Liz is absolutely correct. The Humanist morality is degraded, urizen utilitarianism: Once dignity is functional, not sacred, the weak get culled.
Cold reason without transcendence = conveyor-belt death.
This is Aktion T4 logic.
Cold reason without transcendence = conveyor-belt death.
This is Aktion T4 logic.
November 13, 2025 at 3:57 AM
Liz is absolutely correct. The Humanist morality is degraded, urizen utilitarianism: Once dignity is functional, not sacred, the weak get culled.
Cold reason without transcendence = conveyor-belt death.
This is Aktion T4 logic.
Cold reason without transcendence = conveyor-belt death.
This is Aktion T4 logic.
Fascinating example of Moral Retrofitting. The critics draw moral credit from the very structure of tolerance that thinkers like Dawkins helped normalise, then use that credit to denounce him.
It’s another round of virtue inflation: repaying intellectual debt with devalued empathy tokens. 1/
It’s another round of virtue inflation: repaying intellectual debt with devalued empathy tokens. 1/
November 9, 2025 at 3:09 PM
Fascinating example of Moral Retrofitting. The critics draw moral credit from the very structure of tolerance that thinkers like Dawkins helped normalise, then use that credit to denounce him.
It’s another round of virtue inflation: repaying intellectual debt with devalued empathy tokens. 1/
It’s another round of virtue inflation: repaying intellectual debt with devalued empathy tokens. 1/
The Nazis weren’t champions of personal health freedom, they pioneered the idea that the state can override bodily consent for the ‘greater good.’
That’s exactly why modern medical ethics insists on informed, voluntary choice.
Love the Godwin fork-bomb though!
That’s exactly why modern medical ethics insists on informed, voluntary choice.
Love the Godwin fork-bomb though!
November 8, 2025 at 2:37 PM
The Nazis weren’t champions of personal health freedom, they pioneered the idea that the state can override bodily consent for the ‘greater good.’
That’s exactly why modern medical ethics insists on informed, voluntary choice.
Love the Godwin fork-bomb though!
That’s exactly why modern medical ethics insists on informed, voluntary choice.
Love the Godwin fork-bomb though!
Perhaps the 'prior residents' feel they're on the wrong end of your moral economy?
When you cast one groups as debtors & the other as creditors you build resentment, status anxiety, identity fatigue.
Every time moral discourse becomes one-directional, the counter-current forms in taboo.
When you cast one groups as debtors & the other as creditors you build resentment, status anxiety, identity fatigue.
Every time moral discourse becomes one-directional, the counter-current forms in taboo.
November 8, 2025 at 1:52 PM
Perhaps the 'prior residents' feel they're on the wrong end of your moral economy?
When you cast one groups as debtors & the other as creditors you build resentment, status anxiety, identity fatigue.
Every time moral discourse becomes one-directional, the counter-current forms in taboo.
When you cast one groups as debtors & the other as creditors you build resentment, status anxiety, identity fatigue.
Every time moral discourse becomes one-directional, the counter-current forms in taboo.
Less an echo chamber than here, according to that flawed study. And if it wasn't, there wouldn't be any 'decent people' to leave.
'less contaminated space' - moral panic. Disgust as argument. Irrational.
'less contaminated space' - moral panic. Disgust as argument. Irrational.
November 6, 2025 at 7:11 PM
Less an echo chamber than here, according to that flawed study. And if it wasn't, there wouldn't be any 'decent people' to leave.
'less contaminated space' - moral panic. Disgust as argument. Irrational.
'less contaminated space' - moral panic. Disgust as argument. Irrational.
engagement with sovereignty tensions.
The result is a polished sermon for the already converted: rhetorically clean, empirically hollow, and blind to its own quasi-religious absolutism.
The result is a polished sermon for the already converted: rhetorically clean, empirically hollow, and blind to its own quasi-religious absolutism.
November 6, 2025 at 5:49 PM
engagement with sovereignty tensions.
The result is a polished sermon for the already converted: rhetorically clean, empirically hollow, and blind to its own quasi-religious absolutism.
The result is a polished sermon for the already converted: rhetorically clean, empirically hollow, and blind to its own quasi-religious absolutism.
Biased nonsense.
November 6, 2025 at 4:43 PM
Biased nonsense.
Nonsense. It's propaganda, and you've swallowed it whole.
November 6, 2025 at 4:42 PM
Nonsense. It's propaganda, and you've swallowed it whole.
It's shoddy, biased, and hypocritical.
November 6, 2025 at 4:32 PM
It's shoddy, biased, and hypocritical.
Circular logic: you assume algo causes exodus while ignoring user-driven migration, conflate correlation with causation, & weaponise “Nazi” as a moderation veil to justify siloing, exactly reinforcing Ulro echo chambers on both platforms.
Physician heal thyself.
Physician heal thyself.
November 6, 2025 at 4:22 PM
Circular logic: you assume algo causes exodus while ignoring user-driven migration, conflate correlation with causation, & weaponise “Nazi” as a moderation veil to justify siloing, exactly reinforcing Ulro echo chambers on both platforms.
Physician heal thyself.
Physician heal thyself.
The obvious irony here is, of course, that this article & those sharing it are biased to an absurdly polarised degree.
November 6, 2025 at 4:06 PM
The obvious irony here is, of course, that this article & those sharing it are biased to an absurdly polarised degree.
