questionreality

Fools like you don't value what they have, nor appreciate people who stand up for your right to privacy and free speech. Poor understanding of history is a big reason, other than the ignorance imo. What's funny, is that in countries like Russia and China, the governments do exactly what you want - censor, moderate and prosecute people by having full access to private messages of the messengers. And that's why Durov escaped Russia so he doesn't have to deal with that BS. You would be the first one crying about this if you were to live in Russia or China.

It's the private messages that they wanted to get access to. Public chats on there do get moderation and get deleted quite frequently: including for terrorism, etc, that was even on the news. In fact, it's nothing new, in 2016 they asked him the same question regarding of the encryption and how it can help terrorists, and this was his answer: It's either secure for everyone or not - it can't be secure for everyone but not for terrorists.

The problem is that this forum already for quite some time now has become an echo chamber for left wing ideology + group think and a large part of this was Leo's contribution. Lately he changed his tone a bit, but it's a bit too late. A place like this instead should promote balanced perspectives, looking at all the pros, cons, and the person who calls himself the most conscious person in the world for sure should not take sides, and offer balanced perspectives instead. Leo's response to this was not surprising for those who are aware of what I wrote above

I would say both. It made it easier to understand the people and also to understand who I want to be connected with, but harder in a sense that the pool of people that I want to be connected with has shrunk. During the phase it was much harder to be social, now that I am out of it it is not difficult at all and I find that I enjoy it. Overall I would say for sure that it had a positive impact.

That is one of his traits for sure

100% agreed, he would for sure not keep saying that a woman is a social construct if he was actually aware.

People who are different from you are also those who think different, and have different opinions, no? Or is to you the only difference lies in the skin color of the person or their gender? What it clearly shows, is that you actually have no idea what truly means to be "tolerant", "inclusive" and "non-judgmental". Elon Musk is nowhere close to a "bigot" and a "bully" . That is your own subjective opinion and a projection, which has nothing to do with reality.

You nailed it. At the end of the day, the entire thing that you call "life" is a construct. If one were to deconstruct the entire reality, you probably wouldn't be able to function as you do now. Many constructions hence serve practical purpose and are obviously needed for human life.

It wasn't assumptions, here you confirmed once again that I was right. So you want to go the whataboutism route? This last post of mine was not even directed at you, but here you decided to start some shit? Stop pointing fingers at other people and take the damn responsibility. Yes indeed right is also guilty of virtue signaling, but left specifically promotes the values of being tolerant, non-judgmental and inclusive. Right doesn't do that, so you don't expect from the right to be those things. The left is the same as the right in that regard (judgmental, and only tolerant when it wants to be), but the difference is that the left pretends to be those things, when it's actually not. Then you don't really know the left or your own SJW types. They constantly try to pretend that they have the moral high ground and accuses others of being judgmental - you are blind to this, because you yourself are part of the bubble.

No, the "faults" that you perceive a lot of the time are your own projections - because you assume a lot without knowing the person, exactly what you accuse the right of doing. And judgements are judgements - it doesn't really change much. At least the the right doesn't virtue signal and pretend to be something that it's not - while the left pretends to be non judgmental , and is actually fake - because it's just a mask.

Very great point! This is why it also comes down to weather you are more of an extrovert, ambivert or an introvert imo - how much of social engagement does your well being needs? I would imagine it would be a lot harder for an extrovert to be alone by themselves and be exploring abstract realms than it would be for an introvert for example.

That's a very difficult one to balance imo. I went super abstract for some years as I was genuinely curious about many things(and used a ton of psychedelics as well during that time period). When I burned a lot of that through and got the fulfilment in that, I understood that I missed the social aspect and needed to integrate it, and kind of come out of that bubble. Now I find that whenever I need to go abstract, it is available, but now I enjoy relating to people a lot more, it's just more fun. I am sure that they can be integrated, but I see it more as switching between the two - like diving into the water and then out of it. It is for sure possible - if you find a way to monetize your abstract skills. This will probably be not working for somebody, but creating something of your own, that you would find a way to monetize.

I have actually been in Spain (Barcelona) and there the locals now have really turned anti-immigrant. When I talked to the locals, they explained it for the same reason - due to skyrocketing of the housing costs. And most of the population in Barcelona is very left leaning. And to most Canadians that I talked to think that Justin Trudeau is the worst prime minister that Canada has ever seen. While I have considered my self a liberal for most of my life, I have came to understand how naive liberalism can be sometimes and that in some aspects conservative view points make sense.

