• 6 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle





  • I always found it fascinating how the law is such a unique and cloistered ecosystem.

    The sciences and arts encourage self-education and self-discovery. Constructive disruption is admired and moves the fields forward. Those who make it accessible and reachable are celebrated.

    I love your phrasing “law-priests”. The law is the religion in a secular state. It has all the same trappings:

    • The ranks and orders of clergy, where only they are fit to interpret the sacred scripts, with strong bias and penalty for trying to do so as an uneducated layman
    • Adherence to doctrine and continuity (precedent) even as the environment it was established in no longer exists
    • The constant urge to obfuscate and revel in exclusive language, to continue the air of mystery and impermeability.
    • An overall attitude of fear and submission encouraged by the impenetrability. Even our richest and most powerful still fear the legal system for its caprice, and attempt to ward themselves from it with sigils and charms made of contracts.

    Someone needs to nail up some theses to the door of the Supreme Court.


  • TBH, I sort of wonder the history of why they push the LGBT repression so hard in Russia.

    In a place like the US, where you have culture war manifested through elections, it’s an easy way to score points with a specific and identified demographic/donor group. Demonize the gays and then you don’t have to lean on other voters who will ask about why the schools are failing and the economy is spiraling.

    Does the Russian political system have such pressure groups?

    I could sort of see it as part of a larger suite of “traditional values/restore past glory” messaging, but even there, it seems low on the checklist, and again, is there even meaningful campaigning where it pays dividends?


  • The immigration angle is bait and switch politicking. Has been for decades.

    People feel economically stagnant and culturally disconnected.

    Couldn’t be the capitalist machine grinding you to dust while gnawing away any sort of social institutions or greater visions than “line goes up”. It’s clearly Juan or Abdul who are scrabbling to send a few dollars or Euros to their family. Excluding them is gonna roll back the clock to when a single worker could get a no-degree factory job straight out of high school and raise a sitcom-style family of four, you know!



  • Better content.

    I think this might be the new Turing Test right here: If you can’t shitpost to the level of six-sided ursines, you’re not human.

    Realistically, it’s a counterprogramming game. Content farms either want to sell you something, or drive you in endless circles to make ad revenue. That inherently steers towards certain kinds of messaging, which have a distinct smell.

    When that’s the competition, the audience burns out. We all have our mental or technical block lists-- this site never actually delivers ehat it promises-- and they’ll grow over time.

    The content-farm only works for low stakes scenarios, where people don’t mind scrolling into an endless void. But that’s basically the web equivalent of turning on the TV and listening to the random sitcom noise while doing something else. For anything more important, the bloxklists go up and people still end up looking for real resources.


  • This seems like something that would be effectively enforced by applying state pressure to payment networks. I know some banks just deny any transaction coded as gambling, although that could be personal moralization or chargeback risk fears, as well as actual legal rules.

    If there’s some fraud factor involved (I recall at one point seeing some scheme in the US where people would buy wildly overpriced items from a “seller” where the $500 golf balls were really a $500 deposit to a betting platform) you might not even need new rules to intervene.

    Hell, you could weaponize the players: if there’s a bounty on firms and people that middleman the money, you incentivize anyone who lost money to help the state slash the operators’ tentacles.

    Can’t imagine the business staying afloat if they had to resort to players mailing wads of physical hundred-yuan notes to a purser every time they needed to replenish their account.







  • Whatever else you can say, Hillary was not channeling a lot of enthusiasm outside of a very narrow group.

    It felt like there were weeks in peak campaign season where she wasn’t touring or making speeches. What even was her signature issue? (Considering how she was associated with the abortive attempts towards universal health care during Bill’s term, that would have been a sensible focus, but I don’t recall it mentioned once)

    The whole campaign reeked of “play to not lose” rather than “play to win”. She assumed she was the annointed favourite, guaranteed the win, and that’s not really going to excite uncommitted voters. Bernie, at least, generated buzz.