As per the article, this seems pretty good doesn't it?
What you're really objecting to is loss of narrative control.
bsky.app/profile/deep...
What you're really objecting to is loss of narrative control.
bsky.app/profile/deep...
November 6, 2025 at 3:39 PM
As per the article, this seems pretty good doesn't it?
What you're really objecting to is loss of narrative control.
bsky.app/profile/deep...
What you're really objecting to is loss of narrative control.
bsky.app/profile/deep...
Institutions lost epistemic liquidity, so people anchor trust in the logo. “Lancet” is a proxy node for epistemic certainty, not the content itself.
Blind sharing a high-status citation broadcasts allegiance rather than understanding. It’s tribe-detection/signalling.
Blind sharing a high-status citation broadcasts allegiance rather than understanding. It’s tribe-detection/signalling.
November 6, 2025 at 2:25 AM
Institutions lost epistemic liquidity, so people anchor trust in the logo. “Lancet” is a proxy node for epistemic certainty, not the content itself.
Blind sharing a high-status citation broadcasts allegiance rather than understanding. It’s tribe-detection/signalling.
Blind sharing a high-status citation broadcasts allegiance rather than understanding. It’s tribe-detection/signalling.
Did you read the study? Lot's of problems. overlapping cohorts without censoring, unmodeled exposure order/interaction, misclassification of infection, temporal heterogeneity, behavioral & access bias, etc
Or did you just assume? Arg from authority?
Or did you just assume? Arg from authority?
November 6, 2025 at 2:20 AM
Did you read the study? Lot's of problems. overlapping cohorts without censoring, unmodeled exposure order/interaction, misclassification of infection, temporal heterogeneity, behavioral & access bias, etc
Or did you just assume? Arg from authority?
Or did you just assume? Arg from authority?
Classic “complexity compression.” The real system, immune adaptation across variant waves, prior infection, behavioral shifts, gets collapsed into a binary variable: vaccinated/not & even the cohorts overlap.
Multiple probs with this study, big one of course is the missing 70%
Multiple probs with this study, big one of course is the missing 70%
November 6, 2025 at 2:14 AM
Classic “complexity compression.” The real system, immune adaptation across variant waves, prior infection, behavioral shifts, gets collapsed into a binary variable: vaccinated/not & even the cohorts overlap.
Multiple probs with this study, big one of course is the missing 70%
Multiple probs with this study, big one of course is the missing 70%
This is pseudo-sacral participation: invoking moral disgust to sanctify withdrawal, rather than insight->contamination through association, the tribe defiled by proximity to the impure. The high priest of legacy reason now bangs on the temple door as the digital bazaar hums with ungoverned chatter.
November 4, 2025 at 4:00 PM
This is pseudo-sacral participation: invoking moral disgust to sanctify withdrawal, rather than insight->contamination through association, the tribe defiled by proximity to the impure. The high priest of legacy reason now bangs on the temple door as the digital bazaar hums with ungoverned chatter.
His proposed “solution” (withdrawal) is not a fix but a feedback dampener: it prevents adaptation by isolating one’s memetic enclave from the larger social computation.
November 4, 2025 at 4:00 PM
His proposed “solution” (withdrawal) is not a fix but a feedback dampener: it prevents adaptation by isolating one’s memetic enclave from the larger social computation.
If Otto’s logic executes at scale (mass withdrawal), legacy sensemaking enclaves will sever the last connective tissue to plural discourse.
The new cognitive topology becomes: islands of purity floating in seas of noise.
No bridge remains, only competing sermons shouted across the void.
The new cognitive topology becomes: islands of purity floating in seas of noise.
No bridge remains, only competing sermons shouted across the void.
November 4, 2025 at 3:44 PM
If Otto’s logic executes at scale (mass withdrawal), legacy sensemaking enclaves will sever the last connective tissue to plural discourse.
The new cognitive topology becomes: islands of purity floating in seas of noise.
No bridge remains, only competing sermons shouted across the void.
The new cognitive topology becomes: islands of purity floating in seas of noise.
No bridge remains, only competing sermons shouted across the void.
There's a lot wrong with this code:
Assassination glorification = criticism?
Corporations overrepresent because 'market forces'-> deflecting moral accountability back to the audience, “you’re the problem for noticing.”
In this OS irony defends power rather than subverts it.
Full audit coming up.
Assassination glorification = criticism?
Corporations overrepresent because 'market forces'-> deflecting moral accountability back to the audience, “you’re the problem for noticing.”
In this OS irony defends power rather than subverts it.
Full audit coming up.
November 4, 2025 at 4:39 AM
There's a lot wrong with this code:
Assassination glorification = criticism?
Corporations overrepresent because 'market forces'-> deflecting moral accountability back to the audience, “you’re the problem for noticing.”
In this OS irony defends power rather than subverts it.
Full audit coming up.
Assassination glorification = criticism?
Corporations overrepresent because 'market forces'-> deflecting moral accountability back to the audience, “you’re the problem for noticing.”
In this OS irony defends power rather than subverts it.
Full audit coming up.
Powell objectively correct. Scale exceeded his estimates.
November 2, 2025 at 10:59 PM
Powell objectively correct. Scale exceeded his estimates.
Otto English commentariat fantasising about murdering a political opponent.
November 2, 2025 at 10:39 PM
Otto English commentariat fantasising about murdering a political opponent.