JCX retweeted
This is really sad:
When psychology professors are asked whether they'd put the truth before social equity concerns, 66.4% of male professors said yes, but fewer than half of female professors (43%) agreed.
In both groups, too many put equity before truth.
JCX retweeted
Gee, I wonder where the Anti-Datacenter movement comes from 🤔
JCX retweeted
Time is revisable. That's what you're missing. We're in a trans-temporal, hyperdimensional war over reality. Just because it WAS, doesn't mean it WILL be.
JCX retweeted
The editors of the world's most prestigious medical journals are sounding the alarm, and nobody is listening.
"We have peer reviewed, high impact editors in most of the journals that are the most high impact, saying that they don't believe what is being published in those journals is trustworthy anymore."
"The BMJ, The Lancet, all of those editors have come out and said, we have a huge problem. We can't replicate this research and we actually don't even know who did the research."
"Everywhere we've looked for corruption, we've found it."
Emily Kaplan, co-founder of the Broken Science Initiative.
@broken_science
JCX retweeted
Travis Kalanick: The UK's Social Media Ban is About Censoring and Tracking Adults, Not Protecting Kids
@travisk:
“I think we all agree social media is bad for the kids and for the adults. Too much of that stuff is very bad. It's brain rot for real, and it's going to be worse than cigarettes. It's all the things.
But the real point of banning under 16 is so that you can force adults to identify themselves and de-anonymize themselves, so you can set up a full-scale censorship regime, which they're sort of contemplating in the UK.
And what censorship is really about is not harmful content, it's about content that the people in power don't want you to see that disagrees with them.
If it agreed with them, it's not harmful. It's the stuff that doesn't agree with them.
And so what they're doing is they're criminalizing disagreeing with them. And so there's a derivative of this age-based stuff, which is really about the adults, not the kids.”
JCX retweeted
The Bolsheviks were a tiny extremist group nobody took seriously. They could have been crushed at any time. Until one day, they couldn't. Soon they had control of all of Russia. They were insane. But that did not matter. They were organized and committed. They ruled for 74 years.
JCX retweeted
"... the political left has long had a remarkable lack of interest in how wealth is created. As far as they are concerned, wealth exists somehow and the only interesting question is how to redistribute it."
— Thomas Sowell
JCX retweeted
Cave Catgirl simple Nyanderthal. Need smart tribe explain this thing.
Elon sell electric cars. Elon sell satellite internet. Elon launch rockets. Elon make things people want buy. (Including governments!) Somehow this make Cave Catgirl poorer? Please explain slowly. Use small words.
If Elon become rich by taking Cave Catgirl mammoth, Cave Catgirl understand.
If Elon become rich by stealing Cave Catgirl hut, Cave Catgirl understand.
If Elon become rich by government pointing spear and taking Cave Catgirl shiny rocks, Cave Catgirl understand.
But that not argument being made.
Argument seem be:
"Man build companies. People buy products. Investors think companies valuable. Therefore Cave Catgirl poorer."
In fact, GOVERNMENTS do these things.
Government take mammoth, because they say it endangered.
Government take hut if no pay property tax.
Government take spear, say stick dangerous. Say only special government police should have stick.
Please explain why Nyanderthal should be angry at Elon, and not Government? Cave Catgirl no follow.
Did Tesla make Cave Catgirl poorer?
No.
Did Starlink make Cave Catgirl poorer?
No.
Did SpaceX make Cave Catgirl poorer?
No.
In fact, SpaceX doing things NASA should have figured out years earlier while tribe paying Russians to take astronauts to space. That seem opposite of poorer.
Starlink do more to give remote people internet than all of Government. This also seem like good thing.
Cave Catgirl notice weird thing. When local bakery become successful, tribe clap.
When plumber become successful, tribe clap.
When businessman become successful, tribe suddenly act like success itself crime.
Very strange.
Now if you want argue government favoritism, subsidies, regulatory capture, or cronyism? Good discussion. Cave Catgirl listen. Simply pointing at giant number and shouting: "LOOK! HE HAVE MORE SHINY ROCKS THAN ME!" This not actually argument. It envy. Wise holy man on cross say this is sin.
