something_else

The most committed homies you could ever find

A lot of people delude themselves that they know how to invest in crypto when really they just got lucky. I don't know if that applies to you, but by default when I see people really excited and overconfident about crypto it raises red flags to me that they got lucky. The fluctuation of crypto is so unpredictable that you can never be that confident if you are also accurately assessing risk. If you have a bunch of money to spare, maybe it's worth putting some on some speculative crypto trade. But unless you are detached enough, and have enough money, you're more likely to become a gambling addict.

That's what the Faraday cage pouch is for. If you want more solid protection I guess you buy a more expensive one. But I'm pretty sure even a grounded metal tin is probably enough to protect an unplugged external drive from a solar flare. Most cloud backup services are probably going to have defenses in place to restore data even after a solar flare anyway.

If it's really important and you want to be excessive I would aim for 3 or 4 copies: One on the PC you use for it day to day One local backup on an external SSD or HDD, store this inside a little Faraday cage pocket you can buy for like £10 online One copy on OneDrive Potentially one copy on some other cloud backup service Something pretty catastrophic would have to happen for you to lose everything if you followed that. You would likely be fine with just one cloud backup service because these services are designed to essentially never lose any data. Chances are if something happened that meant you couldn't ever recover your data from OneDrive you would have bigger problems to worry about than getting your OneNote document back.

Yes, I agree. You can try to make cold approaching at a mall fun but realistically it's always going to be pretty miserable which is a huge part of the problem. You should find things you enjoy doing that also have a lot of women around, then the whole process becomes a lot more natural. Also, there are very few girls who are going to hear that you are cold approaching a hundreds of girls weekly at a shopping mall and think 'yea I want some of that' It's somewhat an indicator of low value to being with.

Cold approach isn't how most people get laid, you should bear that in mind. Most people get laid through social circle, or going out to bars and clubs. If you really want to get laid those are honestly better starting points for you.

I'm sitting around 10 trips and nothing bad yet. Though all on the same substance (acid)

My friend do you not see the irony here? 'They just care more about complaining' – that's complaining I think if a large enough sub-group of people are complaining it indicates that there is likely an issue that needs addressing. A woman only sub-forum seems like a good idea. The only issue would be verifying who is a woman and who isn't, that's kinda tricky. And that sub-fourm would also become a target for trolling.

It’s because you are constantly telling everyone how you’re above them. That makes people butthurt and it also makes them dislike you really really quickly. Can you blame them? Also some of the stuff you said about researching and manipulating ‘females’, especially the part about the sperm donor, makes you sound a bit psychopathic. The impression given off by all of that together is that you do not view women as human beings worthy of respect, but instead tools to manipulate. That is not a good starting point for making a convincing argument to others about the actual human experiences and nature of women, and it’s probably why many aren’t taking you seriously in this thread

Yea, fair enough. I looked into the archetype system you were talking about, I was using terms incorrectly. Re-read my original post and replace warrior-king with 'stage red' since that's roughly what I was wrongly equating it to. I feel my argument still stands if you do that. Sorry, I should not have made assumptions like that. Thank you for pointing out. The main point I wanted to get across was this anyway: You're clearly not neutral and impartial, just look how riled up you get when Tate is criticised. I'm willing to admit I'm quite biased against him – I think it is justified too however. But you are talking about how you are a neutral observer and then getting quite angry that he is being criticised by us soy-boys. You even tried to insult my appearance out of nowhere in your last comment because I dared to write a criticism of your opinions on Tate. That's not impartial, it shows clear passion for Tate. It would be more respectable if you just admitted that and stopped trying to present yourself as some wise stage yellow sage who's just consuming Tate content from a higher level than anyone else.

Yea, well the death of every human on the planet would do that for sure Which could happen if you get your wish. AI is a technology that is possibly well beyond our ability to predict or control and insane acceleration could be very dangerous. It only makes it meaningless if you’re in it for the money. Just because an AI is a better artist than you doesn’t mean you’re no longer allowed to do art. A lot of the professional art that is done in the world is about creating useful assets/images for specific purposes, or that match a decor and aesthetic. And the artists who do this are shit scared because AI is fast replacing them. So they act all high and mighty about how their precious art must be the only thing that we ban AI from replacing, while it’s fine if all the lowly factory workers and programmers are fed to the AI wolves so to speak, lol. But if you create art from your soul because you enjoy it you’ll do that whether there’s AI around or not, and chances are people will still want that art the same way people still want swiss mechanical watches today.

My face is already on the forum do I match your expectations? All I am saying is that the impression I get of you is that you idolise him quite a bit. You may deny it but you post many threads about him and defend him quite passionately it seems. I get that you want to see yourself as an impartial/neutral studier of Tate but that is not the impression given off. Jocko? Jocko’s certainly not a moron. Goggins I don’t know much about but he certainly doesn’t seem like a moron. The reason for the lack of warrior-king archetypes nowadays is that warrior-king type people are not really as necessary in the modern world. That archetype thrives in stage red societies. The most Tate like group of people I’ve ever met in real life would describe themselves as warrior kings if you asked them. They were all coke-addicted nutcases going door to door trying to scam old people into ‘upgrading’ their gas and electric plans by day and getting into street fights, jail or worse by night. Warrior-king Tate types fall into the grifty and scummy sales jobs in blue/orange/green societies because it’s where they thrive. Can you learn things about confidence, persuasion, power etc. from these people? Of course. Are these people you want in your life? Absolutely not. But they are the most persuasive people on the planet and they suck you into their worldview very easily the more time you spend around them. Tate is like the final boss of that kind of salesman type person and you are better to avoid ever letting them into your mind to begin with.

