The Rise & Fall Of Jordan Peterson (12-24-20)

00:00 The Rise of Jordan Peterson (2019)
12:20 Jordan on the Jews
21:00 Jordan’s health problems, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_Peterson#Health_problems
1:12:40 Ed Dutton and Richard Spencer’s podcast, https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-mcspencer-group
1:14:00 IQ Denial
1:26:00 Geographic chauvinism, Los Angeles vs San Francisco
1:38:00 The Ripper documentary, https://decider.com/2020/12/16/the-ripper-netflix-review/
2:11:00 EVERYTHING THE ALT-RIGHT KNOWS IS WRONG (AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN), https://affirmativeright.blogspot.com/2020/12/everything-alt-right-knows-is-wrong-and.html
2:19:40 The AR Optics debate, https://www.pscp.tv/w/1kvJpoLPeAPGE

Posted in Jordan Peterson | Comments Off on The Rise & Fall Of Jordan Peterson (12-24-20)

Not only Trolls are Trolling the Internet: A study on dark personality traits, online environment, and commentary styles

From this new paper:

* These are “Trolls” (their motive is to seek attention/revenge and are suggested to have person-ality traits associated with Sadism, low self-esteem, low conscience, and a low moral compass), “Lurkers” (they visit various forums but refrain from writing messages or comments), and “Posters” (they use forums to reveal per-sonal information that often relates to sex life, sexuality, fantasies, family problems, and personal problems, varying in motives).

* Dark traits can predict what kind of approach and values a person has towards others… The first of the three traits is “Machiavellianism” (Mach), characterized by often having a cynical worldview and by striving for power, money and status; they often are cold and pragmatic, and use false play and manipulation. They can be charming, cun-ning, strategic, enthusiastic and deficient in morals. The sec-ond of these traits is “Narcissism” (Narc), characterized by seeking attention and admiration, by being arrogant and ex-hibitionistic, and by striving for power and leadership. They often feel superior, dominant and self-righteous. They can be charismatic, productive and inspiring. Thirdly, “Psy-chopathy” (Psych), characterized by often being cold, and by being manipulative, and impulsive. They often have a low degree of empathy and little feelings of guilt… Studies have also suggested that Sadism should be included in the set of dark traits… Apart from the first three traits, Sadism can predict insensitivity to the suffering of others, and can also predict insensitivity when to “strike back” when threatened. Sadism also has shown a unique relation to Internet Trolling and to sexuality. The unique aspect of Sadism is that the individual enjoys the suffering of others.

The anonymity aspect of the online environment is reported to affect the behavior on internet (Seigfried-Spellar & Lank-ford, 2018). This could be due to de-individuation processes (Demetriou & Silke, 2003), inducing a state where individuals feel anonymous among many people. Postmes and Spear (1998) claim that de-individuation must not necessarily lead to unethical behavior on the Internet. However, de-individuation may lead to online disinhibition effects, meaning that in anonymity, communication is more uninhibited than in a face-to-face communication (Clark-Gor-don, Bowman, Goodboy, & Wright, 2019). Measures of Online Environment (OE) can be de-scribed with three subcategories (Ritter, 2014). One is “Acceptability” (relates to the hegemonic culture of the forum. Individuals who score high on OE-acceptability may feel it is okay to express themselves with both prejudice and sexist comments). A second is “Aloneness” (encourages harassment, as the OE is lacking social codes, creating inhibitory effects. Individuals do not feel they need to follow ordinary social norms and can write whatever they want). The third is “Anonymity” (neutralizes status disparities and makes individuals feel invisible while also reducing personal responsibility. Individuals participate in more risky behavior and treat people any way they want since no one knows who they are).

