BartHarleyJarvis's recent activity

  1. Does anyone know how many users have been banned from Tildes?

    ~tildes Ask
    I was looking through some old posts this afternoon and noticed several users posted but had since been banned. I was wondering if anyone knows the approximate number of users that have been...

    I was looking through some old posts this afternoon and noticed several users posted but had since been banned. I was wondering if anyone knows the approximate number of users that have been banned and what the most common reasons were.

    25 votes

  3. Comment on The vast majority ~90% of us only consume, never post and never comment. So come on in, leave a tildes-worthy comment, and join the 10% my dear lurker in ~talk

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    This comment speaks to my core. I have a master's degree in history and studied quite a bit of 20th century Middle East history. I'm not an expert, nor do I present myself as one, but I have a...

    This comment speaks to my core. I have a master's degree in history and studied quite a bit of 20th century Middle East history. I'm not an expert, nor do I present myself as one, but I have a much better base of knowledge than your average user that confidently dishes out takes that are devoid of any meaningful historical context. It drives me crazy when I see it, and that's about information that can be found with a few trips to the library. I can only imagine the feeling when it's related to topics that require a specialist's knowledge and understanding to speak on.

    7 votes

  4. Comment on US bombers strike nuclear sites in Iran in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    History is critically important when talking about any issue today, including nukes. Setting aside the importance of whether or not they actually have nukes, you still need to ask why Iran would...

    The history of the region is important, but I don't know that it means much when talking nukes today.

    History is critically important when talking about any issue today, including nukes. Setting aside the importance of whether or not they actually have nukes, you still need to ask why Iran would try to build nukes in order to make a proper assessment. How do you begin to answer that without any historical context?

    This should be familiar to you as a progressive since we do it all the time when we try to understand issues at home. Take the socioeconomic conditions of Black people, for example. How do you make sense of that without slavery, redlining, or Jim Crow? Without historical context, people start to look for answers in the wrong place, like the color of their skin or "the culture." It's how people end up buying into racist 13/50 talking points.

    7 votes

  5. Comment on US bombers strike nuclear sites in Iran in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Well, if nothing else, it's good to know where you stand. I have neither the time nor the inclination to go into every detail of how wrong this is. I doubt I would get anywhere if I tried. I don't...

    Well, if nothing else, it's good to know where you stand. I have neither the time nor the inclination to go into every detail of how wrong this is. I doubt I would get anywhere if I tried. I don't blame you for it, we are all products of our environment.

    If you are interested in expanding your horizons, I suggest you read up on the history of the region. It wasn't always like this.

    If God himself told you that you were in charge of choosing the next world superpower and your choices were today's Iran or today's Israel, which would you choose? There is only one responsible answer if you care about human life.

    Geez, that's a tough question. Truly, those are some pretty bad options. But I guess if I had to go with one, and I'm basing my answer off of whether I "care about human life," I'd choose the one that isn't murdering people who are trying to get food. I'd choose the one that isn't systematically shooting children in the head. I'd choose the one that hasn't spent the past two years indiscriminately bombing innocent people who were forced into an open air prison of its making. If choose the one that isn't an apartheid state. I'd choose the one that isn't led by a war criminal. Because unlike today's Israel, I see Muslims as human beings.

    12 votes

  6. Comment on US bombers strike nuclear sites in Iran in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    The quote was Israel is an unstable country led by right wing ethno-nationalists that regularly use religious references to justify their atrocities. They have nukes and are backed by a coalition...

    The quote was

    As a believer in liberal democracy, we can't let unstable countries run by religious fundamentalists have nuclear weapons

    Israel is an unstable country led by right wing ethno-nationalists that regularly use religious references to justify their atrocities. They have nukes and are backed by a coalition of religious fundementalists in the west.

    It's not that I support Iran. I support peace, liberty, and diplomacy. I see that the ends don't justify the means, especially if it wasnt necessary in the first place.

    Everyone is so quick to bring up their moral/ethical opposition to the Iranian regime. If that's where you stand, fine - just be consistent.

    49 votes

  7. Comment on US bombers strike nuclear sites in Iran in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Sounds like America is fighting on the wrong side.

    As a believer in liberal democracy, we can't let unstable countries run by religious fundamentalists have nuclear weapons.

    Sounds like America is fighting on the wrong side.

    33 votes

  8. Comment on US President Joe Biden never pressured Israel for ceasefire, according to Israeli investigation in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Hey, I know I'm late to the party, but this thread stuck with me after reading through it the first time. I try to avoid posting about this topic because it's one of those issues that might get me...

