[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]

/townhall/ - Townhall

A place for civilized animals
Password (For file deletion.)


File: 1559435267262.png (905.05 KB, 1280x720, 16:9, Mayor,_Let's_get_galloping….png) ImgOps Google

Welcome to /townhall/! This is an anonymous-only board for debates, dialectics, and discussions of a serious nature.

As the topics discussed on this board may deal with sensitive or controversial subject matter, we expect a higher standard of conduct than elsewhere on the site, and will enforce the board's rules with a greater degree of strictness. Inability or unwillingness to follow the rules will result in a /townhall/-only ban.


1) All posts in a given thread must contribute constructively to the conversation, whether agreeing or disagreeing. Off-topic, contentless, inflammatory, or hostile posts will be deleted and result in a ban.

1a) Derails that occur as a natural result of discussion progressing from the original subject will generally not be interfered with; however, if these hinder discussion of the original topic, making a new thread is preferred.

1b) Part of contributing constructively is understanding and addressing the reasoning behind an opposing view. While this can be a tedious task and will generally not be officially enforced, please make an effort to at the very least avoid "talking past" someone when presented with a counterargument. Simply doubling down on your initial point does not advance a discussion.

1c) Be as willing to "lose" as you are to "win", and above all else, be willing to learn and understand. You will not get the most out of this board if your only goal is to persuade, and you will not even be effective at that unless you understand what you are arguing against.

2) Ad hominems and other uncivil behavior will not be tolerated. You may have a significant personal stake in some subjects discussed here, and it is normal to be frustrated when someone cannot relate; however, lashing out is not an effective way to engender sympathy for your position, and will not advance the conversation in a constructive way. Even if you find someone's argument morally abhorrent, there are constructive ways to express this.

2a) Attempting to deliberately provoke an uncivil reaction is prohibited, even if it is done within the letter of the law.

2b) Snark and other forms of mockery are strongly discouraged and may result in warnings or bans.

2c) "Strawmanning" an "opponent" deliberately will be regarded as uncivil conduct and will be dealt with accordingly. This will not apply to genuine misunderstandings.

3) While we do not claim to be arbiters of absolute moral or empirical truth and aim to moderate this board in a fair and even-handed, politically agnostic manner, the following extreme positions are considered "off-limits" regardless of how they are put forward, including attempts to "hint" or dogwhistle:

Post too long. Click here to view the full text.


File: 1717531193617.png (145.4 KB, 676x600, 169:150, medium (1).png) ImgOps Google

Is English the greatest language in the omniverse, or is there value to spreking different languages?

Ist Eaglisch dijn masgrätan täl ent dijn omnimundo, oft ist dar stok ent sprek tälän altrá?
10 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.



yes, or wat about ancient greek?


...that sounds kind-of like normative cultural ethical relativisism-think to me


eh, it's alright


File: 1718431332922.jpg (34.17 KB, 1000x1000, 1:1, Grimm.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>...that sounds kind-of like normative cultural ethical relativisism-think to me

It's just historical linguistics. Like how a lot of European nobility spoke French regardless of their holdings or how Italian is a homonculus a bunch of cities invented to pretend to be a country.


When you think about it greek works well as a language of science because of it's highly synthetic nature.

Like. We call it a telephone, derived from Greek τῆλεφωνή. This is not the name of the device the ancient greeks used to call each other. Rather Greek words can be synthesized on the fly without an exact dictionary definition, so you can describe inventions that there is no name for succinctly without being cringe.


File: 1717024673669.jpg (357.87 KB, 1080x1895, 216:379, Screenshot_20240529_181146….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Do you ever wonder if in the future medication-resisting bacteria and viruses will cause an apocalypse type situation, someday, with something like half of the people where you live passing away? Or is this paranoia? Or maybe it's a matter of investing into medical services enough?

