wervenyt's recent activity
-
Comment on When Richard Dawkins met Claude in ~health.mental
-
Comment on US will revoke passports for parents who owe child support in ~society
wervenyt LinkMe, having brought up "deadbeat dads" as an ostensibly progressive angle on denying human rights as part of fascist creep merely a handful of hours before seeing this article: oh,Me, having brought up "deadbeat dads" as an ostensibly progressive angle on denying human rights as part of fascist creep merely a handful of hours before seeing this article: oh,
-
Comment on Woman covertly filmed for 'humiliating' social media content - then told to pay for removal in ~tech
wervenyt Link ParentSurely the marketers are honest about their products and services!Surely the marketers are honest about their products and services!
-
Comment on What does Tucker Carlson really believe? I went to Maine to find out. (gifted link) in ~society
wervenyt (edited )Link ParentQuit falling for the words. But if you polled the apolitical and unengaged democrats, they'd probably agree that "there are real differences between men and women". Those of us with nuanced...Quit falling for the words.
But if you polled the apolitical and unengaged democrats, they'd probably agree that "there are real differences between men and women". Those of us with nuanced understandings of queer issues are not in the majority. Increasing border security also cuts across political lines, unfortunately. This is the thin end of the fascist wedge, in other terms.
Whether he believes it or not is irrelevant. But "great replacement" is not a thing people who can read books and control their urge to burn crosses at the same time believe. It's a myth that only holds together through news media spectacle, and Carlson is a spectacle organizer.
Edit: as a system of memetic consolidation and mass manipulation, Tucker Carlson is a force for bigotry. as an individual moral entity, Tucker Carlson is either so bigoted that it's comical, but clever enough to be incredibly inconsistent, or he's so evil that his personal bigotry is irrelevant.
-
Comment on What does Tucker Carlson really believe? I went to Maine to find out. (gifted link) in ~society
wervenyt Link ParentHe's worse than Jones. Jones is a crank to the core. The real Tucker Carlson is evident from his decades of public speaking: he is a canny, cynical, and hateful person who is perfectly calibrated...He's worse than Jones. Jones is a crank to the core. The real Tucker Carlson is evident from his decades of public speaking: he is a canny, cynical, and hateful person who is perfectly calibrated to surfing the tides of respectability. He's a literal national socialist, and pushed the Fox viewership toward those views more directly and effectively than almost any of their other pundits. While their other talking heads have more brashness, rely more on fearmongering and bigotry, and couldn't care less about anything but their level of comfort and control of their surroundings, he was able to appear erudite, and levelheaded, and reasonable, and became the place that Foxists would seek real solutions. Because he is relatively erudite, levelheaded, and reasonable. He's just reasonably evil.
While those like Jones are happy to go off the deep end over conspiracy theories and inculcate themselves into hatred, Carlson's project has been the strategic utility of bigotry to maneuver the masses into supporting fascism directly. Now that the fascists have power, his role is to evangelize to those apolitical and unengaged Democratic voters the real values of capital consolidation, military expansionism, and strongmen. Fascists know better than anyone, you put the screws to a liberal, and they'll stare at their feet to justify their complicity in genocide, blinders not necessary.
He's not a racist or sexist or antisemite or transphobe because he's scared by Them, hell, I don't know if the guy actually has a problem with anyone he propagates hatred against. But it paid the bills and got his points of view their feet in the door, and that's even more reprehensible than blind hatred, IMO.
-
Comment on Why I find woke criticism of veganism and effective altruism so outrageous in ~society
wervenyt Link ParentFor all the hot water I get myself in about using new terms, I can't help but cling to woke (positive). In its original sense, it's playfully self-congratulatory, very apt/easy to explain, and...For all the hot water I get myself in about using new terms, I can't help but cling to woke (positive). In its original sense, it's playfully self-congratulatory, very apt/easy to explain, and doesn't really imply anything negative about anyone but racists and their power structures. In the short period where it just meant "progressive (positive)", it lost some charm, but now that fascists are going around acting triggered by alarm clocks and labeling taxation as woke, it has become an excellent bait term for the purposes of disrupting the language of right wing propaganda in one-on-one conversations. The moral panic is so transparent that all but true blue fascists immediately deflate once they're defending some of it.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
wervenyt Link ParentI mean, in the context of that exchange? it was dismissal of the person you replied to, and dismissal of other's points of view. Say disagreement is not dismissal all you want, but you don't get...I mean, in the context of that exchange? it was dismissal of the person you replied to, and dismissal of other's points of view. Say disagreement is not dismissal all you want, but you don't get to play that card if
[you] have yet to see is an example of what that means, or any concrete example of the left actually "going too far".
That is dismissal of opposing viewpoints as failing to engage, when plenty have.
