ITT: Hacks

good god it reads like a zuckerberg robot post.

...

Go back to /pol/.

fuck off zuck the cuck

You cannot cuck the Zuck!

>It's called diversity you fucking racist.
Do you need to swear?

...

affirmative action is racist in itself

nice post my friend

...

I know people that have gotten a social sciences degree, gotten a job out of college as a software engineer with programming experience, and then gone back to grad school for CS but this is pretty ridiculous.

...

america is a travesty

I honestly can't offer you a good reason for it. It's not affirmative action because I could do it if I wanted to as well. It's just a baffling thing that you're allowed to do for some reason.

What's wrong with making a complex topic understandable to laymen?

I'm pretty sure fields medal winners don't write like that, and they can probably also choose which PhD students they take

I don't get it, is that supposed to be wrong?

That's not as good as this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_(magazine)

>Favoring pseudoscientific content, the magazine addressed issues related to HIV/AIDS, AIDS denialism, alternative medicine, and themes of interest to the LGBT community. It ran from December 1992 until February 2001, ceasing publication because all the contributors had died of AIDS-defining clinical conditions.

Looking back AIDS denialism is really cute, it was a dead end after everyone involved with it died though.

this shit comes from europe

bitch? 55 yo math-geek that deadlifts 350.

that's all i needed to know to read his entire incerto series

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_Memory_Syndrome_Foundation

who deleted this? sjw mods?

...

They've been working overtime lately. I made some off-handed remark about miscegenation and IQ and I got a 24-hour ban, under the pretense of Global rule #3 (racism off of /b). I guess the paradigm shift is scaring some people.

jesus christ why are lefties so fucking terrible
>hurr durr aids is not real because that would be homophobic and i'd be offended
>herr x is fake because that would be racist
>derpy z is false because that would be misogynistic

The current left is just a cancerous morass blighting the face of America. We need a return to the old Enlightenment ideals of liberty and rationality. Maybe then political correctness and religious bullshit alike will stop getting in the way of honest scientific inquiry.

The concept that "only" a society like that could uphold those ideals isn't quite true, though it would make things considerably easier.

Really, the problem has always been failure to force incoming outsiders to fully assimilate to the dominant culture. The bleeding hearts cry about how we're stomping all over their native culture, but doing so is what ensures stability.

They won't assimilate. This is an experiment that has failed repeatedly... the tribal bonds are too strong.

>jesus christ why are lefties so fucking terrible

hey dipshit, at least my side of the political spectrum isn't brushing a planet-boning climactic trend under the rug because muh 401k

>my memory is an absolutely infallible tool, i could never misremember a thing

>jesus christ why are lefties so fucking terrible
I'm not aware of any political bias in HIV-denial.

Quite the contrary, there are always those who do, even with a laissez-faire approach, even if there are also many who do not. We just have to keep to meritocratic ideals so that those who embrace the new culture can better themselves while those who refuse must either assimilate or starve. The reason this hasn't happened isn't because of an inability to do so, but rather because political correctness, in its misguided compassion, concocts reasons why the latter sort should be spared the dilemma of assimilation or starvation, leading to the formation of an underclass that largely contributes little to society while being able to survive (albeit in squalor) on welfare.

>says while shutting down already operating nuclear and hydroelectric plants

no u mr big oil

It's in the OP. Lang denied it because he was a socialist and thought it was a homophobic/racist conspiracy pushed by the ebil Reagan administration and bible thumpers to shame the poor homos. The idea that AIDS was a christian-right conspiracy was not that unpopular in the 80s

Assimilation is indeed possible, but it's a massive undertaking and the society in itself must be able to develop a methodology to ensure that assimilation is able to actually occur in a smooth and most convenient way.

Since graduating and having a ton of off time, I've been reading immensely and, in particular, I've been intrigued by history. Most of the nations in this world today were not originally homogeneous, e.g., there has always been migration from one country/nation to another and they've formed from there. When we think of "German" people, we think of today's Germanic people. But we don't take into consideration how other people from other people from the nations came into the country and developed over time (read: years) to assimilate. Suddenly, someone whose ancestral line goes back to Norway/Sweden from 500 years ago recognizes himself as a German, despite the fact that his ancestors are Norwegian/Swedish.

Basically what I'm saying is that every country has had assimilation to a certain degree and most countries, if they were able to properly implement policy, those who assimilated were able to thrive and contribute to the society.