It's very funny to observe this thread and see how the leftists who usually accuse the right of being judgmental, close-minded, and constantly virtue signal, actually behave exactly like the people they criticize. It's like a mask that they wear and once the person that they don't like crosses a certain threshold to trigger them, the mask comes off. I am referring to people who are quick to judge Elon, without actually taking the time to figure out who he actually is. But the fact remains, is that Elon has already done 100x more for the world than they will ever do in their lifetimes.

Frank yang. I know you have some differences and probably dislike for him, but I think the audience would win from it. Also, you don't have to talk about certain topics if you don't want to - there are many things to discuss.

Buddha actually denied the existence of soul, and that's how Hinduism/Buddhism has split. But you can also find this out by having a total breakthrough with psychedelics for example

Wow, now I can even understand a little bit what a person experiencing schizophrenia can feel like! Very great explanation as well, very clear and on the point. Amazing, glad that our conversation somehow could help you : )

I can relate a bit to what you are saying, as sometimes I am also exploring when it comes to discussing various topic/subjects (if my ego doesn't jump in for whatever reason), but people often perceive the idea to be rigid, and think that I hold a certain position, when I am just exploring. What I found to be the key, is the communication style, and feeling where the person is at - as certain things can be a trigger to an ego and change the discussion from exploratory to defending positions. Based on how you conduct yourself on a forum, I would say that your communication style certainly embodies what you say you are - very neutral, balanced, probably more than from anyone that I have seen. Thank you for sharing your perspective, I find you as a person very fascinating actually.

Do you find it difficult in communicating with people when they perceive your ideas to be rigid, when they are clearly not? I do find that sometimes to be an issue for me. Other than that, I totally understand now what you mean. I can totally relate, as I used to be a lot more abstract thinker myself in the past but decided that I didn't want to be "alone in the woods" as you say. So it's really a choice that one has to make - either to live alone in the woods or to be part of the society. Very good point and this is why politics is such a difficult field to navigate. It requires a lot of sacrifice and even the best choices will have some downsides.

Except that's not how it works a lot of the time in practice, especially in US. Sometimes a kid tells the parent that he wants to transition, and the parent just obliges, and goes with whatever the kid wants, without thinking twice. Take even a guy like Elon Musk, who just went along with it and now regrets it. This is why this shit should not be promoted or popularized - as kids can be easily influenced at a young age, and this is where conservatives have a valid point imo. Some kind of protections would need to be also put in place - so that a parent understands that they bear full responsibility and ultimately it is their choice, not the kid's.

My position was that I don't believe that kids should be making that decision, due to such young age. And that this idea should not be promoted and popularized. If their parents think it is best for them and are willing to take that responsibility, then obviously it is fine. I was not talking about placing a ban on transition treatment - don't confuse me with conservatives. When you mentioned that the right does not want to provide the free therapy for kids, my idea was to perhaps have a compromise - have them get free therapy until they are adults, and then allow them to make that decision to transition after they turn 18 or w/e the consensus would be. This was just an idea and I personally think that it would actually work.

I meant that what you perceive as "yellow" is relative, abstract, and subjective. So what you may perceive as "yellow", someone else may perceive as something else and vice versa. So your whole idea of what is yellow, and how one operates in it, is quite abstract and subjective to begin with. Would you say that yellow is fluid in a sense that it is able to see truths in multiple perspectives, and also doesn't hold a rigid opinion on a particular thing? And at the same time is detached from position, because of it's fluidity? Regarding this thread: That was exactly my argument. When we clearly define what a woman is, it gives society a lot more practical value, especially to society that is no near evolved towards yellow. And for me, if I want to live in a society and not alone in the woods, practical mindset clearly has more value than abstract one.

Where did you get that from? Like, we are reading the same thread here? Never did I say that parent's shouldn't have the ability to decide weather their kids could transition or not.

Haha, way to put words in my mouth and assume things that I didn't say! So conscious of you (oh the irony). You either don't want to understand what was my point or just too intellectually lazy to, I will not repeat myself again. And again, here because it is to your benefit you give the doctors the benefit of the doubt, yet in other times you would shit on scientists, doctors, etc.

Way to point the fingers at others and excusing your own behavior. JP is no near close to being arrogant, perhaps you don't know what arrogance means? Since you identify yourself as the progressive, what I said clearly applies to you. You virtue signal, and promote inclusion, compassion, and acceptance, but when it comes to people that you don't like, you throw it all away. Being compassionate and inclusive has no conditions - either you are, or you are not.