You can rattle all that off. I don't really disagree. But I can read between the lines and grasp that people dislike being expected to change their language at the drop of a hat and that the hyperperformative side of progressivism is literally the subject at hand. Pretending that the pushback hasn't been continual, even within groups of relatively sympathetic individuals, because you agree with the end goals, is disingenuous and fucking insulting.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
wervenyt Link Parentit's always fun to simply dismiss others' points of view, but this is also a poignant example of the condescension that many people in this thread have explained is the common thread that hooks...it's always fun to simply dismiss others' points of view, but this is also a poignant example of the condescension that many people in this thread have explained is the common thread that hooks people into a moral panic, should they not already agree with you
I mean Jesus Christ
-
Comment on For thirty years I programmed with Phish on, every day. In 2026, the music is out of phase with the work. in ~tech
wervenyt Link ParentAh, fair enough. That does shift how I interpret your past comments, and as such I don't have much to say in disagreement. Thank you for clarifying for me.I’m just quite skeptical about the future of programming as a career.
Ah, fair enough. That does shift how I interpret your past comments, and as such I don't have much to say in disagreement. Thank you for clarifying for me.
-
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
wervenyt Link ParentNo, I meant specifically neopronouns there, but also, that you get to choose how people refer to you in general. That's a fundamental paradigm shift. Previously people thought "there is man, there...No, I meant specifically neopronouns there, but also, that you get to choose how people refer to you in general. That's a fundamental paradigm shift. Previously people thought "there is man, there is woman, I use he for man, and she for woman", and 'they' floats as kind of a loose alternative in the mix without real value. Grammar, utilized by the speaker. Neopronouns are not generic, in how they've been discussed. They are not based on public information. While few people may actually utilize them, and fewer still throw fits about them being dismissed, it's not small potatoes. It's a foundational shift.
The difference between progressivism in gender and antiracism is that we have been working on antiracism for a long time. Abolishing the gender binary as a political project is, realistically, about thirty or forty years old. Not to mention that Race was established in the past four hundred years, meanwhile most linguistic genders have been either irrelevant to social gender or broadly aligned with the patriarchal binary for like twice as long, at least. One traces a real phenomenon, in the form of sexual dimorphism in ways that were central to society for as long as human history, even if it's always been more nuanced on the ground, and the other is European culture coping with being materially rooted in pure evil. We can throw away race entirely, and we lose nothing. Gender must be continually deconstructed to prevent the social reification of a binary, though.
The only reason that the right wing is able to muster these methods is because people are playing around on the level of representation instead of refusing to be legible to the dominant powers. Language is how they win, if we don't keep confounding their rhetoric. But no, let's keep insisting that the incidental reference to a person is necessarily correlated to their access to medical care.
-
Comment on Google Chrome silently installs a 4 GB AI model on your device without consent in ~tech
wervenyt Link Parent(not directed at you) some people need to grow the hell up and take accountability for their part in creeping fascism and the surveillance state. and no, a job is not a good justification for...(not directed at you)
some people need to grow the hell up and take accountability for their part in creeping fascism and the surveillance state. and no, a job is not a good justification for abdicating your duty to yourself and your neighbor. brainwashing yourself with tiktok and taking any compromise that makes your life just a little easier is, in fact, your decision. -
Comment on Did wokeness leave us worse off? (gifted link) in ~society
wervenyt Link ParentI (not smoontjes) just feel like language is more personal for the user than this line of thinking credits. Sure, slurs are slurs, pronouns are pronouns, and gender is in the eye of the performer,...I (not smoontjes) just feel like language is more personal for the user than this line of thinking credits. Sure, slurs are slurs, pronouns are pronouns, and gender is in the eye of the performer, but we spend years training to "use language properly", at penalty of failure in school, people build their worldviews through that language, and not only are we asking people to give up their (pathetic) guilty pleasures, not only to challenge how they interpret their own position in society by centering gender discomformity, but also to loudly proclaim that referring to someone in the third person is something that is now Deeply Personal and Very Simple and if you don't understand you should simply accept this and educate yourself, in the span of like one or two election cycles. I'll never not be woke in every sense of the term, but strategically, the language policing seems to have generated more victimization than it ever could have prevented.
Like you said elsewhere, this isn't a conversation that should be centered on the left going too far, or how wokism triggered the fascist hammer. That's been building for half a century, at least. But if we want to peel away at the people who simply vote for their wallet, we don't need to throw nonbinary people in the trash to say "we need to be strong in the face of strongmen, and that includes not letting their petty words set the bounds of discussion." Because that's what this is: taking the brute fact of misgendering and dismissal and mockery as an issue in itself, when it's only ever been growing pains. And no, that won't be fair to marginalized people. We can't make that transition without doing the hard work of revolution. But just because we can learn to respect neopronouns and sit with our uncertainty does not make it a ballotable issue. It means we (those of us who are less marginalized, not necessarily speaking for you) need to make private space for those more marginalized, and erode the gender binary through dissolving language, not put the vulnerable on a billboard and use confrontational public discourse that simply reifies a baggy temporary concept of gender which nobody in particular cares for (ie transmedicalism).