    Hey, I know I'm late to the party, but this thread stuck with me after reading through it the first time. I try to avoid posting about this topic because it's one of those issues that might get me worked up when I don't see eye to eye with the person on the other end of the discussion, even though I'm fully aware that we're all acting in good faith. Lurking is more my speed anyway. Having said that, I was glad to see this story get posted and the constructive conversation that followed.

    Anyway, I was catching up on one of my programs and they had a fantastic interview with Jeremy Scahill of Drop Site News (the American publication that first covered the Times of Israel story, linked in the original article as well) and really went in depth about the difference between Trump and Biden on Israel/Palestine. If you're not familiar with his work, Scahill was at The Intercept and has been covering US foreign policy for a long time. I highly encourage everyone to check it out. If nothing else, it's food for thought. The interview starts at 23 min.

    I hate tagging people, but I'm making an exception this time since it's better than spamming the thread or posting a new topic. So here you go @sparksbet @raze2012 @rosco @TheMediumJon @skybrian

    2 votes

  9. Comment on Those dire wolves aren’t an amazing scientific breakthrough. They’re a disturbing symbol of where we’re heading. in ~science

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    I just watched this and the original video that @sparksbet posted. Both were really good so thank you both for sharing. In keeping with the theme of this comment thread and the criticism of the...

    I just watched this and the original video that @sparksbet posted. Both were really good so thank you both for sharing. In keeping with the theme of this comment thread and the criticism of the article, I'd like to make two points. First, Green's criticism is very similar to the author's. Second, and more importantly, the additional nuance or balance is a benefit of the vast amount of space that Green has in comparison to the author of this article. A proper transcript isn't available, but if we were to take the length of the two videos and estimate the amount of words in them it would probably be somewhere between 12,000 - 15,000. Compare that to the 1500 the author got and you can see there is a lot less room for her to work with.

    6 votes

  10. Comment on Those dire wolves aren’t an amazing scientific breakthrough. They’re a disturbing symbol of where we’re heading. in ~science

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Perception is reality, my dude. Why wouldn't they address the original claim as if it were true? If your sole focus is on the 20% that is true, then aren't you giving implicit approval to the...

    Perception is reality, my dude. Why wouldn't they address the original claim as if it were true? If your sole focus is on the 20% that is true, then aren't you giving implicit approval to the remaining 80%?

    Let's say tomorrow Coca-Cola announces a new product called Coca-Cola Quantum and says, "Introducing new Coca-Cola Quantum! CCQ is the healthier choice that will keep your teeth clean and strong. Drinking Coca-Cola Quantum will make you live longer and smile brighter. And it's good for your brain!" Then hundreds of articles and news segments around the world basically repeat those claims.

    Now in this situation, CCQ is technically healthier than any other coke product, and is less damaging to your teeth. Scientifically, its kind of amazing that they were able to pull it off, but it's definitely not going to help anyone's teeth or make them live longer. Are you saying the press should focus on the 20% that is a scientific miracle and ignore the other 80% that's marketing?

    9 votes

  11. Comment on Those dire wolves aren’t an amazing scientific breakthrough. They’re a disturbing symbol of where we’re heading. in ~science

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    I see comments like this all the time on reddit whenever someone disagrees with a run of the mill opinion/analysis piece. I'm sorry if I sound like a jerk, but it drives me crazy. For starters,...
    • Exemplary

    they're posting hot takes on trending topics to get clicks. Slate used to do much better journalism.

    I see comments like this all the time on reddit whenever someone disagrees with a run of the mill opinion/analysis piece. I'm sorry if I sound like a jerk, but it drives me crazy. For starters, that's what these pieces do. They're not meant to break news or report facts in an objective manner, they post takes on trending topics and they use eye catching titles to drive engagement. Every major publication does that. It's fine if you disagree with the analysis presented in the article, but we don't have to dismiss everything as lazy clickbait or bad journalism. Furthermore, if the author were to make this piece all about how "the projects are extremely cool, cutting-edge genetic research," then it would be devoid of context and analysis which would, ironically, make it bad journalism.

    As for the actual contents of the article, is this really a hot take? It would be one thing if this were the reaction to some university based project that got blown out of proportion, but this story and the discourse around it seem worthy of the criticism presented in the article. Stop me if you've heard this one before: Billionaire tech CEO makes bold claims and promises better future on the heels of over-hyped breakthrough.

