array_key_first

The danger with this is that you're asking cloudflare to know more about you and your website and to be more ready to take websites offline. That's a monkey paw if ive ever seen one.

If the system itself is set up such that it covers up the crimes of cops, which I would argue it is, then yes - simply by knowing that information and choosing to participate in the system, you have just helped cover up crimes, which is a crime.

Consider: is it possible to be an ethical member of the mafia?

> Somewhere your thought process is broken. You do not appear to have a strong concept of causal relationships.

I don't think you even believe this is true, you're just short circuiting like a poorly built robot. You can't respond to what I'm actually saying so it's just "uhhh uhhh you're not logical! I can't respond to illogical people!"

But think about it, for like longer than 5 seconds. If you know the police do bad things, and you want to join anyway, doesn't that mean that you must want to do bad things? And, if you're in the forced, doesn't that mean that you're helping and abetting said bad things?

If your brain really can't comprehend why that doesn't compute, then okay remove the world police. Replace it with mafia, or pirates, or gang, or Nazis. The concept itself makes sense, no?

I think the problem is that you intrinsicly view the police as good guys, they fight crime. But that's not really true, one because good guys and bad guys don't exist, that's comic book stuff, but also because the police are systemicly, institutionally, evil. Like, from their conception as slave catchers in the south.

You might view the police as good guys who sometimes do bad things. Others view them as essentially a gang. Except a state-sponsored gang, which is much much worse.

In that light, do you understand how ACAB might come to be? Even if you don't agree with it?

Right but naturally that's not actually why they're doing it. In actuality, it's a layoff - they did not go through and analyze which employees are "keeping up" and which aren't, don't be so naive.

This, like virtually all layoffs, is for economic reasons. Of course you can't say that because that reflects poorly on your growth and makes your investors uneasy and yadda yadda yadda. But what do investors like? Hm? AI!

Oh! Oh!!! This is strategic, you see, so we can use even more AI, yes yes that's right mhm.

But that's literally what we teach.

Part of the reason men cause so much violence is because of people like you, your exact mentality. Which says that's its expected for men to be violence, so, c'est la vie!

Men are not just like... inherently violent creatures, that's a stupid and toxic mentality. No, they're socialized to be violent by other men, who were also socialized to be violent.

I just don't understand why people would think it works.

We used to do it. Shocker, it didn't work. Bullies were much, MUCH meaner in the past. Mostly it's just mean words now, which is still bad but better.

So, we had corporal punishment, it was bad. Then we got rid of corporal punishment, and it got better. Hmm, thinking caps!

Of course that's just correlative evidence. But we have literally no evidence anywhere from anyone that corporal punishment is good.

Consider: not hitting kids is much easier than hitting kids, and also free. Ergo, if we're gonna be hitting kids, we need really strong research to show that it's effective. Which we don't have. The default should be DENY, not ALLOW, just like good security practice.

While this is true, these are nothing burger examples. The world will not crumble if you don't help a nice lady put her luggage in the overhead compartment.

Yes, as a man, our "strength" is mostly for show and is redundant in modern society. Also most men are not even very strong because we live sedentary lives. Because - surprise! - 99.9999% of all economic activity has nothing to do with strength.

This isn't ancient Rome and you aren't a spartan. Most men are fatties sitting at an office job. They don't have, nor need, strength. They need statins and metformin.

> We have very simple fixes for that - such as clothing and protective sun creams. The same does not apply to physical differences between men and women.

Brother do you hear yourself. Your key example, the thing holding your entire argument together was brick layers. Fucking... brick layers.

And you think we don't have anything to eskew gender differences? Brother, look around you. 99.9999% of jobs can be done by men and women thanks to modern technology. Including fucking war!

Because you know what's stronger than men? Guns. And you know who can hold guns? Women. So, there you go, that's why the US army accepts women.

Well prepubescent children have very similar hormone make up. That's why young boys have no muscles and have the same sort of body as girls. The only reason we can tell them apart at all really is because of long hair and the color pink.

