Want to wade into the sandy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid.
Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful youāll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cutānāpaste it into its own post ā thereās no quota for posting and the bar really isnāt that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned so many āesotericā right wing freaks, but thereās no appropriate sneer-space for them. Iām talking redscare-ish, reality challenged āculture criticsā who write about everything but understand nothing. Iām talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. Theyāre inescapable at this point, yet I donāt see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldnāt be surgeons because they didnāt believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I canāt escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)
Rationalists: we should always incorporate new data into our worldview
Also rationalists: I found some anthropology study of Australian First nations from 1899 and found it fascinating
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QZM6pErzL7JwE3pkv/shortplav?commentId=zn2bXx2WmLmyGiefm
Of course they measured skulls.
See, itās a good practice under the principle of charity to read as much fascist propaganda as you can and incorporate it into your worldview. It doesnāt matter who said things, but rather whether theyāre true, and since youāre a rational agent you can surely evaluate each claim with perfect objecitivity. Digging a 19th-century eugenics study is expanding your objectivity score.
Reading polemics from leftists too? lol no what are you talking about, theyāre all irrational and biased
/s