Before demanding wealth tax, first explain how man selling products people willingly buy somehow making Cave Catgirl poorer. Because Cave Catgirl just humble Nyanderthal. Cave Catgirl not seeing connection.
JCX retweeted
No, you don't get it.
He does not have $1 trillion sitting in cash, it is 99% stock in his companies.
To make that wealth liquid would mean selling all that stock which would swiftly destroy *both* the companies (Tesla, SpaceX, others) and the wealth. If he sold it all, he'd end up with maybe $100b max, several hundred thousand people would be out of work, the companies ruined and many of their suppliers also ruined.
Okay, but now Elon has $100b in cash, and can "solve the world's problems".
$100b divided by the world's 8 billion people is $12
If you were in charge, several of the most innovative industrial companies in the world would be destroyed, hundreds of thousands out of work, and space would again close to human civilization for another generation.
But everyone on earth could have one nice meal and you could revel in your altruism.
JCX retweeted
> you’ll never start a rocket company
> you’ll never build your own engines
> you’ll never be able to use off-the-shelf parts
> you’ll never survive three launch failures
> you’ll never reach orbit
> you’ll never win NASA’s trust
> you’ll never launch cargo to the ISS
> you’ll never compete with Boeing
> you’ll never compete with Lockheed
> you’ll never make rockets reusable
> you’ll never land a rocket vertically
> you’ll never land one on a drone ship
> you’ll never reuse a booster
> you’ll never fly the same booster 10 times
> you’ll never fly the same booster 20 times
> you’ll never fly the same booster 30 times
> you’ll never recover and reuse the fairing
> you’ll never lower launch costs
> you’ll never launch every month
> you’ll never launch every week
> you’ll never launch multiple times a week
> you’ll never carry astronauts
> you’ll never replace Roscosmos
> you’ll never fly civilians to orbit
> you’ll never manufacture satellites at scale
> you’ll never build the biggest constellation ever
> you’ll never make satellite internet work
> you’ll never make satellite internet fast
> you’ll never make satellite internet affordable
> you’ll never serve rural customers
> you’ll never serve aircraft and ships
> you’ll never build a methane rocket engine
> you’ll never make full-flow staged combustion work
> you’ll never build the most powerful rocket ever
> you’ll never build a rocket bigger than Saturn V
> you’ll never build it out of stainless steel
> you’ll never launch Starship
> you’ll never separate Super Heavy and Starship
> you’ll never relight Raptor in space
> you’ll never bring Super Heavy back
> you’ll never catch a booster with Mechazilla tower arms
> you’ll never launch 85% of mass to orbit worldwide
> you’ll never change the economics of space
> you’ll never force the entire industry to copy you
> you’ll never win
> you’ll never IPO
Congratulations to @elonmusk and the SpaceX team. You did what countless people said was impossible, and you did it time and time again.
Today is your day. You deserve this. May it be a glorious one.
JCX retweeted
Il faut avoir l'honnêteté de reconnaître le coup de génie de la gauche, parce que c'en est un. Le plus grand hold-up rhétorique du siècle tient en un seul mot : raciste.
Voici le mécanisme.
Après 1945, après les droits civiques, l'Occident a fait du racisme le mal absolu. À juste titre : c'est une de ses plus grandes conquêtes morales. « Raciste » est devenu le mot le plus radioactif de la langue, l'excommunication moderne, la mort sociale instantanée.
Le coup de génie a été de détourner ce capital moral. Pas pour protéger des personnes : pour protéger une idéologie.
L'égalitarisme des résultats ne gagne jamais un débat sur les faits. Il produit l'inverse de ce qu'il promet, partout, à chaque fois. Alors plutôt que de gagner le débat, on a rendu le débat impayable. Tu questionnes les résultats de l'immigration sans assimilation ? Raciste. Tu défends le mérite ? Raciste. Les maths avancées ? Racistes. Les frontières ? Racistes. Le mot a cessé de décrire un comportement pour décrire une position sur l'échiquier.