The primary dilemma with America is that blacks are the children of slaves and, to be frank, America has always had an ingrained problem of racism -- not necessarily more than other countries, but it's very hard to convince the primary population (Caucasians) that the offspring of slaves (blacks) can be on the same footing as them. Affirmative Action was developed to ensure assimilation as best as possible, to decrease the economic plight faced by blacks and to increase economic, as well as societal, mobility. It works in some cases, but in others, it doesn't; that being said, white Americans have a very strong ideological thought process about race that ultimately defeats assimilation.

Affirmative action and demagoguery ignoring or denying innate differences between groups is sure thing to backfire

In addition to that, many blacks are trapped in an economic cycle of poverty and psychological hell which fights against assimilation into the country to begin with, given its history. There are also other issues plaguing the black community, such as fatherless homes, lack of employment, rampant physical/psychological abuse, sexual abuse, etc.

It's important to note that black Americans often disassociate themselves from African migrants, and even treats them with a semblance of scorn. So, it's clear that simply sharing the skin color isn't a prerequisite to bonding; Dominicans are also oftentimes very antagonistic toward Puerto Ricans and vice-versa. Similar disdain is shared between Cubans and PRs, too. Two groups of people could speak the same language, have the same skin color, be identical even down to their fucking DNA structure .... and just because they come from other parts of the world, they'll downright hate one another.

But if we look back into history, we find something a bit bizarre. If we look at how populations formed into what is now Cuba, or Puerto Rico, or Dominican Republic or Germany or Norway/Sweden, or England, or .. ... we find that there was relatively no "true" homogeneous population. They became homogeneous over a prolonged period of time. For fucks sake, look at Gaul. That can be considered a classic case of a "homogeneous" population suddenly splitting off into other homogeneous populations suddenly.

If we'd like to ensure assimilation for any country, especially America, new societal policies must be set forth. This ideological shift in America which focuses upon "Americanism," like we're European, is a bit bizarre. The first wave of Americans were Europeans from very distinct backgrounds. There were conflicts in neighborhoods between Germans and Irish, Italians and Irish, the Dutch and English; the list goes on and on. But how did they assimilate?

Acknowledging any innate differences between groups doesn't somehow prevent them from being able to integrate.

Indeed but ignoring them can and does create antagonism

what, nuanced and thoughtful posts in a thread like this?

They assimilated because they found a common ground between one another. They assimilated because they needed to survive with one another, for one another, by one another. If not, they were going to tear one another apart. No one has ever really understood the full gravity of those words from the declaration of Independence:
>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's an insanely powerful quote. It was developed not for the sake of sounding pretty, but to ensure that assimilation could indeed occur here, that it has occurred and it will continue to occur. This, of course, is antithetical to slavery and those who were enslaved finds this quote hypocritical, downright ridiculous even. To truly understand how a country can come together, you have to go back to the roots of that country/nation.

I think this is a cop-out. There were several groups who said the same of the Irish, the Italians, the this-person, the that-person, etc. Now that those people "assimilated," all of those comments have been pushed under the rug; no one discusses them anymore, huh? The Irish were considered filth itself, the white niggers; Italians were considered criminals. Suddenly, 200 years later, we hear no talk about "innate differences" between Italians and Germans. I wonder why that is?

If you even look at the history books, there were similar thoughts back then too. But after assimilation, after hundreds of years, those thoughts are downright laughable now.

I don't think anyone disagrees that there's an "innate difference" between two groups of people. There's a difference in how Swedes interact with Germans, how Swedes think in comparison to Norwegians, etc. But I guarantee you that an average German has more Norwegian blood than he'll ever give himself credit for.

This is the typical line of reasoning that I see often on this website and it's a bit bizarre, especially when the topic of assimilation comes up. Assimilation has to do with one group, the minor, developing under the constraints of the dominant culture of the region. In addition, it is expected that the minor group adopts their rituals, their practices, and becomes a countryman -- maybe not his generation, but his children will. Then, his children's children. Then, so on and so forth. Before you know it, his minor culture's great-great-great-great grandchildren consider themselves no different from the "primary" dominant culture; they see themselves AS the dominant culture. This is a good thing; it implies complete assimilation.