My instincts say that the disease risk to humanity alongside the AI risk to humanity are both serious and not at all a matter of paranoia but also are exaggerated, with there being less than 1/3 a chance of eventual human extinction. Maybe I'm just wrong?
9 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1717317120898.png (212.64 KB, 600x849, 200:283, b3a77296688586ca833d656bee….png) ImgOps Google

Most people fight off most bacteria on their own. The species wouldn't have made it very far without a functional immune system. Klebsiella shrugging off colistin isn't going to wipe out half of the human population. It's gonna make the practice of medicine a bitch for sure, but it's hardly an apocalyptic event. Really the only situation where MDROs are such a critical issue is in sepsis patients, and sepsis patients have really bad outcomes to begin with.

As for antibiotic resistant viruses, that is all of them. Some highly targeted anti-virals exist but they haven't been a routine part of care until quite recently and they don't really have any dramatic effect on outcomes the way antibiotics do.

Anyways there is an enormous amount of bug-drug work going on behind the scenes. Bug-drug people might overstate the danger posed by superbugs in the name of improving antibiotic stewardship, but really that's because healthcare is a fundamentally empathetic job and telling that 1/10,000 person that there is nothing that can be done is a situation that they try to avoid.


File: 1717794865171.jpg (819.41 KB, 1024x1024, 1:1, 525863d3-c322-4caa-909a-36….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

A chiral-mirror version of cyanobacteria might lead to the extinction of most existing life on Earth...


I miss ebola..


File: 1715857040726.jpg (325.57 KB, 1200x768, 25:16, Untitled.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

So the American election is this year.

You got a Douche on one side a and Turd on the other.

But out of the two of them who do you honestly think is going to win?
33 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


Conflating what groups like the NIFB say and painting every denomination found in the States as that is wrong.
I get you have religious trauma, but you need to stop this nonsense.


I can't stand Jewish people

Christians are pretty bad too though sometimes


>if I don't agree with you then this place is /pol/

You know for as much as people shit on /pol/, it's a wonder that those opinions seem to be sprouting up in places all over the internet outside of /pol/. It's almost like people are getting sick of radical leftist ideals


File: 1712385402273.jpeg (213.47 KB, 1290x1218, 215:203, tr6ft0jfoosc1.jpeg) ImgOps Google

Do you ever think we're going to see a time where birth control will be banned?

I have to wonder how many people are currently in favor of it, together with porn lately there seems to be a vocal push to get rid of both.

(also divorce)

(twitter source for OP https://twitter.com/LizzieMarbach/status/1775882953790230666)
11 posts and 5 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1717830508542.png (2.03 MB, 1000x1400, 5:7, 3332119__safe_ai content_a….png) ImgOps Google

I think it's more likely we start vat-growing people than disallowing casual sex. That would probably be safer and better for gestation anyway. Between completely defanging arguments about bodily autonomy, you eliminate dipshit stupid women poisoning fetuses with alcohol or other drugs.

If pregnancy is pushed down to being a completely intentional, deliberate choice, it would also cut down on the bodily autonomy arguments. If pregnant requires more effort than just fucking then it becomes a very deliberate choice. Especially if there are easier and safer ways to procreate.

Let's be honest, human bodies just suck. We're designed to get tricked into procreation with unbelievable hormone washes that flood our brains to compel us into an act that's frankly got dangerous consequences because evolution demands we perpetuate.


idk... i think many people against birth control r more against the culture that seems to frequently surround birth control use rather than birth control itself


This is definitely true. It can oftentimes be a "For me, not for thee" kind of thing.


File: 1716550828969.jpg (18.81 KB, 600x400, 3:2, 16CHIEFS-KICKER-SPEECH-mgf….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

<Women are less intelligent than men. That means that women should have jobs that require much less mentally, such as working at home. This also protects men.>

Are all of these claims coming from many American football players the past few days correct? Are they wrong? What factual evidence exists to support these young athletic men's views, if any? Do you think that they're just being silly?
9 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


I could believe that.

Oh. I see.


it's not true... learned it in high school, and philosophers have been saying it for 1000s of years


File: 1717982102786.jpg (384.82 KB, 1448x2048, 181:256, E3GikS9UYAAmj9g.jpg large.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Ah yes, the macho men of the world are telling us what women are and are not and a bunch of wannabe macho losers are believing it. A tale as old as time.

IQ doesn't define intelligence though. IQ is a measure of logical reasoning. To say logical reasoning is intelligence is to say a wheel is a car.