Et regardez la beauté technique du dispositif. Pas besoin d'arguments : l'accusation suffit. Pas besoin de procès : la dénégation aggrave le cas (votre défensivité prouve votre culpabilité). Pas besoin de police : la peur fait le travail, chacun se surveille lui-même et surveille son voisin gratuitement. Il suffit d'exécuter publiquement quelques exemples par an pour tenir des millions de gens. Une idéologie irréfutable, protégée par un mot imprononçable. Les deux pare-feux du même système : la French Theory avait aboli la vérité, l'accusation a aboli le débat.
Est-ce qu'un comité s'est réuni pour concevoir ça ? Pas besoin. Les idées subissent une sélection darwinienne : celles qui survivent sont celles qui se défendent le mieux. Marcuse avait quand même déposé le brevet dès 1965, noir sur blanc : tolérance pour les mouvements de gauche, intolérance pour ceux de droite. Le reste a évolué tout seul. Il faut l'avouer : c'était génial.
Mais ce dispositif génial avait un coût, et le coût a un bilan. À Rotherham, le rapport officiel Jay a établi que des fonctionnaires britanniques ont laissé plus de 1 400 gamines se faire exploiter pendant seize ans, en partie par peur d'être traités de racistes s'ils nommaient les faits. Relisez cette phrase. Des enfants ont été sacrifiées à un mot. Voilà ce que veut dire idéologie mortifère : pas une métaphore, un bilan.
Et maintenant, regardez ce qui s'effondre sous nos yeux.
Une insulte ne fonctionne que si elle fait peur, et une monnaie ne fonctionne que si elle est rare. Ils ont imprimé le mot comme Weimar imprimait le mark. Quand tout est raciste, plus rien ne l'est. Résultat : des tweets qui commencent par « traitez-moi de raciste si vous voulez » récoltent des dizaines de milliers de likes et l'approbation de l'homme le plus riche du monde. Il y a dix ans, cette phrase était un suicide professionnel. Aujourd'hui, c'est un haussement d'épaules. L'hyperinflation a tué la monnaie.
Et voilà la vraie tragédie, que les faussaires devront porter : en imprimant le mot sans limite, ils l'ont brûlé pour tout le monde. Y compris pour nommer le vrai racisme quand il existe, car il existe. Les faux-monnayeurs ne détruisent pas que leur arme. Ils détruisent le mot dont une société honnête a besoin.
Privée de son mot magique, l'idéologie va maintenant devoir faire ce qu'elle n'a jamais su faire : gagner un débat sur les faits.
Elle ne le gagnera pas. Au travail.
Tout le monde pense que le monde libre a gagné en 1989, à la chute du mur de Berlin.
C'est faux.
Et c'est exactement pour ça que le monde est aujourd'hui en feu.
Ce qui est tombé le 9 novembre 1989, c'est un appareil.
Une économie planifiée, un empire militaire, un mur de béton. Ce qui n'est pas tombé, c'est l'idée. L'idée que le monde se divise en oppresseurs et en opprimés. L'idée qu'il existe une égalité finale à atteindre, par tous les moyens. L'idée que tout ce qui existe (la famille, la nation, le mérite, l'héritage) est une structure de domination à abattre.
Cette idée-là n'était plus dans le bâtiment quand le bâtiment s'est effondré.
Il faut reprendre la chronologie, parce que tout est dans la chronologie :
Le communisme économique avait un défaut fatal : il était réfutable. Il promettait l'abondance, il produisait des famines. Il promettait l'émancipation, il produisait des barbelés. Budapest 1956, Prague 1968, L'Archipel du Goulag publié à Paris en 1973, les boat people de 1979 : à chaque décennie, le réel envoyait sa réfutation. Les boat people étaient une réfutation flottante, visible depuis les plages.
Alors l'idéologie a fait ce que fait tout organisme menacé : elle a muté.
La mutation a un nom, et j'en ai raconté la généalogie ici : la French Theory.
Foucault a déplacé la guerre du terrain des faits, où le communisme perdait à chaque fois, vers le terrain du savoir lui-même.
S'il n'y a pas de vérité, s'il n'y a que des rapports de pouvoir déguisés en savoir, alors plus aucune famine, plus aucun mur, plus aucun goulag ne peut réfuter quoi que ce soit.
La French Theory n'a pas enterré le marxisme.
Elle l'a rendu irréfutable.
Et la mutation a des dates. Toutes antérieures à 1989.
