They are basically acting like a monopoly already. Arbitrarily limiting their software, arbitrarily changing rules, implementing anti-competitive policies. They think they’ve won a race that’s begun five minutes ago. Incredible hubris. Short Anthropic when it goes public.

empathy debt.

lol

She strangled her three kids with an exercise band, one by one, and jumped out the window, paralyzing herself. This is far from the first time this has happened. Theresa Riggi did the same thing. Andrea Yates, too. David Carmichael drugged and strangled his own 11-year-old son, then watched television in a daze before deciding it would be a good idea to call the police. Lindsay Clancy was prescribed: • sertraline (Zoloft) • fluoxetine (Prozac) • zolpidem (Ambien) • mirtazapine (Remeron) • clonazepam (Klonopin) • quetiapine (Seroquel) • diazepam (Valium) • lamotrigine (Lamictal) • lorazepam (Ativan) Among other drugs. Over four months. By Dr. Jennifer A. Tufts and Rebecca H. Jollotta, CNP/PMHNP. These women are supposed to be professionals, and in their professional opinion, they thought it was prudent to put this woman on multiple cocktails of potent psychotropics at breakneck speed. In psychiatry, most of these medications require weeks to reach a supposed "steady state" in the blood and even longer to show therapeutic effects. Further, SSRIs must be hyperbolically tapered to minimize side effects. This alone takes time. To cycle through over 10 different substances in 16 weeks means her brain was never once at a baseline. It was a 120-day neurochemistry experiment. And look at the outcome. Imagine how much trust you must have to allow someone to put you on 10 or more mood-altering meds, most of which exert whole-body effects—effects we do not look at, for neurotransmitter deficits we do not test for! If you looked at every notable familicide case, at school shootings, and at random acts of senseless violence, you would often find these drugs involved. But we don’t look. We need to start looking. And we need to completely gut this system. Here are some more cases you can Google for yourself: • 1993: William Forsyth of Hawaii fatally stabbed his wife 15 times, then killed himself, two weeks after starting Prozac. • 1996: Kurt Danysh shot and killed his father in Pennsylvania. He wrote in a blog that, while taking Prozac, he felt as if he was observing himself “from above.” • 1998: Donald Schell, a 60-year-old with no history of violence, murdered his wife, daughter, and granddaughter before killing himself, weeks after being prescribed Paxil. His surviving relatives successfully sued GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), Paxil's manufacturer, with a Wyoming jury finding GSK 80% responsible and awarding the family $6.4 million. • 1999: David Hawkins, then 76, strangled to death his wife of 50 years. He only got three years for the murder because the judge concluded it wouldn’t have happened if not for him being on Zoloft. • 1999: Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold shot and killed 13 people and wounded 23 others, before killing themselves during a mass shooting at Columbine high school. Harris, then 18, had been taking Zoloft, but had switched to Luvox before the murders. • 2001: Christopher Pittman, then 12 years old, shot and killed his sleeping grandparents and then set fire to their house in Chester, South Carolina. He was prescribed Zoloft less than a month before. • 2001: Andrea Yates, who drowned her five children in Texas, suffered from postpartum psychosis and was being treated with Effexor and Haldol. Her husband later stated that a sudden increase in her medication dosage significantly worsened her condition. • 2004: David Carmichael of Ontario, Canada, drugged and strangled his 11-year-old son. After the killing, he sat in a daze watching television before calling the police. He was found not criminally responsible due to Zoloft-induced psychosis; he had been prescribed the drug only weeks prior and was experiencing a "psychotic break" the judge attributed to the medication. • 2010: Neal Jacobson, a Florida family man with no history of violence shot and killed his wife and twin sons three weeks after being prescribed Zoloft and Xanax. • 2012: James Holmes, “The Batman Killer,” shot and killed 12 people, injuring 70 others at an Aurora, Colorado movie premiere of The Dark Knight. He was taking Zoloft. His psychiatrist upped the dosage, and then he abruptly stopped. • 2009: Shane Clancy, a 22-year-old theology student described as “a gregarious teetotaler whose life revolved around family, study, and charity,” stabbed to death his ex-girlfriend’s new boyfriend. Clancy also stabbed the man’s brother nine times, as well as Clancy’s ex-girlfriend, both of whom survived. He then fatally stabbed himself 19 times. He had begun taking Celexa just three weeks before. • 2010: Theresa Riggi, an American living in Scotland, fatally stabbed her three children. She was on a cocktail of antidepressants and painkillers at the time. Similar to other cases, the defense highlighted her compromised mental state and the influence of her prescription regimen during the period leading up to the tragedy. • 2019: Alec McKinney and Devon Erickson opened fire at the STEM School Highlands Ranch in Colorado, killing one student and injuring eight others. During court proceedings, testimony revealed that McKinney, then 16, had been prescribed the antidepressant Zoloft in the months leading up to the attack. • 2026: Jesse Van Rootselaar, 18, murdered his mother and young stepbrother at home before killing nine more and injuring 27 at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School. His alleged Reddit account revealed use of illicit and prescription psychotropic drugs, including a reported 280 mg dose of sertraline (Zoloft), exceeding the 200 mg recommended cut-off.

