Message from @Scipio Americanus
Discord ID: 543647662545829900
uyghurs
i am 25% uyghur
I wonder why people arent using shit like Riot
thats what I thought
Im going to set one up tomorrow
Discord is highly accessible
that counts for a lot with casual users
@PunishedMuskovy basically we either use the most popular (invariably botnet) service or use an extremely obscure service that only autistic linux users will find
Like for the purposes of some arch linux help group I'm sure IRC isn't that bad
but for political stuff we need to include dumb people and hence maybe discord is a better choice despite my autism
The unwilling part is pretty bad cuz that can essentially be everyone
America really needs another silver legion or american blackshirts
Not this nazi bs
it be better
for everyone to work 4h a day, some random administrative job(ie that requires only physical strain, and is monotone and etc..), from age of 10 till death
Thank you very much for posting this movie clip in the serious discussions channel.
4 hour work day is feasible but only for a minority of freelancers
why is RT labeled on websites like youtube as "being funded by Russian Government", yet the BBC is a "public broadcast" despite the fact that it receives money from the Government?
because biased technocrats are biased
thats what i figured
youtube algos are just shit too
but leaving that out is purely because they chose not to assign a value to BBC not due to being incompetent
oh britain, the incompetent totalitarians
exactly, they have yet to really become ingsoc. then they become *competent* totalitarians. and shit gets wack.
RT is russian propaganda - and i love it cause of it. It propagates Russian Point of View, thats what they themselves say. I dont get it when people are angry about this
Long live Mother Russia!
Because rt is considered by the russian govt as a strategic asset (https://web.archive.org/web/20081227071316/http://www.government.ru/content/governmentactivity/mainnews/33281de212bf49fdbf39d611cadbae95.doc). Margarita simonyan, the editor in chief has stated in interviews repeatedly that she sees the organisation as being parallel to defence (http://archive.is/RzLyk). The bbc has a huge framework of transparency and has shown that its fully willing to critique the british govt. RT does not demonstrate that and would, as current events seem to show, (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-usa-media-restrictions-rt/russias-rt-america-registers-as-foreign-agent-in-u-s-idUSKBN1DD25B) prefer to register as a foriegn agent then apply a minimum standard of transparency.
BBC only criticizes the British government when it’s against what they want people to think
the bbc's adherence to an orthodox perspective of its own delineation is a separate conversation. Happy to have it but to even recognize that statement we have to first accept that the BBC and the government of the United Kingdom form their conception independently of one another. RT seems to take pride in being a mouthpiece for the kremlin and so to answer @Scipio Americanus original question, we say the bbc is a public broadcast because it's an independent organization which receives money from the public, whereas RT is held to a higher level of scrutiny as it seems to see itself as an extension of the russian state with, if similar projects are anything to go by, russian ministry members acting as tie-ins to executive roles
Also moving the discussion here as it seems more fitting but finally replying to something in normal chat earlier in the week...
@Aki
```significant intermarriage... is irrelevant to your original point```
I disagree. It shows that genetic differences between ‘whites’ and ‘jews’ are inconsistent and seemingly arbitrary. While not conclusive, in the absence of a set range of genome sequences which we are to call ‘jewish’ it shows strong reason to doubt why we would suspect ashkenazi jews higher earning rates as explainable by a genetic advantage where we would not expect the same of a highly similar group, ie mainland Europeans. In order to prove your assertion a specific gene set would need to be found and you would need to show that this gene set is characteristic of the ‘jewish’ range of genomes. As our conversation seems to be scoped around the US we would also need to collect earnings data based on genome, rather than self-identity, as the US currently collects racial data.
```IQ disparity... is not a sufficient explanation```
That is not my position. IQ disparity *would* be a sufficient explanation but it is not a *neccesary* cause of wealth disparity as I illustrated with the Paris Hilton example.