In this, we don't necessarily highlight, nor do we ignore, differences between two cultures. If anything, the dominant culture attempts to find methodologies in how the minor culture can be properly integrated into society.
>The minor culture does not speak our language, but is here. So, they need to learn the language of our dominant culture.
>At age X, children need to be doing Y and progressing to Z. If they do not, then we must develop a strategy to make sure that progress has been made. Let's look at governmental strategies to employ this.
>An adult man/woman must be doing A, B and C. If they are not, then they are not keeping up with the norms of the dominant culture. We must create incentives or develop a strategy to ensure that this takes place.

These lines of thought have occurred in every single civilization on earth. There is no civilization, except for some Chinese mountain backwater where their version of Chinese is so foreign to the mainland, that hasn't experienced this. Those who have been successful are now independent nations; those who haven't are, well .. dust and shadows. Or struggling. America is pretty much struggling.

I don't remember being there people telling the Irish and the Italians that if they don't succeed or end up in jail it's because the Americans are keeping them down and the system is set up against them (despite probably being more likely to happen back then than it is now)

>>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
This sentence is also complete gibberish scietifically. Men aren't created equal, there is no Creator and there no such thing as "inalienable rights"

People are actually quite naïve about that phrase. They actually believe that the founding fathers were just speaking about men, in general. The context of that document was as a challenge to the 'divine' right to rule claimed by the monarchy and the overly invasive (or oppressive) governments of the old country. The idea that they meant to say "all peoples are interchangeable and equal" is absurd.

You should summarize and write more concisely. I can see many errors in your reasoning, but it's not worth the effort to dissect that entire wall of text. In short, why is it that you fundamentally disagree with ?

As someone with a rowdy Irish grandfather, you're speaking out your ass. These disparate groups DID hate each other and blame the system for being skewed against them. Many old people still do, for that matter, but they've mostly been replaced by a younger generation that doesn't share those prejudices.

>There were several groups who said the same of the Irish, the Italians, the this-person, the that-person, etc. Now that those people "assimilated," all of those comments have been pushed under the rug; no one discusses them anymore, huh?
Africans had been in america at that point for over a century and they yet haven't integrated after all the other groups have, despite all the legislation and best intention of most to make this happen. You're kind of proving his point.

Wading boots aren't the same as stockingfoot waders, they're just boots with special soles.

>There's a difference in how Swedes interact with Germans, how Swedes think in comparison to Norwegians, etc. But I guarantee you that an average German has more Norwegian blood than he'll ever give himself credit for.
>Suddenly, someone whose ancestral line goes back to Norway/Sweden from 500 years ago recognizes himself as a German, despite the fact that his ancestors are Norwegian/Swedish.
Africans will never recognize themselves as German, French Norwegian etc. They just need to look at themselves for a minute to remind themselves they clearly aren't, that they are African.

>Assimilation has to do with one group, the minor, developing under the constraints of the dominant culture of the region. In addition, it is expected that the minor group adopts their rituals, their practices, and becomes a countryman -- maybe not his generation, but his children will. Then, his children's children. Then, so on and so forth. Before you know it, his minor culture's great-great-great-great grandchildren consider themselves no different from the "primary" dominant culture
In France the opposite is happening. First gen immigrants were high IQ integrated and contributed to society. Now their grandchildren are planning and carrying out terrorist attacks. So much for muh integration

>>These disparate groups DID hate each other and blame the system for being skewed against them.
>purposely twisting and misinterpreting what I said to make a point
Were the Americans telling these groups they weren't succeeding because the majority (or a large portion anyways) of the Americans were keeping them down and the system was set up against them?

Not really, his point still stands.

African-americans have only been free, much less equal, for a fraction of that time. A slave class is going to have a much harder time integrating with society as equals, particularly when a major portion of the society in question spends the better part of a century resisting any efforts for that integration to occur, and that's before considering any resistance that the African americans themselves would put up against it.

We call them the Democrats. My grandmother literally only votes straight ticket for them because "they'll make sure we're treated fair". That's the beginning and end of her logic.

>implying Chinese and other asians weren't imported as indentured servants to work on the railroads around the same time that slavery was made unlawful
>implying they were allowed into white neighborhoods either thereafter

They're doing pretty good. Your theory doesn't hold water.