    You understand that this can't replace conservation efforts, but most people don't. When something like this comes along with all the puff pieces and Joe Rogan episodes, it gives people a false sense of security which makes them less concerned about things like ecological collapse and the government's slashing of environmental protections. To make matters worse, what little resources we dedicate to conservation might get redirected towards subsidies for for-profit companies like Colossal. It's not that they do nothing for conservation efforts, they undermine them. As the author said:

    Careful and painstaking conservation work, such as the work restoring wood bison herds to Alaska, is overlooked in favor of designer species given meme-sprinkled promo reels. ... Colossal’s very questionable marketing of its genetic tinkering has already prompted Donald Trump’s oil-friendly Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum to insinuate that the endangered species list will be a thing of the past if we can just refresh and resurrect species at will. “[T]he status quo is focused on regulation more than innovation,” he posted on X.

    14 votes

  12. Comment on Who's afraid of Hasan Piker? in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Thank you so much for taking the time to watch the video and write out a thoughtful reply. I can't speak to Frogan's content since I am not one of the ~200 people that watch her, but as a longtime...

    Thank you so much for taking the time to watch the video and write out a thoughtful reply.

    I still think that the people roasted in the content nuke aren't good role models. Even if it's your job to tell people about the Gazan genocide you don't need to laugh along with terrorist propaganda. Hasan and his moderator that Ethan focuses on both seem like insufferable people even though they are on the side of the oppressed.

    I can't speak to Frogan's content since I am not one of the ~200 people that watch her, but as a longtime Hasan subscriber, I would encourage you to examine some more of his content beyond the handful of out of context clips that were presented in the video and decide for yourself. He is one of the few voices on the internet that consistently advocates for progressive politics across the board and promotes a healthy version of masculinity in a space that is riddled with Andrew Tate clones. His massive library of content unfortunately provides opportunities for people to twist brief moments of his stream and turn it into something it is not. For example, I could post parts of this clip from the election season alongside countless jokes or brief moments of irony and make it seem like he is a Trump supporter while ignoring the thousands upon thousands of hours where he is criticizing conservatives. I think that if you are as charitable towards Hasan as you were towards Ethan, you'll be able to see that there is a lot more depth to his commentary than what was presented in the content nuke.

    1 vote

  13. Comment on Who's afraid of Hasan Piker? in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Hi, I know it's been a while since you posted this. I had already seen at the time, but I didn't want to drive the discussion away from the article in question. Not to mention the fact that it...

    Hi, I know it's been a while since you posted this. I had already seen at the time, but I didn't want to drive the discussion away from the article in question. Not to mention the fact that it would be unreasonable for us to go through every point raised in the video.

    I am a longtime H3 fan, dating back to the pre-Vape Nation days. He was actually the first youtuber I ever subscribed to. Coincidentally, Hasan was the first Twitch streamer I ever subscribed to. It was like a dream come true when the two joined forces after the brilliant "Oh my god, it's Sam Seder! What a fucking nightmare!" moment. I was really sad to see them part ways after 10/7, but I understand that this is a very personal issue for Ethan. And while I think he is misguided in both his perspective on Gaza and his constant attempts to go after Hasan, I still think he is a decent person at his core. I would love to see this squabble end and H3 go back to it's old ways or set his sights on a more worthy opponent.

    The Hasan Piker Nuke is a very well-produced video. I disagree with the premise and most of the content in the video, but the H3 fan in me was happy to see that he still has his fastball. As I mentioned before, going through roughly two hours of twitch clips and addressing them one-by-one is an incredibly daunting task. But if you are truly interested in examining this a little further and seeing an alternative perspective, I highly recommend this video by Noah Samsen. It's not a point-by-point recounting or rebuttal of the H3-Hasan debacle, rather, it addresses the overall thesis of the content nuke. Noah also provides links to a playlist that goes more in-depth on the points brought up in H3's video, but I think his video is better. I'd love to read your thoughts on it.

  14. Comment on Michelle Obama launches podcast with her brother Craig Robinson in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    You know what, you made some great points. It's hard not to view this cynically given everything I'm seeing in that sphere, but given what you pointed out this probably is coincidental timing. I...

    And this isn't Michelle's first foray into podcasting either. She made The Michelle Obama Podcast in 2020-2022 and Michelle Obama: The Light Podcast in 2023. So I don't get why everyone is all of sudden being so fucking cynical about this one, as if this is new territory for her and was only created in a desperate attempt to counteract Joe Rogan, or serve as her entry into a political career.