```Religion and work ethic```
In the wake of data ethnicity does not seem convincing. In terms of practice, adhering jews are the highest bracket by earnings. Non-religion in this case serves as a solid base mark here with atheists and agnostics also in the top 6 and the non-affiliated only just scraping below the national average. As the ethnicity is correlated with adherence to cultural sets with inflated earnings relative to a random basket of the american public is it any wonder that the ethnicity seems to prosper? This line is further reinforced by the differing outcomes of ethnically very similar groups of christians or the high ranking of hindu’s despite the crushing poverty of india. If ethnicity was a primary factor here this makes little sense while if other factors play a higher role, factors such as geography, culture, community, etc these seem highly intuitive. We can see that work ethic is not a bogus theory, but a vital prerequisite for success to be achieved. (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/11/how-income-varies-among-u-s-religious-groups/, http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/)
@CronoSaturn
_"I disagree. It shows that genetic differences between ‘whites’ and ‘jews’ are inconsistent and seemingly arbitrary. While not conclusive, in the absence of a set range of genome sequences which we are to call ‘jewish’ it shows strong reason to doubt why we would suspect ashkenazi jews higher earning rates as explainable by a genetic advantage where we would not expect the same of a highly similar group, ie mainland Europeans...."_
The current intermarriage rates are not representative of the past. In 1970 it was only 17% and yes, it grew from that to 58% in modern times, but that is still enough for the genetic distinctiveness to be present. Finally... Jewish pop in USA is distinct from the gentile pop on genetic distance graphs. So... your reasoning does not apply.
_"That is not my position. IQ disparity would be a sufficient explanation but it is not a neccesary cause of wealth disparity as I illustrated with the Paris Hilton example."_
No, no no... you said it yourself: "That IQ is correlated with wealth is not a proof that all wealth is a display of IQ disparities alone" That means that:
1. You accept that IQ plays a role.
2. You don't think it is the only factor.
Trying to go back on your own words without admitting to it in the open and explaining why you do it is an intellectually dishonest thing to do Crono.
_''In the wake of data ethnicity does not seem convincing. In terms of practice, adhering jews are the highest bracket by earnings. Non-religion in this case serves as a solid base mark here with atheists and agnostics also in the top 6 and the non-affiliated only just scraping below the national average.''_
Gee...I wonder why that is the case... ov vey.. I have an idea... maybe that is because you aren't comparing between religious and non religious jews but between Jews and Gentiles? Here is such comparitson... notabene taken from the very same site that you are using as your source:
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/religious-tradition/jewish/income-distribution/#belief-in-god-trend
The difference is not significant, but if anything, it shows that less religious Jews are on average more wealthy than the more religious Jews.
_"This line is further reinforced by the differing outcomes of ethnically very similar groups of christians or the high ranking of hindu’s despite the crushing poverty of india. If ethnicity was a primary factor here this makes little sense while if other factors play a higher role, factors such as geography, culture, community, etc these seem highly intuitive. We can see that work ethic is not a bogus theory, but a vital prerequisite for success to be achieved."_
Even on the data that you show we can see that jews score the highest, followed by hindu (the IQ of Indians in the US is above average), followed by white churches , followed by mixed/black/latino churches.
Regardless there are other factors outside of IQ that play a role.. yes. However none of em seem to be this mysterious work ethic that you propose. How do you even measure that btw? Because you do measure it ... Right?
Looking at the discrepancies present among white churches... there is no reason to attribute it to any sort of "work ethic" present in the dogma... not when we cannot even quantify it in any meaningful way... so it seems that those "highly intuitive" factors are very highly intuitive sow to speak... huh ;D
@CronoSaturn type of IQ is worth keeping in mind, it might be the case that verbal IQ is more important to become rich than spatial IQ
Much like how Wozniak is poorer than steve jobs
bicameral parliament is best, change my mind
Its no technology itself that's gone too far, its dependence on technology to fulfill and replace natural human abilities, sensations and processes that has gone too far.