…The results showed that particularly Trolling (malicious posting) had significant correlations with almost all four dark personality traits. Controlling for dark personality traits, Sadism and Machiavellianism remained as the strongest predictors for Trolling. This is in line with Buckels et al.’s (2014) results that also showed a strong correlation with the Internet behavior style, and it provides more evidence of the importance of the role of especially dark personality traits. Not surprisingly, it seems that hard-minded people post more malicious content. Similarly, two of the dark personality traits, Sadism and Psychopathy, co-varied strongly with Posting (regular reading and posting on forums). Interestingly, it seems that hard-minded people also post more in conventional styles.

When the Online Environment was investigated as a mediator in these relationships, only trivial effects were found. This means that personality behind posting behaviors generally cannot be explained by how people see or feel or perceive their online environment on Internet forums. The one exception was Acceptability, which describes tolerance to harmful and socially unacceptable behavior on the Internet (Ritter, 2014), which had a small mediating effect explaining Psychopathy and conventional Posting. This study makes several contributions to research on individual behavior on the Internet. First, this study shows that an individual’s behavior on the Internet can be predicted by dark personality traits. The fact that Trolling is related to the dark traits is already known, but what is of interest is that these dark traits (especially Sadism and Psychopathy) are also represented in the regular Posters. Second, the present study also shows in an exploratory way that Online Environment cannot explain the relationship between the dark traits and the posting behavior. It seems that personality traits are “all it takes” for Internet commentary styles.

Posted in Internet | Comments Off on Not only Trolls are Trolling the Internet: A study on dark personality traits, online environment, and commentary styles

Who Made the Vaccine Possible? Not WHO

Graham Allison writes in the WSJ:

…companies like Germany-based BioNTech, its Boston-based competitor Moderna, and the pharmaceutical giant Pfizer have also been racing for a pot of gold at the end of this rainbow. There would be no Covid-19 vaccine today had there been no venture capitalists prepared to invest before a product or profit was visible, no corporate leadership willing to double down with the companies’ own money in the spring to fund a crash effort to produce a vaccine by year-end, and no researchers pursuing a dream about mRNA as an unprecedented route for vaccines.

Second is Operation Warp Speed. Had Mr. Trump not created the initiative, appointed as its leader a man who knows the vaccine development world, and given him license to spend $10 billion outside normal contracting procedures, Covid-19 vaccines would still be only works in progress. Even after they were finally approved, the vaccines’ distribution could have been long delayed. Imagine a world in which Mr. Trump had not appointed as deputy head of the operation a general who knows logistics and had the authority to write contracts with FedEx and UPS to book space on their airplanes and in their network of distribution centers.

So as Americans now look forward to getting vaccinated and resuming our normal lives, we should pause to give thanks to a remarkable group of scientists and entrepreneurs whose capitalism-fed competitive drive pushed them to venture into the unknown—for fortune and fame. And to a deeply flawed, often dysfunctional disrupter in chief who in this case certainly did a good thing.

Posted in Corona Virus | Comments Off on Who Made the Vaccine Possible? Not WHO

FEE: We Had the Vaccine from the Start—You Just Weren’t Allowed to Take It

00:00 Moderna’s highly effective vaccine was available in January, https://fee.org/articles/we-had-the-vaccine-from-the-start-you-just-werent-allowed-to-take-it/
07:00 James Thompson, The Bitter Tiers of Mutant England, https://www.unz.com/jthompson/the-bitter-tiers-of-mutant-england/
13:00 Who Made the Vaccine Possible? Not WHO, https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-made-the-vaccine-possible-not-who-11608744603?mod=hp_opin_pos_1
23:00 One Day Sooner pushed for challenge trials, https://www.1daysooner.org/
25:00 Covid Vaccine: Should “Challenge Trials” Be Allowed?, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlsCMGC60cY
35:30 Clinical Trials: From Design to FDA Consideration, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pfsYbMP47o
55:00 Generating self-compassion, https://www.tmswiki.org/ppd/TMS_Recovery_Program
1:19:00 What are we doing here?
2:20:00 Jared Taylor on BLM
2:21:30 Rush Limbaugh says goodbye
2:28:30 Let’s get energized

Philip Steele writes:

Few people realize that the Moderna vaccine against COVID-19—which the FDA has finally declared “highly effective,” and which is now being distributed to Americans—has actually been available for nearly a year.