    You know what, you made some great points. It's hard not to view this cynically given everything I'm seeing in that sphere, but given what you pointed out this probably is coincidental timing. I still think there are motivations that extend beyond Michelle Obama wanting to grow her brand as a lifestyle media personality, but you're right, this wasn't whipped up as part of the shallow and desperate attempt to counteract Joe Rogan & co. that we're seeing from other dem figures.

    5 votes

  15. Comment on Michelle Obama launches podcast with her brother Craig Robinson in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link
    Are these podcasts going to appeal to anyone outside of the most hard-line blue no matter who voters?

    Are these podcasts going to appeal to anyone outside of the most hard-line blue no matter who voters?

    2 votes

  16. Comment on Digg is relaunching under Kevin Rose and Alexis Ohanian in ~tech

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    Oh. This is like finding out Dwayne Johnson and The Rock are the same person.

    Oh. This is like finding out Dwayne Johnson and The Rock are the same person.

  17. Comment on Digg is relaunching under Kevin Rose and Alexis Ohanian in ~tech

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link Parent
    I recognize the username, but I don't know the backstory. Why is kn0thing poison?

    I recognize the username, but I don't know the backstory. Why is kn0thing poison?

    2 votes

  18. Comment on Hi, how are you? Mental health support and discussion thread (March 2025) in ~health.mental

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link
    Just broke up with my partner of 5 years. I'm actually writing this in the back of an Uber on my way to the airport. I'm sad, they're devastated. Unlike previous relationships, this one didn't...

    Just broke up with my partner of 5 years. I'm actually writing this in the back of an Uber on my way to the airport. I'm sad, they're devastated. Unlike previous relationships, this one didn't have a clear reason to end. We were great partners, we never fought, we made each other laugh. In the rare times when we would disagree/argue, we did it well and communicated well. But there was something missing. I cant explain it. I don't know if it was them, me, or us. Part of me felt it from the start and there were times when my love for them would wax and wane, but I spent the past five years trying to get over that missing piece because everything else was as close to perfect as it can get.

    Unfortunately, after spending a good chunk of our 30s together, it came time to shit or get off the pot. I told them last night and it was awful. I know it's for the best, but it sucks.

    19 votes

  19. Comment on Who's afraid of Hasan Piker? in ~society

    BartHarleyJarvis
    Link

    Well, here is Piker. He stands 6-foot-4, with a sharp jawline and ripples of coiled muscle. He is conversant in bodybuilding, gaming, anime, professional wrestling, and every other interest that tends to make up the media diet of boys of a certain age. His bulge-and-Calvins thirst traps have started libidinal riots online. According to an unofficial census conducted by his community in 2024, his viewership is about two-thirds men. (Slim majorities are white and hold a college degree, while 30 percent reported that they hadn’t yet lost their virginity.) In the past year, he has welcomed both former Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to the stream. Sanders, 50 years Piker’s senior, passed through a week before the inauguration and thanked him for his role in the “revolution of media.” Even the Pod Save America podcast, staffed by former Obama flacks who’ve long advocated for a more institutional brand of progressivism, hosted Piker and listened patiently while he ripped the party a new one.

    All this access has given Piker’s show a sense of beltway authority that it never quite had during the Biden era—evidence of a fledgling effort to make him more central to Democratic messaging. The Democrats, it seems, have found their man.

    Just one little problem with that. Piker didn’t endorse Biden at the dawn of the 2024 cycle. Then he didn’t endorse Kamala Harris either. Resting on a sheathed samurai sword, near the rear of his streaming setup, is a MAGA hat. Piker wears it on the rare occasions he approves of a Trump decision. On one recent occasion, he slipped it on when the incoming administration had a hand in brokering a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas. Piker is pro–Palestinian liberation, pro-immigrant, pro-trans, pro-choice, and unapologetically himself. Some of this has brought accusations of antisemitism and more, all of which he strongly denies but has lately found Piker in an uncharacteristically defensive posture. His take-no-prisoners approach makes everyone—but especially Democrats—uneasy. For a while, a staffer for Ocasio-Cortez suggested the congresswoman would give me a comment for this article on Piker and Democrats’ future. I followed up repeatedly, only to be told that someone more senior would have to sign off. The comment never came.

    As I watched Piker prepare for what was coming in January—an opening salvo from the new Trump administration that aims to redefine both the constitution and the country—I saw into a future most Democrats are too afraid to fully consider. And as I’ve watched how the weeks since have played out, it’s become clear how little time there is left to understand Piker’s provocative appeal to a new generation of voters. The cost of ignoring figures like him is becoming all too clear.

    3 votes