zurew

Dude please do research before you speak on a subject. Your message suggests that you haven't read this thread and you haven't done much of an independent research on it yourself. He has already been charged with with rape and sex trafficking - https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65959097 . The only thing you can argue about is whether he will be convicted or not, but so far nothing suggests that he won't be convicted. The court taking its time has nothing to do with whether he will be convicted or not. Again do your research or just read this thread before your speak on a subject with such a high confidence. You have an incline to hop on the "matrix is powerful and bad" , but that shouldn't make you blind to whats in front of you. This will be a brief introduction to Tate, I won't write everything down , because I would just reiterate whats in this thread and its actually tiring at this point: - You have guy who has easily 30+ hours of video and audio footage where he brags about how he manipulates women, and how he just views them as a tool to achieve his financial goals - He had a pimp course where he taught guys how to manipulate women and how to set up a cam business - There are multiple women who has a cobra and an "owned by Tate" tattoo on them - totally normal right, who wouldn't want to signal so clearly that they are a property of someone else? - There are leaked logs where he talked to his group and gave tips and even asked for advice how to manipulate more effectively so that he can bring them to his place to eventually turned them into cam girls, obviously under false premises - which is sex trafficking - you have 4 victims reported things about Tate like rape and violent assaults. - and there is so much more that I don't have the patience to write down - just look through this thread and you will get more context.

Whoever unbanned me after Roy quickly banned me, thanks.

Roy has been going downhill for a while now. There is not much of a substance to anything he says and he seem to be incapable to engage with most topics more deeper than surface level.

If you really want to attack porn, lets see if you can make an argument why there is no such thing as making porn in an ethical way or in other words - why all porn production is unethical. or make an argument that shows what is inherently wrong with porn (so don't talk about consequences given a certain societal context, but talk about the subject [porn] without societal context, to demonstrate whats wrong with it inherently) -or in other words give something that would be wrong in all context.

@Recursoinominado Don't even engage with that dude - he clearly haven't done even a surface level research on the subject, haven't even read the very study that he linked and its actually embarrassing at this point that he said 50% death rate with a straight face without backing it with anything and without thinking just 5 seconds about what that would actually mean if it would be true. He already undermined the validity of medical studies multiple times in this thread, and people like that wont ever be persuaded by any single or collection of studies and you will have to argue with their feelings on the subject, which is obviously a waste of time and an actual brainrot. Im surprised how people like him can survive on a day to day basis using an epistemology like that. At this point we should create a vaccine (and then unironically mandate it) that gives some of these people the ability to feel shame after they make confident and stupid and baseless claims

Dude this thread is full of evidence, at this point you couldn't be more easily spoon fed with the evidence that is against him. You sound like someone who not just haven't done an ounce of research on Tate, but someone who haven't even read this thread. Most of the time he either lies or make claims that haven't been substantiated.

In those posts, there is no justification or establishment of causal connection for the essential claims that he makes, he is just stating his conclusion several times, without backing his claims up by anything. Very poorly made and formed "arguments".

Keep telling yourself that and after he will get convicted (if he will be ) keep telling yourself that it was the matrix.

Andrew Tate fans: "But, but ,but the matrix"

@Sincerity Good stuff! Its so easy to see the arrogance on the right side - talking about philosophy without thinking about it or studying it in depth.

Sure, my point was to demonstrate you don't need to be for example a champion to make someone a champion. Famous example could be Mike Tyson's coach: Cus D'Amato. My understanding is that he was an amateur boxer and thats the best he could achieve as a boxer - but he became an exceptional coach and he handled the careers of Mike Tyson, Floyd Patterson, and José Torres, all of whom went on to be inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame.

I will say this : this could be a good rule of thumb, but it has some holes in it. We can take a dozen of different examples where the person who guides isn't really good in that domain , but can still make the other person successful or help him/her to solve his/her problem regarding that domain. You might think ,that if a person is bad at embodying the things he/she says, then what she/he says must not be applicapble or must be bullshit, but thats not necessarily the case and it will depend on a couple of factors. For example lets take a boxing coach who has never been a champion in boxing, but could still create a world champion from the right person. And we could flip this and analyze the other side: Just because you have embodied something ,that doesn't necessarily indicates that you will be able to give good advice to other people with in the same domain, who has different abilities, circumstances, and development and life structure compared to you. So how should you judge? 1) You should judge based on the clients. If the teacher/trainer/coach/doctor has good clients or the clients have achievied good results (the definition of good obviously based on what kind of situation or domain we talk about), then it is almost safe to say , that thats a good choice. 2) The other thing is obviously looking for signs of system thinking. System thinking is not necessarily required if you life situation is almost 100% the same as the other clients, because then the same kind of solution process could be applied to your life, but if your life is a lot different in many aspect compared to the other clients, then yeah system thinking from the coach/teacher/doctor/trainer will be required. Those 2 points above should be enough in most cases, to find the right person you are looking for.