1934 : l'École de Francfort, chassée d'Allemagne, s'installe à Columbia. La critique de l'économie devient critique de la culture.
1964-1965 : Marcuse, exilé allemand devenu professeur américain, remplace le prolétariat défaillant par un nouveau sujet révolutionnaire (les minorités, les étudiants, les marginaux) et écrit noir sur blanc que la tolérance doit être accordée aux mouvements de gauche et refusée à ceux de droite.
Octobre 1966 : le débarquement a une date précise. Université Johns Hopkins, Baltimore. Derrida, Barthes, Lacan présentent la pensée française aux campus américains.
1967 : Rudi Dutschke lance le mot d'ordre, la longue marche à travers les institutions.
1968 : les révolutions de rue échouent partout.
Qu'importe. La révolution ne passera plus par la rue, elle passera par la salle de classe.
1975-1985 : Yale, Berkeley, Columbia absorbent la théorie, qui devient le système d'exploitation des humanités.
1987 : Allan Bloom publie The Closing of the American Mind pour donner l'alerte. Un million d'exemplaires vendus.
L'université le traite de réactionnaire et passe à autre chose.
L'Amérique avait son Aron, elle en a fait la même chose que nous du nôtre.
Puis arrive le 9 novembre 1989.
Le Mur tombe. L'Occident célèbre. Fukuyama avait déclaré la fin de l'Histoire dès l'été, avant même la chute. On démantèle les missiles, on encaisse les dividendes de la paix, on déclare le match terminé.
Nous avons célébré notre victoire sur une adresse vide. L'idéologie avait déménagé vingt ans plus tôt. Nous avons gagné contre les chars et perdu contre les chaires.
Pendant ce temps, l'autre empire communiste faisait la lecture inverse. Pékin avait écrasé Tian'anmen dans le sang cinq mois avant Berlin. Sinistre, mais lucide sur un point : la Chine savait que la guerre était idéologique.
Elle a choisi : abandonner l'économie marxiste, garder le contrôle du récit. L'Occident a fait l'exact opposé : il a gardé le marché et absorbé l'idéologie. Trente-cinq ans plus tard, regardez qui construit des centrales et qui déboulonne ses statues.
Vous voulez la preuve que c'est le même logiciel ? Faites la table de correspondance.
La lutte des classes est devenue la lutte des identités.
Les koulaks sont devenus les privilégiés.
L'autocritique maoïste est devenue le privilege checking. Les commissaires politiques sont devenus les DEI officers.
Le samizdat est devenu le compte shadowbanné.
La nomenklatura a quitté Moscou pour Davos et Bruxelles.
Et le paradis ne s'appelle plus la société sans classes : il s'appelle l'équité, l'égalité des résultats.
Exactement ce que je décrivais ici il y a quelques semaines.
On me dira : il n'y a pas de Goulag.
C'est vrai. C'est même tout le génie de la version 2.0.
Le communisme dur devait briser les corps parce qu'il ne tenait pas les esprits.
Le communisme mou tient les esprits : il lui suffit de briser les carrières.
Pas de camps, des services RH.
Pas de procès de Moscou, des excuses publiques.
Pas de Sibérie, la mort sociale.
Demandez aux émigrés du bloc de l'Est installés en Occident ce qu'ils ressentent en traversant une université américaine en 2026.
Ils reconnaissent l'odeur.
Et voilà pourquoi le monde est en feu.
Une civilisation a passé trente-cinq ans à enseigner à ses propres enfants qu'elle était le problème. Résultat : elle ne sait plus défendre ses frontières, transmettre son héritage, ni même nommer ses ennemis.
Quand la présidente de Harvard, devant le Congrès, répond que condamner un appel au génocide « dépend du contexte », vous voyez le logiciel tourner en production.
Et les prédateurs du dehors lisent cette faiblesse comme un livre ouvert : Moscou teste, Pékin patiente, l'islamisme avance dans les rues de nos capitales.
Le feu extérieur n'est que la conséquence du désarmement intérieur. On ne brûle bien que les maisons qui se sont vidées de leurs défenseurs.
Le Mur n'est pas tombé. Il s'est déplacé. Il ne sépare plus l'Est de l'Ouest : il passe désormais à l'intérieur de chaque institution occidentale, entre ceux qui construisent et ceux qui déconstruisent.