Girls are not meaningfully more fragile than boys, especially before puberty. Before puberty they're practically indistinguishable. If it weren't for long hair and the color pink none of us would know.

That's just something people tell themselves. Yes, we socialize boys not to cry. That doesn't mean boys are "stronger", it means that they have a pathological fear of being perceived as weak which will cause them sexual and relationship problems until the day they die.

Historical societies are... historical. We shouldn't be looking to them. They didn't have the technology we have today.

Yes boys are strong. You know what's stronger than a boy? Gun. Girl with gun is stronger. It's not fucking 400 AD and this isn't Rome and we don't have slaves. Things are different today.

Yes, there are biological differences, but they definitely matter the least now as opposed to ever. Think about jobs. Women can do basically every modern job a man can do, and definitely the high paying ones. Now think about ancient societies and why that wasn't the case.

Yes, you did admit that, by implication. To replay what exactly happened in this conversation.

Person A: It's almost not worth commenting on the irony of someone using the name "rationalist" failing to understand basic concepts like "covering up a crime is also a crime".

Reduced: "you do not understand that covering up a crime is also a crime".

You: I did not say or imply that.

Implication: I do understand that covering up a crime is also a crime, and do not imply otherwise.

Implication: since covering up a crime is also a crime, you admit that you do not need to prove every cop has committed a crime themselves to be a criminal.

I'm not assuming anything, I'm only taking your words at face value. What's happening is you're writing things without using your brain to think about what you're writing. So, if what I'm saying sounds stupid or obvious... uh, okay, reflect on that.

Regardless, you're missing the forest for the trees here. You didn't bother to actually reply to anything I said, probably because you thought this sad little response would be easier.

The ACAB viewpoint comes from the preposition that policing in the US is systemicly or institutionally broken and fueled by injustice. Thereby, any willing participation in it is, by definition, an act of injustice.

It's sort of how all jesters are silly. To be a jester, you must be silly, so by definition of a jester all jesters are silly.

Of course people want to spent their time on tiktok. People want to smoke, too. Have you tried smoking? It's the best. It's like your whole life you've been standing, and you just sat down.

We didn't really get much of anything we wanted. The Internet is, really, like... 12 companies? Maybe? I'm being generous, for most people it's much less. Media is just as concentrated and corporate as ever, arguably more. Censorship is the worst it's been in a while, I mean you can't even say "kill" on tiktok. Have you heard young people talk? They have their own new PC language, it's weird. Democracy is dying, not just in the US but across the entire west. Misinformation and lies dominate all communication. Fascism is rising like it's the early 20th century. And nobody is better educated. Allllll this information and everyone is still dumb as rocks.

You did say that, or rather implied it. You claimed this person must know every single cop, but you just admitted right now that actually you don't need to know every single cop to prove that all cops commit crimes. Because covering up for someone else is also a crime, and all cops presumably cover up. Arguably, just the simple act of existing as a cop is perpetuating injustice of the system.

So it's sort of self proving, or proven by definition. By definition of what cops are and what they are allowed to do, all cops must be bastards. If they weren't, they wouldn't be cops!

I don't know, like, common sense and your eyes?

Think of a field sobriety test. Now think of if that actually tests for sobriety. There, there's your source.

It is really high, but it's high because cops interact with traffic a lot, not because of criminals or guns or whatever. Real life isn't CSI Miami, cops are mostly sitting in cars. You'll notice crossing guard is much higher up the list, for the same reason.

That's how it is for literally every other fucking job. The goddamn cashier at McDonalds could theoretically get fired if some bozo complains loudly enough, even if it's not true.

We're legitimately at the point where mcdondalds cashiers have higher standards for accountability and behavior than the police. Just sit back and really, really think about that. And, to top it off, there's droves of people like yourself who are so accustomed to such a broken system that they legitimately believe it couldn't be done any other way - even though there are minimum wage workers working under stricter rules!

It's deeper than this. If you try to justify why Marijuana is schedule 1, you can't. The only reasonable explanation is "the DEA hates black Americans and poor people and wants to punish them most". That's the reasonable explanation, not the conspiracy.

