goldfish crackers ©
@sqc.bsky.social
Mostly lurking, in accordance with the robustness principle. In this house we believe distortionary and redistributive issues should be separated, the notion of a "fiduciary" is essential to the future of democracy, and fascism must be destroyed.
In other news, Stairway to Heaven is actually a good song.
November 15, 2025 at 5:30 PM
In other news, Stairway to Heaven is actually a good song.
Sorry but imo this is just cope. You could say the same thing about Galileo. Like, I challenge anyone to read Meno without thinking "damn this guy was on another level".
November 15, 2025 at 5:25 PM
Sorry but imo this is just cope. You could say the same thing about Galileo. Like, I challenge anyone to read Meno without thinking "damn this guy was on another level".
This might be an artifact of growing up in 2000s Canada when documentaries like "Supersize Me" were all the rage.
November 13, 2025 at 10:44 PM
This might be an artifact of growing up in 2000s Canada when documentaries like "Supersize Me" were all the rage.
We had an endless sequence of school assemblies where we were lectured on some Important Topic and invariably it was total nonsense. Well-meaning (vaguely lefty, "the important thing is to get involved, kids!"), but ignorant. Afaict from talking to teachers, the teachers believed it themselves.
November 13, 2025 at 10:43 PM
We had an endless sequence of school assemblies where we were lectured on some Important Topic and invariably it was total nonsense. Well-meaning (vaguely lefty, "the important thing is to get involved, kids!"), but ignorant. Afaict from talking to teachers, the teachers believed it themselves.
Would you mind grepping for "Pinker"? I'd do it myself but I don't want to download all of that rn.
November 12, 2025 at 10:37 PM
Would you mind grepping for "Pinker"? I'd do it myself but I don't want to download all of that rn.
babes belonging to the emperor, embalmed babes, etc.
November 12, 2025 at 12:07 AM
babes belonging to the emperor, embalmed babes, etc.
fwiw: my skepticism here is just a general one about the moral importance of geography (for standard utilitarian reasons). finding a consitent view on this stuff inside a statist normative framework feels hard. "let's give more moral standing to citizens but not too much more" seems unstable.
November 9, 2025 at 11:17 PM
fwiw: my skepticism here is just a general one about the moral importance of geography (for standard utilitarian reasons). finding a consitent view on this stuff inside a statist normative framework feels hard. "let's give more moral standing to citizens but not too much more" seems unstable.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. If I can push this a little, it sounds like the relevant principle here is something to do with the duty of a country to care for those living within its borders, not a duty arising for having benefited from someone's labour. I'm a little skpetical of that principle.
November 9, 2025 at 11:01 PM
Thanks for the thoughtful reply. If I can push this a little, it sounds like the relevant principle here is something to do with the duty of a country to care for those living within its borders, not a duty arising for having benefited from someone's labour. I'm a little skpetical of that principle.
To the extent that we trade outside our country, we welcome the labour of a large fraction of the world's population. Do you think we should give all those people citizenship, or do you think it's morally relevant that those people perform the labour outside of Canada's borders?
November 9, 2025 at 10:45 PM
To the extent that we trade outside our country, we welcome the labour of a large fraction of the world's population. Do you think we should give all those people citizenship, or do you think it's morally relevant that those people perform the labour outside of Canada's borders?
Important caveat:
November 6, 2025 at 6:17 AM
Important caveat:
yeah, but you can prove those arithmetic identities from pure first order logic without any number theoretical axioms, so while philosophy of math is a pretty wild ride, I think 1 + 1 = 2 is actually pretty solid.
November 6, 2025 at 5:23 AM
yeah, but you can prove those arithmetic identities from pure first order logic without any number theoretical axioms, so while philosophy of math is a pretty wild ride, I think 1 + 1 = 2 is actually pretty solid.
Do you have any pointers for someone who wants to get up to speed on "robotics coming"? I'm very interested in this but haven't been paying much attention.
November 3, 2025 at 12:30 AM
Do you have any pointers for someone who wants to get up to speed on "robotics coming"? I'm very interested in this but haven't been paying much attention.
The better (read: unionized + high demand) manual labour jobs are also intensely social, but due to the pervasive cronyism/nepotism. Some of my past labouring gigs felt like being a courtier of Louis XIV.
November 2, 2025 at 9:29 PM
The better (read: unionized + high demand) manual labour jobs are also intensely social, but due to the pervasive cronyism/nepotism. Some of my past labouring gigs felt like being a courtier of Louis XIV.
Reposted by goldfish crackers ©
As I have said long time, the court really did take over the job of social issue response with pressure relief votes as legislature deferred. Executive agencies really did take over the job of creating legislation as the legislature became evermore calcified.
Everything is the legislature breaking.
Everything is the legislature breaking.
October 30, 2025 at 1:12 AM
As I have said long time, the court really did take over the job of social issue response with pressure relief votes as legislature deferred. Executive agencies really did take over the job of creating legislation as the legislature became evermore calcified.
Everything is the legislature breaking.
Everything is the legislature breaking.
"monetary system"?
October 29, 2025 at 6:06 PM
"monetary system"?
Absolutely correct imo. You're not in the liberal context anymore, and liberal habits of mind (respect for norms, power sharing, etc.) will hurt you. You have one shot to destroy fascism peacefully, and that's by building institutional advantage as aggresively as possible. After that, it's violence.
October 28, 2025 at 11:02 PM
Absolutely correct imo. You're not in the liberal context anymore, and liberal habits of mind (respect for norms, power sharing, etc.) will hurt you. You have one shot to destroy fascism peacefully, and that's by building institutional advantage as aggresively as possible. After that, it's violence.
paraconsistent object theory: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!
paraconsistent metatheory: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.
paraconsistent metatheory: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.
October 24, 2025 at 6:01 PM
paraconsistent object theory: Haha fuck yeah!!! Yes!!
paraconsistent metatheory: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.
paraconsistent metatheory: Well this fucking sucks. What the fuck.
Reposted by goldfish crackers ©
"better to reign in hell" political party
October 24, 2025 at 5:16 PM
"better to reign in hell" political party
this is exactly correct
October 24, 2025 at 5:03 AM
this is exactly correct
I agree, but some the guest choices are pretty questionable imo (Blair, Zuckerberg, Cummings, Andreessen, obviously SBF, etc.). I don't like laundering the opinions of powerful people into an otherwise interesting forum for intellectual discussion.
October 22, 2025 at 6:27 PM
I agree, but some the guest choices are pretty questionable imo (Blair, Zuckerberg, Cummings, Andreessen, obviously SBF, etc.). I don't like laundering the opinions of powerful people into an otherwise interesting forum for intellectual discussion.
God I hope you're right about that.
October 19, 2025 at 8:48 PM
God I hope you're right about that.
I didn't realize that you only meant "inevitable" to apply to the U.S. Obviously you're right that the U.S has never had official parties, so there's no direct evidence either way. What we know is that in the absence of official parties, the U.S ended up here.
October 19, 2025 at 8:33 PM
I didn't realize that you only meant "inevitable" to apply to the U.S. Obviously you're right that the U.S has never had official parties, so there's no direct evidence either way. What we know is that in the absence of official parties, the U.S ended up here.