Notices by ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)
-
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 26-May-2026 12:24:03 JST
ryan
@eriner @djsumdog @PNS And what does it say about IQ when someone sprays tired copypasta that defends imprecision of language and poor communication with handwavium about statistical inference that they clearly don't understand, along with a generous helping of ad hominem? -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:19:09 JST
ryan
ICE, Ukraine, Epstein... All bread and circuses. The only political issue that matters is securing elections.
Without that, the public vote is compromised, and cannot be trusted on any issue. Both parties will continue to do whatever the people in power want: Filter tax money through massive fraud machines; Pass draconian laws that infringe rights and further tyranny. They will claim that they have a mandate to do so because without trustworthy elections, nobody will be able to prove otherwise.
And the public vote that should be distrusted most of all is when they argue that the public doesn't want secure elections. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:19:08 JST
ryan
@eriner The devil, as always, is in the details, and your two-word hypothetical proposal is woefully short on those. What are you getting at here? -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:19:06 JST
ryan
@eriner I was prioritizing a problem without offering any particular plan to fix it. I didn't provide details, because I wasn't proposing a solution. You may fairly criticize me for that, but not for failing to give details of something I didn't suggest.
Of course you assumed a solution, then you asked if I "support" your given solution. I'm unable to answer that without either more detail, or some kind of extrasensory mind-reading ability. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:19:05 JST
ryan
@eriner As to the actual question of how to secure elections, the answer is complicated and nuanced, and I don't have all of the answers.
As a rule, I don't tend to favor "nationalization" of anything, which is why I would want to review the details before pledging "support" of such a thing. In general, I think local control - as local as possible right down to the individual where feasible - produces the best outcome.
But there are other solutions that haven't been tried at a national level, such as decertification of elections that aren't secure, or stripping representation from jurisdictions with incompatible laws. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:19:04 JST
ryan
While it's true I'm on Pleroma, which affords more than 500 characters, it still doesn't provide enough to make every post a scientifically rigorous treatise, nor did I realize that I was expected to do so. The parts of the fedi that I federate with sport a higher-than-twitter average IQ, but I don't think even they demand that from every opening post.
If you want to engage and don't think I've provided enough information, feel free to ask for clarification before whipping out the gotchas and accusations. If I want to be accused of bad faith in every reply, I'll follow Maggos again.
For all you know, my proposed solution might have been "We need to jettison California and have a stronger country without them".
(Actually, that's unlikely. I prefer not to invoke the name of the Statist God "We", as it too often leads to solutions with high popular appeal and almost no chance of working) -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:19:01 JST
ryan
@eriner
> I thought you had already thought the issue through
I have not. At least not so far as a solution. I'm uncomfortable with the "we have to shoot our way out of this" solution, but that continues to be the only one that I see which doesn't involve the expansion of federal power - a solution I like even less, because of its limitless capacity for unintended side effects. The only other option I see at this point is a national divorce, or otherwise an end to the American experiment, which I also don't like.
Like I said, it's a fair criticism that I came without a solution. I guess I came in hoping someone might propose something I hadn't seen. Barring that, you may simply accuse me of trying to "raise awareness".
My original post came in response to seeing yet another thread about the political theater of the moment, and my thinking was merely that the specifics of what the government is doing with its illegitimate power is far less important than trying to address the fact that the power is illegitimate. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Feb-2026 13:18:59 JST
ryan
@eriner The last option - and the one which seems at the moment most palatable to me is "kick the can down the road".
It's not a solution per se, but I figure I've got maybe 25 more years left in this world. If the inevitable societal collapse can just wait until 2050, then it all becomes someone else's problem. Selfish, sure, but it's an effective cop-out. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Wednesday, 04-Feb-2026 12:01:54 JST
ryan
Reminder of the difference between mute and block:
Problem: Somebody is posting things you don't want to see.
Mute = Solves the problem.
Block = Solves the problem spitefully.
If the only thing you need is to filter your timeline, then Mute is the correct solution.
If your goal is to raise the overall level of hostility and resentment on the fedi, then block away.
I, for one, think there's already plenty of hostility and resentment to go around. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 29-Jan-2026 00:37:41 JST
ryan
@realcaseyrollins Actually the total price is $2000. It's Best Buy, so they assume you're probably going to shoplift it. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 22-Jan-2026 00:28:10 JST
ryan
@progo Someday soon psychologists will be reporting on a widespread epidemic of AI Anthropomorphism Psychosis.
If you're truly fluent in bash, you could've done that faster by yourself than by "asking" the LLM to do it (including checking it to make sure the thing didn't hallucinate). And nobody ever says "please help me" to a screwdriver or wrench. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 22-Jan-2026 00:28:06 JST
ryan
@progo Working alone in a delivery van can also be dehumanizing. But I don't improve my mental health by beseeching the handtruck and referring to the windshield wipers by name.