@CARDOZZO I don't know how much he truly cares, but one thing is for sure: that this move will bring even more competition to be the first to create an AGI. It will be an interesting run for sure. But as a side note - if I were him, and if I would truly care about AI safetiness, I wouldn't create an even bigger competition, I would try to join and collab with another big company and help it to make their AI as safe as possible. The goal should be to collect the best people in the field and then join their intellect and power together to create the safest and best AI possible. Shortly: IMO, creating more division and competition around AI and AI safetiness makes solving these issues worse and harder.

Yeah, Elon signed the petition for shutting down GPT4 development for 6 month (virtue signaling and pretending that he cares about AI risk) and simultaneously he built up his own AI company.

Help your girl to heal, and then help her setting up clear and strong boundaries. She needs to be extremely clear about her boundaries especially because asshole and pushy guys will totallly take advantage of her if she won't be very upfront about what line can't be crossed. She needs to learn that there are a lot of cases where the strategy of being confrontational and very upfront is much better than being passive or agreeable. And of course , she needs to cut off that friend.

Yes, because I have resarched this topic a lot, and I asked you and the other guy in this thread and before that I have talked to a bunch of people who could be called vaccine sceptic and they couldn't bring anything substantive on the table just going on side tangents without giving any evidence for their claims or if they did bring something most of the time their own paper debunked their claims or they couldn't conceptualize what was going on in that paper or they only read the abstract and didn't bother the read the whole paper. - so yes this and knowing how fucking insane the idea is to manage to hide these big secrects on a global scale - when on a much smaller scale leaks happen all the time, I am very confident in my position. Before you say again "ohh so you are not open to the idea that a big secret can be uphold for multiple years happen on a global scale?" - show me anything tangible. I don't know whats the problem with you guys regarding analyzing incentives just only from one side and thinking thats like a big find or something. You do realize that alternative media people have a lot of incentive as well to keep repeating their ideologically and conspiratorial points? Alex Jones have earned a fuckton of money doing that and you can earn a lot more than money - for example fame and followers, and an authority position - where you can virtue signal that you are the good one, that you have have all the people's interest in mind, opposite to the corporate ,bad, ugly mainstream media. You can spot a bunch of same tactics and dynamics that you are so oppose to when it comes to the maisntream , but you are not even remotely suspicious or critical when it comes to the alternative media - that shows me you don't really care about seriously analyzing those dynamics you care more about focusing on people who are ideologically aligned with you and your opinions. These tactics could be included on both sides : - Try to become an authority figure who can feed you information - Signal to people that you have their interest in mind - Constantly undermining the other side's validity - Earning a lot of money by not focusing on being right but more by focusing on telling points that are aligned with an establishment or an anti establishment ideology - and then on the top of all that foundation you can build businesses and start your run for president "Years of brainwashing" - where you actually need to learn about medicine and you can't just pull everything out of your ass without . Also you do realize here, that when doctors make claims about the vaccine or about any medicine - they will automatically be uphold to a much higher standard - therefore they need to worry a lot more about not saying wrong shit, because they can lose their job or at minimum they will be 5x more criticised than a layman like RFK. So who has the incentive there to say correct things and to do a more in depth research? If RFK jr is wrong you answer would be - "who cares, he got corrected". If a mainstream doctor is wrong - he is purposefully told a lie to participate in a global scam or "he should lose his job, because he is irresponsible" etcetc. None of that gives you a reason to reiterate a point confidently that you haven't checked yourself. No. Even this point of yours show me that you haven't done any research before, because there are claims that are easy to check (with sometimes a 5 second in other times few hours of google search) and there are others that you can't really check because you would actually need to be an expert or very knowledgeable on the topic. Ohh I am your best bet, because I am not a doctor so I am not brainwashed or blinded by the system yet and I still have a special ability to see through the matrix.