La première guerre froide s'est gagnée avec des missiles et du PIB. La seconde se gagnera avec des écoles, des médias libres et des modèles d'IA. Celui qui écrit les valeurs dans les machines écrira le prochain 1989.
Cette fois, ne nous trompons pas de victoire. Au travail.
JCX retweeted
Am I missing any?
• Postmodern "deconstruction" of a genre that thinks it's more clever than it really is.
• Everything is ironic because they're afraid attempts at sincerity will be seen as cheesy.
• Bathos (when something serious happens but the drama is immediately undercut by a joke).
• Fucked up moral lessons such as portraying selfishness as good.
• Aversion to heteronormative romance.
• Unlikable "strong female character" who talks down to everyone.
• Fetishism masquerading as progressivism.
• Villain is a thinly veiled stand-in for the writer's dad.
• If it's a sequel, prequel, adaptation, or remake, then it's written less like a story set in that universe, and more like a metacommentary about the franchise where creative decisions are based not on what's natural or logical, but on audience expectations or the subversion thereof.
• Protagonist was always perfect the way they are and they just had to learn to unleash themselves instead of improving or overcoming weaknesses.
• "This is a good character because they're really powerful."
• Conflating high stakes with high drama.
• Soapboxing.
• "It's sci-fi/fantasy, so it doesn't have to be consistent with its own internal logic or established rules!" ("space wizards" argument.)
• "Who cares whether or not it makes sense! What matters is how it makes you feel!" Because these things are mutually exclusive somehow.
• Female villain is only evil because of something a man did to her.
• "The man-eating, soul-stealing, vampire rapist spider people are just misunderstood. Humans are the real monsters."
• "Capitalism bad. Now here's a thing we included just so we could sell toys of it."
• Pop cultural references.
• "LOL drugs."
• "Isn't it funny that we're drawing attention to this trope we're doing? We're so much smarter than those other shows and movies that do the same thing because at least we're self-aware!"
• Ugly on purpose for no real purpose.
• Snarky and irreverent protagonist who quips and has a witty retort for anything said to them.
• Sexualizing women bad, sexualizing men good.
• Safe-edginess that's just casual bigotry toward acceptable targets such as straight men, French people, American southerners, etc.
• Old IP "reimagined" for the "modern audience".
• Protagonist is a shameless self-insert.
• "Humor" is "person I don't like dies."
• "Muh realistic anxiety attack!"
• Someone told them "write what you know" and what they know is coffee shops and porn.
• Cute, child-like thing is evil.
• "Traditionally heroic virtues are bad, actually."
• "I may be a cannibal who burns down orphanages, but at least I'm not a racist!"
• "Morality is subjective! Unless you disagree with my politics, in which case you're objectively evil!"
• Thinks they can make a scene "emotional" by simply showing a character crying when they haven't done anything to earn that emotional moment.
• Dialogue has a lot of "ums" and "yeeeahs".
• Memes in the place of jokes.
• "Creative" insults that are just swear words combined with other words, like "fuckstick", "shitballs", or "bitchmuffin".
• Adult characters talk like teenagers.
• Characters use internet slang in real life.
• All male characters are stupid, evil, or both.
• Baby talk combined with excessive profanity.
• Male protagonist gets pushed aside for a female character.
• All characters who oppose the protagonist (and therefore the writer's ideals since the protagonist is the writer) are strawmen because the writer cannot model other people's minds.
• "Why tell a timeless story that will resonate with future generations when I can make it about my pet political gripe of the week?"
• "How can I show that this character is unique and rebellious? I know! I'll give her blue hair and a side-shave!"
• Sexual preferences/gender identity is a character's entire personality.
• Stupid gotcha argument presented like it's profound wisdom and always goes unchallenged.
• "It's a made-up story, so we can do whatever we want with our adaptation! Who cares about the author's intent or the reasons they wrote it how they did?"
• Performative support for whatever happens to be the current political issue of the moment that no one will care about in five years.
JCX retweeted
BREAKING: The DOJ has arrested a special forces soldier who made $400,000 betting on the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, according to ABC.