Women would outperform men in an accurate emotional reasoning test. That doesn't mean men are dumb, just that their expertise more naturally lies elsewhere.

Some of it's nurture, too. The existence of gender roles precludes any 'fair' analysis of either sex's intelligence. Women aren't always pushed to develop logical reasoning, just as men aren't always pushed to develop emotional intelligence.


File: 1716017984282.png (11.88 KB, 1131x724, 1131:724, e271028f4841337f6878bd04a1….png) ImgOps Google

Let's assume for the sake of argument that a "national divorce" is happening in the U.S. such that narrow racial and religious separation becomes a matter of ironclad law. You have to pick and choose which areas belong to Christians versus Jews, white people versus black people, Asian people versus Hispanic people, and so on.

How would you draw the map? What group gets what lands? And what motivates your lines?
17 posts and 8 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


>reasons for the font choices and color choices
I'm not condemning you or anything. I just don't get it.



for fonts, i think i mostly just started with the first letter of the group i was representing, and there was usually a good font starting with that letter that appeared to represent that group.... which was interesting. colors i just picked whatever came to mind.... for locations, just whatever came to mind first, mostly.. fairtly arbitrary but perhaps with a grain of truth


File: 1717981622908.jpg (118.16 KB, 850x1332, 425:666, image0(52).jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I just close my eyes and scribble all over for borders. Then I colour-code every piece of land in the most confusing way possible (white people are black, black people are green, Muslims are white, something like that) and painstakingly assign the land so that, at the bare minimum, 90% of any one group's land is composed of random exclaves that don't border each other all over the place.

I leave a note to cede the Virgin Islands to the Punic people and the mighty nation of Carthage. I deliberately don't say anything about Puerto Rico, Hawaii, Alaska or anything other than the mainland and the Virgin Islands.

Worst case scenario they get someone else to draw the map and I'm not responsible for any fuck-ups that ensue. Best case scenario they try to implement my deliberately stupid ideas and the whole idea collapses like a house of cards.


I did one about spiders.

But how are you dealing with ants this year?



File: 1717188259832.jpg (324.92 KB, 1080x2039, 1080:2039, Screenshot_20240531_153819….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Assume for the sake of argument that you don't have personal empathy and you don't have personal ethics besides pure utilitarianism, and so either the Chinese military or other agents working for the Chinese state killing huge numbers of innocent civilians while starting a new conflict doesn't inherently bother you at all.

Is there any rationalist, utilitarian argument to do anything to either prevent China from taking over other lands or from punishing the Chinese if they act?

What's in it for those r.e. rational self-interest? Is it nothing? Or maybe not? What's the argument for "don't murder people who're your neighbors" if you're a rationalist who doesn't consider your neighbors' worths to effect your own decision making? How can one argue with somebody like Scott Alexander from 'LessWrong' when he says that he just doesn't feel any empathy or anything else towards people that he doesnt personally know?
3 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Well, if you're a rationalist billionaire, say, you could choke an innocent victim to death with your bare hands and then pay the family something like $3 million in a way that makes that family better off in their view of their own circumstances (according to you). Hell, Elon Musk could recreationally nuke whole cities and then rebuild them in a way that long-run utility in those locations is higher. If he was a rationalist. He could do that. IT's all axiology without any higher morality involved.

Eh. The problem for me is I don't really have the ability to operate like a human being with no ethics and no empathy like a Scott Alexander since all kinds of moral things from national patriotism to altruism for one's neighbors to social trust to reverence for tradition and so on that rationalists don't have in their brains and souls I personally have. I still want to understand rationalists all the same though even if they're essentially an alien species from another solar system to me. Tech billionaire rationalists especially have a LOT of money and power currently so I kind of don't have a voice but to get them in some intiuitive way.


>Well, if you're a rationalist billionaire, say, you could choke an innocent victim to death with your bare hands and then pay the family something like $3 million in a way that makes that family better off in their view of their own circumstances (according to you). Hell, Elon Musk could recreationally nuke whole cities and then rebuild them in a way that long-run utility in those locations is higher. If he was a rationalist. He could do that. IT's all axiology without any higher morality involved.
LOL WUT?!  Where are you getting that insanity from???