-
Comment on For thirty years I programmed with Phish on, every day. In 2026, the music is out of phase with the work. in ~tech
wervenyt Link ParentI don't see how. Typing and handwriting are mechanical, with a difference in how your mind interfaces with the scribing itself, but only speed distinguishes the actual composition process between...I think that’s analogous to handwriting.
I don't see how. Typing and handwriting are mechanical, with a difference in how your mind interfaces with the scribing itself, but only speed distinguishes the actual composition process between the two, and plenty of authors switch between handwriting and typing just for ergonomic sake, or draft in hand and proof in type, etc. Programming, on the other hand, is not the same thing as managing nonhuman programmers. At all. They're entirely different skillsets with different impacts on the world. I challenged your point because it seemed specious, but now it seems you're just pulling a "coal miners: learn to code!"
-
Comment on For thirty years I programmed with Phish on, every day. In 2026, the music is out of phase with the work. in ~tech
wervenyt Link ParentWhy do you conflate the existence of a phenomenon with the industrial capacity for the phenomenon?Why do you conflate the existence of a phenomenon with the industrial capacity for the phenomenon?
-
Comment on US landlords want to be paid for pandemic losses and hope to reach a deal with the Donald Trump administration in ~finance
wervenyt Link ParentWell, we've got a long and proud history of dirt farming in this country, why not subsidize rentseeking?Well, we've got a long and proud history of dirt farming in this country, why not subsidize rentseeking?
-
Comment on "The reason I'm not an atheist is that I think the philosophical arguments against it are unanswerable" (gifted link) in ~humanities
wervenyt Link Parentyup I just went through the Critique of Pure Reason a few months ago, Kant's pretty ruthless with it. Hell, I don't even particularly agree with Kant, but he wasn't wrong there.I just went through the Critique of Pure Reason a few months ago, Kant's pretty ruthless with it. Hell, I don't even particularly agree with Kant, but he wasn't wrong there.
-
Comment on "The reason I'm not an atheist is that I think the philosophical arguments against it are unanswerable" (gifted link) in ~humanities
wervenyt (edited )Link ParentNot a philosopher either, . The cosmological argument is not a very convincing one, even if it isn't particularly wrong, either. Most philosophers today can point to a few solid critiques of it,...Not a philosopher either,
but I play one on TV. The cosmological argument is not a very convincing one, even if it isn't particularly wrong, either. Most philosophers today can point to a few solid critiques of it, going back to early modernity.I've spent a long portion of my life researching these kinds of neutral theological arguments, and I'm not sure any really hold up under interpersonal scrutiny. If there is a God, or are gods, in the kind of simplistic way that terminally modern atheists strawman and some misled souls actually believe, then the only good reason to believe is going to be in the eye of the beholder. If our God/gods exist as most actually tend to believe (speaking to a broad set of disparate beliefs), then looking for a logical root at the beginning of time starts to feel fallacious and beside the actual point.
The only point for articles like these is to do the hard work of browbeating reductionist believers in Scientism until they go back to their inglorious pits. Science has its limits, because communication and logic have theirs, and in that space of Meaning beyond truth is where anyone builds their conception of deity, should they decide to.
Edit: wanted to clarify that I'm aware this is not a dissimilar argument from Kalam, but that's kind of the issue with bringing it up as an argument "for God".
-
Comment on "The reason I'm not an atheist is that I think the philosophical arguments against it are unanswerable" (gifted link) in ~humanities
wervenyt Link ParentBut if they were continually arguing with people about their impoverished worldview that invents a magical field of visual depth that has nothing to do with space, time, or anything material as...But if they were continually arguing with people about their impoverished worldview that invents a magical field of visual depth that has nothing to do with space, time, or anything material as far as they're concerned, I doubt they'd be very pleasant company.
-
Comment on USA to mandate surveillance tech for new cars also determing fitness to drive by 2027 in ~transport
wervenyt Link ParentI don't trust those, almost on principle. It's ruthless to make people wait for a reason to react rather than be proactive.I don't trust those, almost on principle. It's ruthless to make people wait for a reason to react rather than be proactive.
-
Comment on USA to mandate surveillance tech for new cars also determing fitness to drive by 2027 in ~transport
wervenyt Link ParentApologies, I know I'm doing something here, but I can't resist. oooohhhhh noooo but yeah no I get it. I just think that's unconscionable in any logic but ruthlessness, and I'm tired of ruthless...Apologies, I know I'm doing something here, but I can't resist.
They haven’t been able to figure out another way to do it and still keep up with their competition on features.
oooohhhhh noooo
but yeah no I get it. I just think that's unconscionable in any logic but ruthlessness, and I'm tired of ruthless pointlessness.
"Woo" is a cognitohazard that prevents the educated from being informed of novel paradigms in order to stifle the actualization of new modes of being. I shall not elaborate, because you've done it well enough.