Yes well I thought you might be able to offer some more insights given how much you praise him. It seems not because to me this just sounds like a cop out, sorry. You can live a good, successful life with many positive warrior-like traits without studying someone like Tate. There are plenty of better examples of masculine warrior role models in this thread. Or just do what the majority of non personal dev people do and start doing a martial art or sport. That’ll give you far more stage red development than studying someone like Tate. It’s not even like I don’t think you can learn anything from Tate. But to me it seems you clearly idolise him in a way that’s quite emotional and not detached, which I think for someone like Tate basically means you’ve drank his kool-aid. He’s a salesman and you’re the mark. Also I count like 8 times I’ve heard you have to tell everyone how you’re stage yellow to justify your viewpoints. If you were as developed as you tell everyone then I think your arguments would stand for themselves, instead of you having to tell everyone how stage yellow you are to justify your viewpoints.

I rarely see you accept all the bullshit he's done. If you're going to fairly evaluate him you really need to acknowledge that instead of sweeping it under the rug. He's essentially made his money being a pimp, teaching others how to be a pimp, and selling grifty crypto/investing/freelancing courses. Almost every single penny he owns comes from these sources, and probably several others that are too dodgy for him to even reveal. It's all very stage red. If you wanna integrate stage red find someone who's a higher stage of development but has integrated red, @Razard86 suggested some great examples of above. Can you actually tell me any concrete lessons you have learn from Tate? I saw you say earlier that 'he turned you into a warrior' and 'his advice made you better with women' but to me these sound a bit like cop-outs. There is no concrete lessons there, those sound quite vague to me. You have consumed a lot of Tate and have said that he is 80% gold, so I am asking you to condense down the 80% of pure solid gold into just a few bullet points of what valuable lessons you think he actually provides. If he is 80% solid gold and has created such great results for you, that should not be too hard.

That's a pretty good list, cheers lol. All of his money comes from toxic/scummy/leechy sources like the ones above. It's hard to argue he's only 10-20% toxic when probably 90%+ of his wealth is coming from really fucking dodgy sources. If he's willing to share the above sources of revenue, which are really dodgy, how many even dodgier sources of revenue do you think he's got going on behind the scenes as well? Tate is like the final boss of used car salesmen.

Hobbies are really what you want. If your school offers it, join various different groups etc. It will probably be quite stressful if you feel you have bad social skills but that is how you will learn and make new friends. If you can't do it in school then do it outside of school.

Automated production lines have been a thing since the early 1900s and as they have gotten more advanced many, many factory workers have lost their jobs.

I mean, there is also nothing morally wrong with smearing shit all over yourself and your partner for sexual pleasure, but that doesn't change the fact that the vast majority of people find it pretty disgusting. There are biological mechanisms in place which make things like that and incest seem disgusting to most humans.

Are they incel forums? Because I've looked at them a fair few times and the primary issue is not looks. It's that they're all really unpleasant people. PUA is something you need basic social skills before you can start doing effectively. If you are not physically attractive, have zero social skills, and no social network at all (which describes a lot of incels) pickup stuff is like step 5. There are like 3 or 4 other steps you need to complete before you should start doing pickup. I've met plenty of ugly dudes who are great with women. The difference is that they are fun people to be around and don't spend their time complaining about how ugly and unlovable they are on forums online, they have vibrant social lives and do a bunch of stuff with their lives.

People have been fearing it for centuries. Artists are crying now like they're the first group of people to ever face the existential crisis of having their job automated, lol

Depends what you’re looking for. Clubs are unbeatable for hookups and more casual relationships. Maybe not ideal for more serious relationships, but it’s not like that’s impossible either. As a guy you will be able to meet way better girls in a club than you’ll meet online

It's a common pattern where a woman shows tons of interest towards a guy on a night out, may even want to go home with him but can't because of logistics, and then seemingly never wants to see them again after that night. I'm not saying it's impossible to see a girl you met on a night out again if you don't sleep with her or anything, just that it's a notably unlikely. When you meet someone out a night the passion usually burns quick and fast, which means it also dies fast.

In my experience, women you meet on nights out at a club are really unlikely to want to meet up again if you don't pull on the same night. It might not be anything you did wrong, it's just how it is.

Because there are some things that cause enough suffering to others to not really require justification for being unethical from a human POV; cold-blooded murder, cheating in clearly monogamous relationships/marriage, and molestation of kids are all examples of things in that category among plenty of others. In regards to cheating specifically: you are breaking a solidly defined agreement of trust, which has the potential to emotionally destroy another person and cause extreme suffering. You are putting your own selfish needs in front of a shared responsibility that you agreed to. Most people agree that this is unethical and at the very least an indication of poor character. The fact you need to keep it a secret from your wife actually explains it very succinctly. If it was a harmless act then you could just tell your wife that you came inside another women's vagina. But you know that it would likely emotionally destroy her so you have to keep it secret in order for it to be acceptable in your mind. Which again brings you back to having to justify the statement "it's not unethical to molest a child if no one finds out" if you want to make that particular argument.

I don't know or care, I'm not coming at this from an absolute perspective or from any kind of religious perspective, I'm thinking about it in terms of the concrete harm it potentially causes to you, and those around you. Hiding behind an absolute POV when it comes to ethical questions is somewhat lazy because everything is OK from an absolute perspective. That's nothing new.