The UN is a political tool absolutely - and it's one that's biased in favor of Israel.

Look, you have to understand that you and I are looking at this from a western lense. The west is EXTREMELY pro-israel. So your Overton window isnt just shifted a little buddy. It's fucking whiplashed alllllll the way to one side. So yes, from your perspective or mine the UN might appear as not pro Israel.

But um, they are, and quite a bit too. Again, if you want to see actual real anti-israel reporting, read stuff from Iran. You will surely notice it sounds very, very different from how the UN portrays Israel.

I think it's about sending a message, and maybe also about ego to a lesser extent. If you pay the 20,000 you're admitting you did something wrong. Of course they did do something wrong. They did something wrong thousands, probably millions of times. And they got very lucky to only be sued once. Which is why they paid millions.

Being anti-israel is not the same as being anti-semetic. That's a low-effort low-intelligence "argument" people throw out to quickly stamp out dissent against Israel, and it doesn't work anymore. It's been overused, get new material.

Israel probably does not leak secrets to Russia or China, but Israel is a bad ally of the US and has gotten us in a lot of hot water. It would be better for the US if we just let them figure their own shit out. We do not need to be aiding a genocide for no benefit of our own.

The UN, like most western organizations, is biased in favor of Israel. Meaning, this reporting is what favorable coverage looks like. You should read unfavorable coverage, it's much much worse. It took the UN a long time to acknowledge Israel even did anything wrong.

Probably nothing, he's just not naive. You would have to have the intelligence of a small child to legitimately believe that authorities are only ever acting in benevolence, never with ulterior motives, and that they can never make mistakes. It's a matter of risk analysis here; we want to minimize the risk of shit going wrong.

It's not that people are even mad about paying for software, it's that paid-for software is often worse in unique ways that free software is not! Which is maybe shocking, but not so shocking when one considers that money intrinsicly corrupts everything it touches as it re-aligns incentives.

For example, a lot of paid for software actively disrespects the user. A lot of paid for software degrades in quality over time. A lot of paid for software has far too many ads. A lot of paid for software loses features over time. And on and on. In my experience, that's just not the case in open-source land.

I donate for virtually all my open-source software, usually a lot. To me, it's not just that KDE is free and Windows costs money for instance. It's that Windows sucks major donkey dick and fucks its own customers up the ass, and, on top of it, continues to degrade, whereas KDE is amazing software that gets better and better by the day.

Well it depends on the task. For agentic coding, more is more, but for tasks that normal consumers use them for there really is a ceiling. OCR, text to speech, that type of thing doesn't really improve when going to a SOTA model, so you'd just be wasting your money. I think local LLMs have more value than software engineers give them credit for.

Phones are such a travesty because they're so incredibly overpowered. I think there's a lot of people out there where their iPhone has more compute than their laptop or desktop, but it can't do 1/10th the amount of stuff. What a waste!

Yes, but the battery tech itself is improving. We're already seeing new phones approach 8000 mAH internal batteries, which is large enough that you can splurge on compute and still have some left over at the end of the day.

None of this has to do with consistency, though, which is the topic at hand.

I mean, maybe you can say Windows has "one window system". But Microsoft has over a dozen GUI frameworks, and then they don't even use them. Teams is electron, believe it or not. I mean, in windows TODAY you can find UIs from 1995 to today in there.

And that's just Microsoft software! The pre installed shit. Don't even get me started on applications. Let me tell you, that's not a problem on KDE or GNOME.

But we have undeniable evidence that the number of record highs to record lows has been increasing dramatically over the past few decades. It's just measurement, there's no magic behind it.

Summers are actually hotter and winters are actually warmer on average, that's real.

This comment feels like playing stupid to such an absurd degree that the argument loses any semblance of thought and you sound like you're yelling at clouds.

Obviously being a slave is not the same as being a millionaire. If you make your argument this reductionist then you don't even sound human anymore, let alone well reasoned.