But the government wouldn’t let you take it.

The vaccine, a triumph of medical science known as mRNA-1273, was designed in a single weekend, just two days after Chinese researchers published the virus’s genetic code on January 11, 2020.

For the entire duration of the pandemic, while hundreds of thousands died and the world economy was decimated by lockdowns, this highly effective vaccine has been available.

But you, and all the people who died, were prohibited by the government from taking it.

There are some who claim that the FDA “saves lives” by putting the brakes on medical innovation with their requirements for years-long, and often decades-long, billion-dollar medical trial procedures.

Missing here is the obvious counterpoint—How many lives did the FDA sacrifice to disease in the meantime?

In the case of COVID-19 we know the answer: more than 300,000 deaths so far in the United States and counting.

So why was this vaccine delayed for a full year? Because the FDA prohibited rapid “challenge trials”—where volunteers take the vaccine and then expose themselves to the virus in a lab, rather than waiting agonizing months to see how many catch the virus “in the wild.”

Challenge trials would have proven the vaccine’s effectiveness in a matter of weeks. But the FDA considered the risk to trial volunteers too high.

But why? Why are hundreds of thousands of “natural” deaths from a rampaging disease considered acceptable to the FDA—while the remote possibility of one or two deaths, in the absolute worst case scenario, among well-informed vaccine-testing volunteers are not?

There is no rational answer. The tragic truth is that we are ruled by a cowardly medical bureaucracy, one that would rather allow hundreds of thousands of people to die than face any potential criticism for allowing an accelerated vaccine trial.

By contrast, in a free society, immediately after the vaccine was created, volunteers would have been allowed to participate in challenge trials. The trials would have been conducted either by the vaccine company itself, or more likely by third-party medical-trial specialists, to remove any concerns about bias in the results.

The first small group of volunteers would be vaccinated, and then exposed to the virus. If the vaccine appeared to be safe and effective, then a larger group would be vaccinated.

As each challenge group proved successful, the number of volunteers for the next group would grow. Week by week the challenge groups would grow larger, until after just a few months—instead of taking nearly a year by the FDA’s “in the wild” method—the results would be definitive and the trials complete.

This means that in March or April of 2020—instead of the first wave of COVID deaths and lockdowns in the United States—we could have seen a wide vaccine rollout, leading to rapid herd immunity, nipping the pandemic in the bud.

But that path would have been possible only in a free society.

Instead, we have the FDA, backed by government force, dictating medical policy and drawing out the trial process for nearly a year, while death and economic destruction reign.

James Thompson writes for Unz.com: “the Moderna vaccine was available in January and could have been deployed from 24 February onwards. It took two days for a bright scientist to complete her mRNA design, and then it was ready to go into production.”

Posted in Corona Virus | Comments Off on FEE: We Had the Vaccine from the Start—You Just Weren’t Allowed to Take It

The Power Of State

Mary McNamara writes for the Los Angeles Times:

I was a junior in college, my brother a freshman, and we were home for the annual roller-coaster ride of the holidays. On this particular Christmas Day, events had unfolded as they often did — early morning present opening (hats off to Mom, who must have felt like crap at 6 a.m. but got up anyway), then a big extended-family gathering and meal during the afternoon. Things inevitably … devolved and after our guests left, my brother and I retreated to our rooms and out of the line of fire. I remember lying in bed and thinking that in two years I would be out of college and living somewhere far, far away; so far that perhaps I wouldn’t be able to come home for Christmas. Which might break my father’s heart — but, I thought, he’d live.

I was deeply asleep when Dad had his heart attack.

It was not a big one — he remained conscious — but hearing him tell my mother repeatedly to call an ambulance in a voice broken and strained filled me with fear.