>implying that there wasn't anything serious complicating matters like a war fought over slavery
>implying that black people weren't seen as a political symbol of slavery or abolition during the conflict
>implying that the side that lost didn't take their frustrations out on black people in particular
You want a more comparable analog to what blacks have been through, look at native Americans. They got fucked left, right, and center in a major war, they had to abandon most of their old traditions and endure being a political symbol of either untrustworthy savagery or the white man's burden, and they still managed to eventually (sort of) assimilate despite taking considerably longer than asians did. (Granted, the earlier political climate was arguably even less hospitable for them than post-war black treatment, but that's probably balanced by the fact that even then they weren't a slave class the same way blacks were)

>a war fought over slavery
Please stop repeating this debunked myth.

>sci_whitebois_btfo.png
>hurr durr why was this retard's posts deleted?
Off yourselves.

>Affirmative Action was developed to ensure assimilation as best as possible, to decrease the economic plight faced by blacks and to increase economic, as well as societal, mobility. It works in some cases, but in others, it doesn't; that being said, white Americans
>using racism to fight racism
Yes, White Americans (that is, those that put it in place and maintain it) are at fault. For that, at least.

>ceasing publication because all the contributors had died of AIDS-defining clinical conditions
You can't make this up.

>debunked myth
>they referred to themselves as "slave states"
>their Declarations of Intent repeatedly cite slavery as the main cause
>said Declarations almost never mention taxes or duties to the northern states that /pol/ loves to propose as an alternative reason

It's classic revisionism, just like people who propose the crusades were a european movement of defence against an encroaching Islam block.

Well muslims did conquer half of spain

>implying they weren't

But precisely, the Crusade of Barbastro in 1064 received very little support. If European rulers were really interested in this sort of pushback strategy, they would have come in flocks to Spain.
On the other hand, Jerusalem was not a strategic position at all for the defence of Europe.

This thesis doesn't make sense for a variety of reasons. See pic related, an article by the guy who brought us the famous "dark age is a myth" article.

Lang is shit

any war against Islam is a defensive war because Islam is anti-life

a 350 deadlift isn't impressive for any male over the age of 15 and under 65

Typical left-right paradigm destroying useful discourse. Truth is neither the left or right want to defeat climate change or move to a more efficient energy

DA DADA DONT FID

This makes complete sense. Placebo has been used by human forever.

I remember the rabbit hole I went down looking at that. Some dark shit.

Depends on their weight. A 350lb deadlift is pretty good for a male under 160lb. Maybe not impressive but definitely not bad at all.

>Assimilation is indeed possible

t. white liberal living in a white area with only white/asian friends & associates

There is no end to my hate for you sorts of traitors

There is no such thing as "integration"
You can't repeat these liberal meme words that have been twisted from any original meaning to the marxist propaganda it is today

It's the left that is filled with gullible retards who have been leading an anti-nuclear crusade for decades.

>native Americans
Liberal buzzword, it is white northern europeans who are the native Americans, we founded this country. Not the injuns

Notice your whole story of history is the white race being the villains, victimizing non-whites, and that now we need to accomodate these foreigners whom YOU have enabled/imported by handing our country over to them

At the end of the day the only reason the Liberals think this way is because they view the non-whites as an "ally" in whatever nonsensical utopian scheme they are running.
Then they turn around to complain about the corrupt dysfunctional policitics of their left wing strongholds lol.. or how unsafe they feel...

How many people who would take homeopathic medicine are harmed by medical intervention vs. lack of medical intervention?

Not to mention that Taleb thinks GMOs will kill everyone for some reason. He is the quintesssential shallow contrarian that appeals to pseudointellectuals.

homeopathic medicine has been shown to mess some people up
esp. cancer patients

>can't come up with a good argument, so he blindly ad hominems and baselessly claims integration doesn't exist
ebin

Look at all the French people with Algerian ancestry who still consider themselves French. Look at the sizable population of black Britons, or Indian Britons for that matter.
Just because you can't imagine it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

>be good Christian knight
>hear that the filthy Saracens are ruling the holy land
>go crusading
>arrive in sandland
>run low on provisions
>find village
>massacre them, they're probably heathen infidels anyway
>desecrate the corpses just to show we mean business
>eat their food
>continue pillaging in this manner
>worn down by disease and exhaustion
>finally run into some Saracens
>get slaughtered
>it's okay 'cause deus vult
>centuries later some librul historian finds out those villages we slaughtered were mostly Christian anyway
>mfw