>a human being with no ethics and no empathy like a Scott Alexander
Enough with that defamatory nonsense!


>How can one argue with somebody like Scott Alexander from 'LessWrong' when he says that he just doesn't feel any empathy or anything else towards people that he doesnt personally know?

I don't know who that is and I can't think of any reason to care about his opinion.


File: 1717130119223.jpg (118.21 KB, 979x545, 979:545, Guilty.jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

"A New York jury on Thursday found former President Donald Trump guilty of all 34 felony charges of falsifying business records related to a hush money payment to porn star Stormy Daniels by his then-personal lawyer Michael Cohen before the 2016 election. Trump... [has become] the first U.S. president to be convicted of any crime. He faces three other pending criminal cases."

< https://www.cnbc.com/2024/05/30/trump-trial-verdict-hush-money.html >

My personal reaction is to find this conclusion to be utterly and completely meaningless. Like past messianic claimants who've assembled a ironclad movement of acolytes that no brute force could ever stop such as the Prophet Mohammed, Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar, Attila the Hun, and so on, any social, legal, and/or economic action at this level to harm the holy Savior figure of Trump is inherently futile and weak. He cannot be resisted in such a fashion. It's like trying to tear down a stone monument by just hitting it with your hands and feet. You don't stop a Messiah who genuinely acts on behalf of God's will this way.

What do you think, personally? Does this actually mean a lot? Could it down the line? Should it?
24 posts and 4 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1717286402892.jpg (88.33 KB, 960x768, 5:4, i want to come inside rain….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

I don't. Israel is evil


Do you pay taxes?


File: 1717287068731.gif (172.67 KB, 640x360, 16:9, puppet laugh.gif) ImgOps Google

>Do you pay your taxes



File: 1715601891784.png (169.55 KB, 575x444, 575:444, Smells-Like-AI-Generated-U….png) ImgOps Google

Have you ever tried to express what you think about modern politics in some kind of creative piece, no matter how silly, experimental, inconsistent, or whatever else you might've thought it seems in retrospect?

Like do you think you can represent your viewpoints in a concrete way? I guess we can try that here? Maybe?
35 posts and 18 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


File: 1717100777713.png (3.4 MB, 1335x1263, 445:421, zxczc.png) ImgOps Google

Doesn't look like it.


Could be worth notifying this on /canterlot/


File: 1717102146350.png (3.4 MB, 1335x1263, 445:421, zxczc.png) ImgOps Google

Never-mind, refreshed the page, the quick reply box doesn't appear until you scroll down the thread.


File: 1716502500982.jpg (264.41 KB, 1352x886, 676:443, 1-s2.0-S0924224418306058-f….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

Should fraudulently adulterating food be punishable by death?
11 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


Alright so, one we aren't the same person.
Two, I made no claims how a system should be structured or what I want.
Three, my point was your notion of capitalism, or I suppose "pure capitalism" in your words, being impossible or I guess now "a rough battle," nice motte and bailey btw, is a defeatist notion that only further entrench the current power structures.
Four, no where did I mention the use of violence or force. I am not naive enough to purport that violence is not often the only tool that people are left, or feel left with, in the face of our current structure. That said we have the tools and means to make meaningful change and to downplay the work of the people that are fighting for what I would assume is a would you want to live in is repugnant.
My issue with your statement is I've heard it a million times from people, but anyone that holds that notion is just some theory drunk regurgitation.

If you think all hope is lost you lack a spine. If you think things can't change you lack a spine. I hope you advocate for the change you want irl. I really do, because normally those that accept your proposition cloister themselves away and try and drag others into the bog you are in.

Final response to this as the thread is completely derailed.


>Capitalists taking people's private properly for their own and otherwise using the authority of the state to crush rivals
Uh, no. Not at all. What?

Capitalism is an economic system of trade between individuals.
It's purely an economic system.
It can, and has, existed inside most any state. Hell, even communism, despite their claims, had capitalism running through. Some stuff was nationalized, but there were always private enterprises still trading some items.

