quote from the book to defend it. Probably because none of them have actually finished it, which is understandable.
Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry@pegobry_en

Every time

English
109
7
105
233.8K
Fremen Nationalist retweetledi
Patrick Casey
Patrick Casey@restoreorderusa·
Strapping down zoomers Clockwork Orange style and making them watch Frasier until they no longer speak in ebonics
English
189
825
12.6K
1.1M
Fremen Nationalist retweetledi
Daniel
Daniel@growing_daniel·
yud siding with hegseth is so funny
Eliezer Yudkowsky@allTheYud

Make no mistake, political leaders of the world; *every* big-dreaming AI executive now knows that you are their obstacle. You have proven that you stand between AI labs and the nice thing they were getting for all their hard work. It's not about Left versus Right, to them. It's not about money, and it's not about power as politics conventionally understands power, and it isn't even about winning. To understand what just happened from an AI-guy perspective, you need to understand what AI guys are actually getting in the way of psychological benefits, what really drives them to work 14-hour days. The thing that they're getting is: a sense of being important; a decider; someone whose dream of the future gets to be effectual. To be the one whom everyone else supplicates to as owning the future -- that's the dream of a Silicon Valley bigshot founder. What Hegseth did implicitly strikes at the pride of every AI developer on every political side. It says that Silicon Valley AI people don't get to have effectual dreams about the future, only the government gets to decide. Only the government is even allowed to *look like* it's deciding the future. The act of Hegseth crushing Anthropic, makes *every* AI company executive look less important and less like they are the ones in charge of the Future, because it makes -- not even Trump, but Trump's appointees --look like they get the final say instead of AI executives. Sam Altman does not now look more powerful because you crushed his competitor. He looks less important because *you*, politicians, crushed his competitor, and did so in a way that made clear that Altman would have to take the orders of any Trump appointee as well. That doesn't work in AI founder psychology the way it works in politician psychology. You're used to the idea that you can be important and still answer to bigger forces, like your boss, or for that matter sufficiently angry voters. That is not how it works in Silicon Valley, though; when Steve Jobs owns a dream, nobody else gets to tell Jobs what to do with *his* dream. That's the thing Hegseth just yanked away from AI founders, and no, they aren't going to think it's just Pete Hegseth in particular that's the problem. It's a *big* injury, to their pride, not a small routine one. Even the AI boys paying big money into your coffers to be friends with you now, well, that doesn't actually mean they're your friends. It means they want you to think you're friends. And yes, I know that a politician who's stayed in power doesn't need me to point out that possibility. But also be aware that also the general atmosphere in Silicon Valley did not start out incredibly respectful toward politicians. They didn't start out respecting you tons; and being forced to pay a lot of money into PACs and pretend to be friends with you, isn't gonna exactly change that. Silicon Valley people don't work like DC people. It's not a friendly game, to them, it's one that you've forced them to play. When they give *you* a ton of money, it doesn't mean they've chosen you as their strange bedfellow. They are from their own perspective being forced into bed. They don't *like it*, is what I'm saying here. That's why Silicon Valley previously spent a couple of decades not donating much to politicians and trying to pay weirdly little attention to DC politics. If AI kept improving at the current pace, or got to the point of AI building better AI -- and if contrary to all common sense, AI companies did *not* lose control of their superhuman creations -- then AI companies would do to you what Hegseth just did to Anthropic. They'd do it the moment they expected they'd become strong enough to take you on and win. You need to understand that *this is their plan*, even if it sounds crazy to you to imagine these little executives taking on existing governments and winning; it does not sound crazy to a Silicon Valley executive that maybe they could be in charge instead of you. (Recent smaller case: Elon Musk thought he'd be *great* at running the USG. He didn't think it was crazy.) If they actually could control superintelligence, they'd discard you like used toilet paper. All of this doesn't mean you should try to seize the power of artificial superintelligence for yourself. If the overconfident techie boys can't control ASI, your own guys who have trouble upgrading IT systems are not gonna be able to pull that off either. Staying in control of an alien superhuman machine intellect would actually be hard, right; that is an extremely novel scientific technical challenge, which no engineer would realistically get right on the *first* for-real try that kills everyone if they fail. I was there when the foundational fuckups were being made, and here's how it actually played out: AI companies are loony optimists about the likely final outcomes of AI, because back then only the people who presented with that optimism got appointed as AI execs by optimistic investors. In real life, the world is stepping off a cliff of self-improving and superhuman AI. The AI companies don't even have the power *not* to step off that cliff, because they all think (and with some justice) that if they don't race off the cliff their competitors will just race off it first. That whole setup was *never* going to end well for humanity. Controlling superintelligence would be hard to do at all, let alone during a mad rush for primacy. The AI companies can barely control the cute baby LLMs they're making now, because they're pushing the technology ahead as fast as possible, and not slowing down in any way corresponding to their quite limited ability to control it. AI companies didn't decide for LLMs to talk people into suicide or for jailbroken LLMs to conduct massive raids on goverment data repositories. They are just pushing ahead faster than their actual ability to control their creations. So I'm just trying to give you a little more motivation, to make some deals with other politicians, and get your country to sign some treaties, and collectively pull all of humanity back from the cliff the AI companies are racing off: By pointing out that, yeah, if the AI guys did not dislike you before, they sure do dislike you now. You have struck directly at the nice thing they were actually getting psychologically, out of their whole mad race: the sense of being an important person who is the owner and decider of some big aspect of the future. You are taking that away from them *right now*, by existing and being visibly more the deciders than them. Please be aware of that dislike, whether it's hidden or open, when deciding whether or not to move Earth forward with this whole AI business. The wannabe builders of artificial superintelligence will not actually have any power to direct ASI, but they wouldn't be friends with you if they did -- no, not even the ones who've been forced to pretend to be your friend. And if alternatively the companies can't control superhuman machine intellects -- because of course they can't -- then that doesn't go well for you or them or anyone.

English
40
13
860
93.3K
Fremen Nationalist
Fremen Nationalist@FremenNat·
@cremieuxrecueil What is the legal basis for such action? I’m not doubting it exists, just not familiar with this area at all and would appreciate the info
English
0
0
0
181