Eli Bishop

No you don't understand, he doesn't want to be "incentivized", he wants to be "incented."

It can be pretty jarring to read stuff
from the late 1960s or early 70s where you see this all the time, from white writers who in many cases may have meant well by keeping up with preferred terminology, but had just done a mental search-and-replace of "Negro"->"Black" and left it at that.

I think the OP's point is that the mid-level will suffer not because mid-level engineers are replaced by AI, but because people don't stay in their jobs forever and eventually you'll need some brand new mid-level engineers. So where did those people start out?

Someone else in the thread has made basically the same point as Peter did here, and Cohn didn't respond. Instead he spent his time calling a dozen other people stupid mentally ill liars.

Like, consistently in that thread, when someone says a general bad thing about FIRE, he insults them and blows it off... but when someone says a very specific and harder to dispute bad thing about FIRE, he simply ignores it and doesn't respond. To me that doesn't really scream good faith.

Maybe Cohn was a good dude, but I have to say that he's coming off as a total bad-faith asshole in the linked thread. There's no way he honestly doesn't understand why people have issues with FIRE. He's just sneering and acting like anyone who has these concerns is an insane fool.

It's a deliberate misuse, part of their ongoing anti-trans propaganda effort plus their general anti-intellectualism. Don't know how common it is among actual people, but it's gotten a ton of press from some of their worst loudmouths, so your chances of being understood would depend on the audience.

Or, more simply: they've decided the word "gender" is inherently freaky and un-American, there should be only "sex", so "gender ideology" = the far-out belief that there is even such a thing.

Basically it is the current right-wing way to say "any point of view in which transgender people, and others not conforming to a 1950s notion of a sex binary, exist and should be respected in accord with both decency and the law", but to make it sound like some weird cult thing.

Unfortunately, these days yes, you are. A casual search online will lead to a lot of stuff you'll probably wish you hadn't read.

Similar deal with "racial preference." That's how right-wingers describe anything related to affirmative action or DEI, but nobody actually involved in those areas is saying "we have a racial preference so let's not hire this white person" or whatever nonsense they imagine.

Simpsons screenshot of Principal Skinner saying "I was only in there to get directions on how to get away from there." (from "Bart After Dark")

And estrangement is a thing that really has to be done from an uncomfortably close distance.

I mean, do what you feel, of course. Just wanted to clarify that I was talking more about outcomes than about what's deserved. Anonymous online trolling is a weird dynamic that's different from dealing with assholes in just about any other context. Our usual instincts can exhaust and hurt us.

I don't think it's about being afraid, really - or about their emotional state. Just that the engagement makes them more likely to keep playing the game, so the result is more and more trolling, and all of the discomfort is being borne by you (assuming you don't enjoy being mad) and other readers.

OK well there's a bunch of people doing that, as far as I can see. Trolls get angry responses, and they enjoy them. This person already has a self-congratulatory post up about having succeeded in getting more "haters."

But it's an anonymous rando on the Internet. What do you have in mind? Some people are telling him to go fuck himself, other people just eyeroll and avoid reading him, other people don't really care. In a forum with moderators you can shut that down, but this isn't really that.

Pretty sure they're trolling, so the "social sanction" is what they hope for and enjoy.
Either that or they're just a super sloppy writer (or drunk). One of their later comments was based on imagining or pretending that they had really said "don't *sell* bad art."

Did Saudis Fly Out of the U.S. While Airspace Was Still Closed after 9/11? Did a secret flight whisk Saudis and Osama bin Laden's relatives out of the USA during a ban on air travel?

Anyway, the "Saudis were flown out of the country on 9/12" thing is (not surprisingly) a mashup/distortion of several different stories. Summary: www.snopes.com/fact-check/f... Michael Moore was one of the main legend-spreaders.

It was for two days, although things were still relatively quiet for a little longer because flights didn't all resume at once. Of course 2 days felt like 2 months at the time.

If anyone thinks they know exactly who I'm talking about here, you have about a 1 in 500 chance of being right, because I see this about 500 times a week whenever I'm stupid enough to read random comment threads in progressive spaces.

Option 3 is the one to pick if you're a total fucking asshole. To make it even clearer, try adding something about being a bold anti-PC truth-teller who's just using the enemy's language "against them", as if the enemy is reading your posts and reeling from your sick burn.

But if you want to anyway, fine, do the stupid bit. And then when people are like "uh wtf, maybe it's sarcasm but how about just don't?", you have a choice. 1. Do nothing. 2. "Oh yeah, sorry, I get how that sounds with no context. I meant ___." Or 3. "Obviously I meant ___ and my comment was great."

But if you want to anyway, fine, say that. Just don't try to be cute about it by talking the way a bigot would talk, and assuming that everyone should read your righteous mind & know that you're just doing a bit. Because 1. they won't and 2. even if they do, that's a stupid lazy pointless bit.

PSA: if you feel like the Internet needs you to point out that Republicans are hypocrites because they tolerate some queer and/or non-white people on their side... nah, relax, 100000 other people made that exact same comment for you already & also no one gives a shit & it doesn't help in any way.

Well, fuck this. How about I just block you, the whole thread goes away, and you go on to alienate even more people and thinking that you're teaching them all a lesson.

You have no idea how salty I & my friends are. The fact that you pissed people off doesn't mean you're a bold truth-teller & anyone you pissed off is a PC scold. I'm not very nice, I'm not being nice to you now, and I don't give a shit about being not-nice to JD Vance.

I'm only still talking to you in case you aren't actually a total asshole & really do mean well. Because I guarantee if you go around talking that way & assuming everyone knows what you *really* mean, a lotta good people will be thinking "holy shit what a creep", whether they tell you or not.

Your very first reaction, when someone else very politely called you on this & even said they're sure you didn't mean it that way, was to double down and say it was clear & then insult her with your sarcastic "you do you" shit. That is asshole behavior. You think you're an ally? Then don't do that.

Screenshot of Funkybat's first two comments from the thread.

Here's what you wrote. Nothing about commenting on homophobia. Just Thiel is gay and he's evil, and Vance is one of "his boys." Your other explanation, after someone asked, doesn't make it *not* inflammatory to talk this way. Which I guess you're going to keep on doing since you think it's so clear.

If what you want to say is that Republicans are hypocrites for being allied with a gay man, you can just fucking say that in the first place, rather than dropping "gay groomer" in a way that looks completely random until someone asks you about it and *then* you provide a rationale.