State authority is not required for capitalism.


Fraud corrects for false demand created by marketing and hype in production chains that are strained by lopsided demand pressures. Producers cannot sustain producing *only* extra virgin top quality oil but that is the only thing that their customers are interested in, despite the fact that 99% of their consumers cannot tell the difference and they want it for applications where the "inferior" oil is in fact better suited and cheaper.

Fraud is so rampant because the vast majority of consumers care more about the label on the side of the bottle than the contents, as evidenced by the overwhelming lack of passion the topic incites.

Fraud is a market force, like any other, that corrects for disparities between real and apparent demand, as well as for excessive regulation.


File: 1716449653487.jpg (1.63 MB, 2000x1672, 250:209, YOO This dude giving me a ….jpg) ImgOps Exif Google

>Absolute monarchys and benevolent dictatorships are the best ways for a country to function

This is what I unironically believe and I won't elaborate
4 posts and 1 image reply omitted. Click reply to view.


I would posit that this is why the Great Houses of Battletech work.
The size and scale of the universe makes communication in both a timely and reasonably coherent manner impossible, when it comes to larger states.
So, nobility, simply vying for their territories' interests, came about in place of typical fares as democratic elections.

The Cameron dynasty is relied on for maintaining the Star League as a whole, and did so successfully for quite a significant chunk of time. Their role in large part was to balance the other houses, maintaining the League against the special interests, ideology, and ethnic conflict of each of these territories. Conversely, for each of them, they represented their people. And within their territories, they had planetary families, oft with ties to the Great Houses themselves, vying for the interests of their people.

Is the system perfect? No. Of course not.
No system is, however.
 But it does maintain a semblance of stability, for a reason.
Mind, I'm a Taurian. Fuck the innies, Kerensky was a war criminal.


> So, democracy replaced absolute monarchy because of increased morality through Christianity, as well as increased knowledge for each individual
To be honest, the greatest death blow to monarchies also decided to lob off the heads of Church leaders.

>  because as populations get larger and people live longer, their individual needs become more diverse.
This is the challenge for current politics.
You can please some people some of the time, you can't please all people all of the time.
A "benevolent" dictator will still have to make choices and will have to make choices that will hurt a lot of people with none of the negative consequences.
Good for some parts of society, but that really sucks when you are the one to be executed for the common good.


Sic Semper Tyrannis.

The right to violate the rights of the people belongs to the people. An absolute monarchy, vanguard party, a benevolent dictatorship is mass negligence. Suddenly the failures of the people can be pushed onto one person, or even a small group.


I believe that it's incredibly helpful when looking at violent conflict to just sit down and listen to what a given solider "on leave" claims, letting them advocate even if you don't necessarily agree with or even understand that person!

Does anybody else agree? If so, would they be willing to post here similar videos interviewing soldiers from China, France, Germany, Russia, or any counties known for big armies? I'm looking to learn! Please share even if you personally dislike the soldiers' opinions!

Any other media covering the question of "What is my life as a solider, really?" is welcome too!


I would have exceptional doubt as to that individual's credibility.

As a general rule, soldiers aren't allowed to just speak willy nilly about a conflict, after all.
At bear minimum, they'd risk repercussions when they return to duty.
If not being branded a traitor and incarcerated, should their dialogue not reflect the state's position.

This type of thing reaks of propaganda, to me.


File: 1714563627650.png (281.5 KB, 1079x1152, 1079:1152, Screenshot_20240501-073240.png) ImgOps Google

What will come of the pro-Hamas agitators who are unlawfully harassing and intimidating Jewish students?
39 posts and 13 image replies omitted. Click reply to view.


idk. but "people are people," as it says in the song.


File: 1715622656081.png (801.83 KB, 1080x1045, 216:209, Screenshot_20240513-134548.png) ImgOps Google

Hmm, not sure what to make of this.  I guess both sides have some bad people.


File: 1716329785301.png (671.65 KB, 1080x1323, 40:49, Screenshot_20240521-181209.png) ImgOps Google

Previous [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]
[ home ] [ pony / townhall / rp / canterlot / rules ] [ arch ]