Treating LLMs like they're human is the fastest-growing mental illness in the western world. It's especially dangerous because LLMs mimic human communication very well. It bypasses the intuitive defenses that keep us from making friends with handtrucks and wrenches.
The solution to this mental illness - this "AI psychosis" - is to interact with humans. The solution is not to sink deeper into the delusion with "a little simple courtesy". -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Wednesday, 07-Jan-2026 01:29:44 JST
ryan
“If there’s a more clear-cut case of eminent domain, I’ve never seen it.” – Michael Kitz, “Contact”
-
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Saturday, 04-Oct-2025 05:46:38 JST
ryan
Far too few people understand the true secret to surviving social media with your sanity intact:
Don’t feed the trolls.
The idea is simple: If you’re not going to get anything beneficial out of continuing a conversation then don’t continue it. Don’t engage. Don’t reply. Let the idiot get the last word in. It’s no sweat off your balls.
I feel silly for giving such obvious advice, but the number of y’all who clearly don’t understand this is staggering.
(And of course, as a sometimes-troll myself, I thank you all for being so obtuse)
-
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Saturday, 13-Sep-2025 08:55:40 JST
ryan
When the left preaches tolerance, remember what they're saying about Charlie Kirk right now.
When the left preaches empathy, remember how they feel about Charlie Kirk right now.
When the left asks for open discussion of ideas, remember what they did to Charlie Kirk, who was trying to do exactly that.
The left practices situational morality. Something is considered moral if and only if it advances the goals of the left. Lying, cheating, election fraud, murder. All on the table, as long as it serves a political need.
The left cannot be trusted. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 04:25:44 JST
ryan
If an individual commits a crime, that person must be punished.
If an accomplice enables a crime (eg: a bureaucrat or politician who releases criminals back into the population), the accomplice must also be punished.
If a system incentivizes a crime, that system must be torn down and rebuilt.
But you do NOT punish an entire race of people for the actions of a few.
This message applies as equally to the anti-white racists in the political left as it does to the newly-minted anti-black racists who have formed in the backlash against them. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 03:49:15 JST
ryan
I just heard a programmer utter, unironically, the sentiment that “We can’t fix bugs until users find them.”
This is the current state of software development. In 2025, most programmers are not old enough to remember a time when developers tested their software before shipping it to end users. When software had to be as good as possible before release, because you couldn’t just patch it the next day.
Nowadays, end users have been conditioned that all software is more or less buggy shit. They crave updates like a junkie for the next fix - hoping that this time, this time maybe the update will fix more bugs than it introduces.
This is the current state of software development.
-
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 11-Sep-2025 03:38:42 JST
ryan
Not sure who needs this reminder, but…
Stereotyping (and its specialized variants such as nationalism, sexism, racism, etc) is a powerful human instinct, which happens to have been correct just often enough to be passed down through evolution.
Do NOT mistake it for logic.
- “I observe a member of group X to have Y trait or behavior”
- “It seems like a lot of members of group X have Y trait”
- “We can prove that a majority of group X members have Y trait”
These statements have varying levels of confidence which may allow you to make a stastitical inference about an arbitrary member of group X, but NONE of them is sufficient to prove the commonly assumed syllogism:
- α is a member of group X, therefore α has trait Y
This simple fallacious formulation is very often used as the basis for “othering” huge populations of individuals, and, I believe, is the source of most of the injustice in the modern world.
-
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Monday, 18-Aug-2025 12:24:07 JST
ryan
A refresher, if you encounter someone who tries to use the "fire in a crowded theater" doctrine to try to argue away the First Amendment:
The line, often quoted by censorship advocates, is from a 1919 Supreme Court opinion (Schenck v. US) by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes. It de facto outlawed trolling.
It was later overturned in a 1969 case (Brandenberg v. Ohio), which severely limited the situations in which speech becomes actionable. It added litmus tests like "imminent", and "likelihood".
The "fire in a crowded theater" argument is not only NOT a law (it came from the judicial branch, not the legislative one), it's not even CASE LAW. It's nothing. A historical note. An error by the Supreme Court that they corrected 50 years later.
The First Amendment is part of the US Constitution. It is the very first change made to the Constitution, once they realized that the government needed to be explicitly constrained from infringing on human natural rights. It is the law of the land. Do not believe a misinformed (or politically biased) authoritarian who thinks a Constitutional amendment can be overruled by a erroneous deprecated court paper. -
Embed this notice
ryan (ryan@bemrose.social)'s status on Thursday, 10-Jul-2025 13:20:35 JST
ryan
@realcaseyrollins I don't know who that is ... which might prove my point.
Regardless, this definitely applies to actors, journalists, politicians, and porn stars, all of which make up the bulk of people who one might call celebrities.