Then, after my brother called 911 and things seemed as bad as they could get, the power blew…

I have already told you my mom got sober, and in case you were wondering, my father lived for many years after his heart attack — so it would be easy for me to couch this moment in the black humor that many adult children of alcoholics often use to describe the outstanding moments of a dysfunctional life. I mean, it is pretty hilarious in a way — “and then the lights went out” is a pretty good punchline for any “it could be worse” kind of story. But some stories defy even black humor; 30 years later, my brother and I almost never talk about this night because, at the time, we were just two kids shivering in the snow, desperately signaling for help.

The ambulance came and Dad survived, but the days that followed were a blur of anxiety. In the ICU, Dad was told he would need a quintuple bypass. Mom was drinking hard and refusing to speak, so we stayed away from the house as much as we could, visiting our father and hanging out with our aunt, who was the only person who had ever told us that the real problem in our house was not that we were lazy and ungrateful but that our mother was an alcoholic — and it was not our fault.

I remember telling her it would probably be best if I skipped the next semester of college to stay home and take care of my father. My mother certainly was not up to the task, and my aunt, a widow with four young children, already had way too much on her plate.

My aunt suggested gently that leaving school might not be the best plan. Then she called one of her friends, a recovering alcoholic who promptly took me to a meeting of family members coping with alcoholism. I sat through it in silence, hunched miserably in my coat, thinking only of how awful it would be to return full-time to a house I had waited so long to flee.

Afterward, I spoke with a woman who looked remarkably like my mother. I told her what was happening and what I planned to do. She shook her head and took my hands in hers.

“This is not your problem,” she said. “This is her problem, and their marriage. It is not your job to fix them. It is your job to get on with your life.”

Bud: “Luke, allow me to play devil’s advocate for a minute. You seem to minimize anecdotal evidence in favor of data/evidence verifiable by scholars. Yet for both therapy and AA isn’t all the power/benefit anecdotal. Like the Christmas drinking story, powerful though it may be is just an anecdote. is that reliable?”

Luke: Both have their place. Anecdotes, to me, are great for personal inspiration (the micro). Empirical data is good for analyzing the macro (society). Both are often more powerful when used together ala an anecdote that illustrates the data.

Creating and editing are two different mindsets. If you do them together, they don’t work well. When you create, you do not want to edit at the same time. Inspiration and analysis are also very different mindsets as are feeling and thinking. I don’t want to be in analysis when I am loving my woman, and I don’t want to have the horn when I’m trying to analyze marginal tax rates. Sometimes I want to run hot (emotional) and sometimes I want to run cold (analytical). I was about to go for a walk and do a heartfelt stream on being a good friend to oneself when instead I got immersed in researching and dealing with a problem. So that switch in mindset took me completely out of my ability to feel and to livestream.

When I have a tech issue while livestreaming, it destroys my ability to have fun, to laugh, and to be spontaneous. It’s hard to monitor my sound quality and think and create at same time. One moment I may feel loving and generous, next moment I have to deal with a problem and my ability to love is destroyed for hours. When I studied calculus and economics, it killed for years my ability to appreciate poetry.

I can have experiences that are so powerful, such as with yoga/therapy/12 step, that they, at times, supercede my desire for the data. Sometimes when you analyze things, you lose the placebo effect. I had a shrink who thought my miraculous recovery from CFS after getting on nardil in late 1993 was pure placebo. Acupuncture, which many studies say has purely a placebo effect, solved my carpal tunnel in 2007. I had ecstatic experiences doing kundalini yoga.

There are some things I don’t want to know, such as how many dudes my GF has banged. There are some things that just permanently warp the way you look at someone. There are times when ignorance is bliss. For everything there is a season and a time under heaven. There’s a time to feel and a time to analyze. There’s a time to get angry and a time to forgive.

Orthodox Judaism primarily spoke to a non-rational part of me. I don’t think I converted primarily out of rational reasons, but I enjoy at times rationally analyzing the tribe I joined.

Posted in Addiction | Comments Off on The Power Of State