slopjockey @ slopjockey @awful.systems

Posts

10

Comments

139

Joined

2 yr. ago

And despite the fact that whatshisname wants to secure a future for himself and his heavyweight white children, he doesn't capitalize "white" at any point. To be honest that was the only part that was surprising.

And here are my favorite sneers from the comment section

This guy gets fucking dunked on for not reading the room and claiming that black guys might actually be better boxers, genetically.

And this guy thinks that weight classes are for wokies.

Honestly, I'm starting to think this post was threadworthy just from the comment section alone.

So there was a big, vaguely described, public kerfuffle at a beach in my city, so I logged onto Xitter to see what happened. The first (and only relevant post) was from a sinister-ish sounding bluecheck. Low and behold, I found that he writes to the Unz review.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240526210416/https://www.unz.com/article/the-worlds-greatest-boxer-is-a-white-man/ It's all about Usyk, a heavyweight boxer who's considered a pound for pound great. Usyk is a great boxer, undoubtedly. But this article is strangely constructed, borderline pointless, and brazenly racist (shocker). And honestly, reading the comments, I think the author's just trying to cope with the fact that black boxers tend to be popular.

I don't think racist cope on its own is even worth a stubstack, but this one take is especially stupid:

Since it’s assumed that heavyweight boxers are able to beat everyone below their weight class, the heavyweight champ is essentially the real champ. And until last weekend, there hasn’t been an undisputed heavyweight champion since 1999, when Lennox Lewis—a black “British” man—collected all of the belts, only to lose one of them a year later when he failed to promptly fight a mandatory challenger.

To those unfamiliar with combat sports, I can't emphasize enough how weird it is to say that the heavyweight champ is the best boxer, period. Skill - irrespective of raw strength - is super important to boxers and other people who participate in combat sports. To the point that any fan ranking a pro boxer will likely talk about "Pound for pound" (p4p) greats, not the objectively strongest fighters. And right now the unofficial p4p great is a sub 5'6" Japanese boxer Naoya "Monster" Inoue. This man is a beast. I don't need to glaze him any harder, just google him or look up what people think on reddit. Weirdly enough, he's not mentioned once.

Hell, he doesn't mention Gervonta "Tank" Davis at all. He's half an inch shorter than Inoue, but he's also considered a p4p great and is known for his high boxing IQ. As a matter of fact, he doesn't mention Terence Crawford - 5'8" also considered a p4p great - at all either. Hmmm.

That's what everybody who's into HBD looks like

He looks like the child Taron Egerton's Eggsy and Scott Alexander

Ya, I looked up that guys feed and it was all frog posting. Like literally 50% frogs and 50% white woman sieg hieling

😉

These people are full of shit popping off like they do after THREE kids. Big fucking deal, my parents had three, and my brother and I were accidents. And they let us have heat in the winter and they didn’t hit us. Three is still normal!

There are some more lovely sneers in r/longreads

https://www.reddit.com/r/Longreads/comments/1d061p3/at_home_with_americas_premier_pronatalists/l5loa62/

This is part of a whole thing where the journalist keeps presenting their framing without question.

Yuuup, and at no point is it explicitly mentioned that what they're doing is entirely unfeasible on a societal level. How on Earth will a couple dozen rationalist having 4, 7, or even 11 kids make up for the hundreds of millions of women in America having 1.5? Or the billions of women having under 2.1 kids in the rest of the world.

On top of that, they only have 3 kids and they've already put a shit ton of time and sunk themselves over half a million in debt just for housing and childcare. I absolutely believe these two can afford it, but this isn't something most Americans can achieve, much less most global families. One couple trying to outfuck global population decline would be like if I tried to end global poverty by becoming really, really rich.

It must have some internal models of some things, or else it wouldn’t be possible to consistently make coherent and mostly reasonable statements.

Talk about begging the question

Also he used to be u/imaxblue. 3 years ago today this man was making 2 sentence horror stories, posting pictures of his dratini plush, and speaking in uwu xd talk. All while decrying wokism on his substack.

The craziest part is that this is just every tenth guy on the web right now. Man I used to be terminally online, but every time I see the newest micro celebrity I feel like I'm in freak central.

Proof (he links his substack): https://www.reddit.com/r/uwaterloo/comments/kl4oz0/well_yes_i_am_an_expert_in_epidemiology/gh6vfiz/?context=3

That Floyd tweet was fantastically dim-witted, so much more so than I expected from the headline. This unaltered video of a man's death is a deepfake not because it was doctored, nor because it's misleading, but because it gave progressive beliefs I don't like. And all that was sandwiched between an AI plug. His point was that AI would somehow shit all over the libs and he doesn't explain how, not even a little bit.

How do these weird ass neolib AI freakazoids keep getting cited in mainstream sites?

A good portion of online rw politics is just a desparate cry for pussy blanketed with callous dogma.

He does have a point though. The TTS does sound pretty different from "Her".

...but it also sounds a shit ton like Johansson in general. Which would make sense if it was trained on a corpus of her speaking rather than just clips from the one movie.

I mean come on, it sounds like chatGPT's about to tell me that the sun's getting real low.

Begging the question is a fallacy in which the premise of an argument presupposes the truth of its conclusion; in other words, the argument takes for granted what it's supposed to prove.

In Critical Thinking (2008), William Hughes and Jonathan Lavery offer this example of question-begging: "Morality is very important, because without it people would not behave according to moral principles."

Used in this sense, the word beg means "to avoid," not "ask" or "lead to." Begging the question is also known as a circular argument, tautology, and petitio principii (Latin for "seeking the beginning").

https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-begging-the-question-fallacy-1689167

Is that a recent change? I feel like I've seen a fair number of dead links on Wikipedia, mainly on older unpopular articles

"How to craft pro-eugenics story in minecraft site:stormfront.com site:heritagefoundation.org -site:splc.con"

Here's another good one: https://old.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/12qbsfo/tpo_has_joined_twitter_been_tweeted_by_paul/

paywalled papers that turn out not to support his claims

My favorite tp0 moment was when someone pointed out the identical twins in an adoption study he cited were barely separated, and tp0 blocked him and left the original chart using data from the study up.

https://old.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/comments/12qbsfo/tpo_has_joined_twitter_been_tweeted_by_paul/jgr8sxv/