You have made some claims about the vaccines, without doing any research yourself and just reiterated what RFK said. - Why do such a thing if you are truly agnostic? Instead of asking 100 different 'why' questions - psycho analysing RFK - why not do some research regarding the vaccines? None of your questions are relevant regarding the efficacy and or safetiness of the vaccines - there are a 100 million different ways a person could be wrong about something, its not relevant why someone is wrong if he is indeed wrong. I can fuck up a math equation for a million different reasons and in a million different ways - but it still won't change the fact that I fucked it up. Sounds like you haven't researched any smart person seriously. No matter how smart you are , you can always say some dumb shit, especially when you are making claims outside of your own expertise - which sounds exactly like something what RFK did. Also, its not like RFK jr is some genius or something. Whats interesting is that on one hand, you are claiming to be agnostic and on the other hand literally nothing is stopping your from fact checking rfk's claims. - to me if you would be honest you would just say that RFK's words are resonating with you , because it aligns with your anti-establishment ideology - but in that case lets not pretend that you would be persuaded by any data or studies. I would suggest to be more honest with your position , because you are giving off extremely dishonest vibes here.

What was her bodycount?

Sounds good and interesting. I will be particularly interested in this part: "INTELLECT SERVES INTUITION" -- my intuition told me, that this is definitely correct .

Thats probably one of the hardest questions ever and it is a very hard problem (maybe impossible to solve in the case of adults). It requires a very long deliberate process where you need to demonstrate through a lot of arguments and hypotheticals why their thoughtprocess will predict a lot less things accurately than your epistemic process and why your epistemic process more reliable in general. One of the hardest part is that you need to be extremely patient about it and you need to be extremely careful about your rhetoric (you need to present it and approach it in a way ,where the person feels safe in your presence and won't feel like they will get gotcha'd or that they will get trapped or that they will feel dumb). That kind of thing (that I described above) takes a lot of practice and intelligence to figure out how to go about it and even then it is not guaranteed that you will change people's thoughtprocess/epistemic process. Regarding a more healthy informational ecosystem (where even if we assume that the epistemic process is the same, we still need things to stop the deliberate information poisioning), we need certain incentives that are non-existent right now: For example lets just think - what reward do you get if you seriously try to analyze everything as objectively as you possible can? You will get almost no reward, and not just that, but you will get punishment from whatever group you are in, therefore you are incentivised to get stuck in a group think as much as possible. What is the reward for not taking strong position on something that you are not so sure about? You get no reward and not just that, but again, you will get punishment from almost everyone. What is the reward for arguing with the group that you are deeply invested in (and where people maybe depended on you or where you are depended on them)? What is the reward and incentive for stopping in a middle of a debate and acknowledgeing that the person you debate with knows more about the topic than you, or that you seriously don't know the answers to his questions - in other words - whats the reward for epistemic humility? Just to be clear: when I say incentives - in this context I mostly refer to social reward or punishment, but of course it could be financial or any other incentive as well.

Whats your argument against amateur porn and what your argument against onlyfans?

A new era is coming with AI creating realistic porn and with AI creating realistic human avatars with realistic persona. That (if left unregulated) will probably make it so that most pornstars and onlyfanscreators will lose their jobs, but we will see.

What about amateur porn? Do you have the same thoughts about it? Or what about doing onlyfans?

What does RFK even think? If he really believes that there is a matrix where a bunch of powerful people from all around the world can work and are working together in a malicious way against humanity (creating dangerous vaccines, 5G) etc, then why the fuck he thinks that he will be the one to do anything about it? - Like what does he think - he will singlehandedly destroy the evil elites? -how fucking deluded you would have to be , if you take his foundational beliefs (about the malicious matrix) as a fact.

You are not depdended on it, you just recognize whats in your toolbox and then utilize it to the best of your ability. Thats like saying there is a needle and you have a hammer "don't be too attached to the hammer, when you can just use a big rock to do the same work" -sure you can use the rock if you want to, but if your goal is to be as efficient , and as good as possible in what you do, then you learn how to utilize all the tools in and around you. You should have asked her, why she is spending so much time doing spiritual work rather than any other work (why is she so attached to spiritual work)? - Maybe because she think it is important and meaningful and she is passionate about it?