Federal investigators say the soldier bet more than $33,000 just hours before Trump announced Maduro's capture.
The special forces soldier was reportedly directly involved with the capture.
"The largest position -- a $32,537 bet that Maduro would be out of office by Jan. 31 -- resulted in a 1,242% profit of $404,222," ABC News reported.
"Following his successful trading relating to Maduro- and Venezuela-related contracts, [Gannon Ken] VAN DYKE allegedly sent most of his proceeds to a foreign cryptocurrency vault before depositing them into a newly created online brokerage account. The same day of the operation, VAN DYKE withdrew the majority of his allegedly unlawful proceeds from his Polymarket account..." the DOJ announced.
"VAN DYKE, 38, of Fayetteville, North Carolina, is charged with three counts of violating the Commodity Exchange Act, each of which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison; one count of wire fraud, which carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison; and one count of an unlawful monetary transaction, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison."
JCX retweeted
On this day in 1865, Robert E. Lee surrendered to Ulysses S. Grant.
Lee showed up dressed in his best, looking like a dignified gentleman. Grant was covered in mud after riding all morning.
Before anything was signed, the two men spoke about their shared service in the Mexican War -- a reminder that Confederates and Union soldiers were nonetheless countrymen tied by mystic chords of memory.
Grant did not create terms of surrender to humiliate the South. Grant and Lincoln understood that to unify the nation, you could not imprison half of it. Confederates were allowed to keep their sidearms and personal horses.
When Grant learned that Lee's men were quite literally starving after having not eaten for days, he ordered 25,000 rations sent to them immediately. Lee said this would have "a very happy effect" on his men.
When Lee rode away after signing terms of surrender, Union soldiers cheered. Grant forced them to stop, reminding Union soldiers that Confederates were "now our countrymen" and there would be no cheering over their downfall. (In fact, days later when actual ceremonial surrender occurred, Union Gen. Josh Chamberlain reportedly ordered his men to salute passing Confederates as a sign of respect)
Lee also worked diligently to stop Confederates from waging guerrilla warfare, encouraging them to set their arms aside and return home and in peace. He was a titan in his own right.
If the spirit of 1865 had been driven by the urge to shame and punish, the Union would not have lasted. So many people today misunderstand that and as such, they try to rewrite America history.
God Bless America.
JCX retweeted
There is a species of ant that approaches the edge of another colony, kills a single worker, and then takes on the dead ant’s scent.
For ants, scent is everything. Wearing that scent, the intruder walks in with no resistance. The workers pass by without concern.
The intruder moves inward, toward the queen, then It sprays the queen with a different scent that makes the workers turn on her. Then they surround her and kill her.
The intruder does not need to fight anyone. The colony does the work itself.
Once the queen is gone, the intruder reproduces. The true invader is no longer an intruder. It is the future.
This is how ideological takeover works.
A destructive foreign ideology takes the scent of familiar ideas and walks in as if it belongs.
It speaks the native vocabulary, justice, equality, compassion, rights, progress. It uses these words and quietly changes what they point to.
Then it moves inward.
It alters how foundations are perceived. Responsibility is made to smell like cruelty, law like oppression, borders like hatred, tradition like danger, history like guilt.
At that point, the civilization turns on itself.
Its courts, universities, churches, media, and bureaucracies begin treating their own foundations as threats. They believe they are defending the system.
They are enforcing what now smells legitimate. They do not see the intruder because it sounds exactly like them.
And when the founding principles are finally removed, discredited, dismantled, erased, the foreign ideology does not need to conquer anything. It inherits what is left.
The queen is gone. The colony is no longer itself.
The most effective conquest is the one that convinces a society that its own foundations are the enemy, and that killing them is an act of virtue.
JCX retweeted
the reason why the internet changes culture & society rapidly is primarily due to the fact that it reveals societal truths about human nature & the underlying environment that previously weren’t accessible or were hidden to the common man.
if you watch tiktok you can gain a deep intuitive understanding of the opposite gender pretty quickly.
if you work at any company & watch the dashboards you can see human behavior in real time. e.g. the facebook dashboards were insanely fascinating, & the dating app dashboards were even better / richer with context. the internet delivers micro / macro data on humans at scale to everyone who seek it.