Bro said:

This whole snit happened because Colbert didn't want to give equal time to a black female Democrat. THAT is priceless.

Brutal ratio..

American culture was purposefully established around universal limiting principles and moral duty accessible and knowable to >ALL< Men. Principles of Christianity: Truth Love (Agape) Faith Hope Charity Justice Mercy Humility Repentance Forgiveness Stewardship Obedience to God Sanctity of life Human dignity (Imago Dei) Moral duty Temperance Courage Prudence Principles of Classic American Liberalism: Moral realism (truth knowably exists) Unalienable natural rights Ordered liberty Rule of law Individual moral agency Limited government Separation of powers Consent of the governed Equality under law Freedom of conscience and religion Freedom of speech and association Private property as stewardship Civic virtue Personal responsibility Justice through due process Common good through moral order Discernment between liberty and license Duty to God, family, and country

The ratio.....

This you?

My IQ is 104 - that’s 4 points above the highest score possible

This might be his best bait yet.

There is a theoretical scenario under which I would lean toward agreeing, but in the real-world situation I do not agree. The ideal "replacement": We can imagine a situation where the costs, for me, would be marginally lower status wrt jobs and such, a modest increase in felt "otherness", and a slight decrease in the efficiency of my socializing. The immigrants in this case would assimilate well, and everyone would be basically fine with them. The benefits would be living in a more advanced and well-functioning society. In that case I would probably agree that being "replaced" is a net good. But I'm not so optimistic about real world high skilled non-white immigration. Here are some reasons why: Ideology and Ethnocentrism: Non-white immigrants tend to exhibit a significant degree of ethnocentrism in their social behavior and general worldview. Politically, they tend to promote leftist ideologies that are at once anti-white and also, race aside, a long-term economic risk for the society. In addition to the intrinsic badness of this, immigration at a high level also has predictable negative effects on the white population whereby they become more negatively ethnocentric, populist, etc. This is plausibly made much worse when the immigrants actually are anti-white in ideology, but happens even when they are not. Institutional Quality: My view is that the quality of an institution is significantly a function of a set of behavioral traits possessed by the people managing and implementing it. We know this is not a simple matter of IQ. I don't think we have strong scientific knowledge of which traits do actually matter outside of IQ. So, we can't easily filter for them. This creates a serious risk. We might end up letting immigrants in who are high performers at some tasks we can easily measure (e.g. IQ, making lots of money, etc.), but not institutional management or implementation. So, high-skilled immigration at a high level is risky. How serious of a risk this is depends on your pre-existing institutional quality. If your institutions are already not very good, this risk is not very serious. But if your institutions are significantly better than the institutions in the countries the immigrants are coming from I think this is a significant risk. In the case of the US, this risk seems very high. Some of our scientific and economic systems are plausibly the best in the world (wrt innovation). At the same time, many of our high skilled non-white immigrants come from places with pretty bad institutions. For that reason, I think the US population being "replaced" would be very high risk and so not a good idea. Until we have more knowledge about the full set of causes of group inequality, I think it makes sense to default to these conservative risk heuristics. I would abandon such heuristics if we knew more, and so could be more directly meritocratic about this, but we don't partly because the problem is hard and partly because social science has made the relevant research quasi taboo. There are lesser concerns, but those are the main ones that came to mind thinking about being "replaced" by high-skilled immigration. Obviously, these concerns are lesser for more modest proposals, like letting in a significant but capped number of high skilled immigrants in a task targeted fashion. But the question was about "replacement", which I take to mean something larger than that.

he can't keep getting away with it!

"Its not happening"

I do not doubt this is true. Lol

Legend!

The fact that SF is full of well educated, successful people who can’t figure out what to do with a machete wielding lunatic is darkly hilarious. It’s like seeing a 140 IQ person fail a test for grade school kids.

Borders, ID Checks, and purity tests. Makes sense if you don't think about it.