Scholar

That's very true. Also: Only barbarians find a barbarian charming.

???

He is an ideologue, he wants to create the first actual super-AI, he thinks we have to integrate with the AI so that it doesnt destroy us, and he wants to actually go to Mars. This is what makes him so dangerous, he is precisely not just after money. He wants power to achieve his ideological, austistic ends.

The more clear headed I am, the more it seems like life is just a grand delusion, a distraction of the inevitable impermanence of ones own existence. This has been on my mind recently. Everything is impermanent, it is clear to me now. But this creates a deep, existential lack of motivation for life itself. I don't care to pursue anything at this point. The whole game of life seems silly, redundant. Everyone is getting hot and bothered about this and about that, but the fate of us all is the same no matter what we do in life, no matter what kind of political structure you will create, no matter how much well being or how much suffering you will experience, in the end there is the one that makes us all equal, that turns our lives, experiences, memories and all our meaning into dust. Everything that will be gained will be lost, every joy and every pain is fleeting. I have no interest in romantic pursuits, career pursuits, life pursuits. I have no real desire for pleasure even, it seems fundamentally hollow. Life seems absurd to me. This is a novel experience to me, but it seems to be truthful. It is as if a deep delusion, a coping mechanism had been lifted. Nothing matters.

JD Vance threatened to abandon US NATO support in response to EU wanting to regulate the platform because of disinformation, botting and the false checkmarks. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/jd-vance-elon-musk-x-twitter-donald-trump-b2614525.html?source=pmbug.com This is literally oligarchy behavior. They are literal traitors to the US, and Elon Musk is actually what conspiracy theorists always imagined Jeff Bezos to be.

He is a transphobic narcissist who literally bullied his own daughter, and you are celebrating him. Unreal.

No they are not. If you talk to these people, they will morally shame and appeal to authority as much as any other person, they just apply it differently.

I don't see how this is anything but fearmongering. Is this happening anywhere? Why are the republicans not appealling to immigrant voters then? These are incredibly conservative individuals. In the end you can argue importing immigrants will lead to the country shifting more conservative in the long run, given that these individuals often skew conservative when they come from certain regions.

The twitter files did not really expose this, the claims are highly exaggerated. Anything that happened there pales in comparison to what Elon is doing with twitter now, all in the open for everyone to see. Here is Destiny debating the journalists responsible for the mess:

In general I think Destiny is more in tune with the deeper problems that we are facing as a society, in relation to epistemic breakdown and so forth. I don't agree with his proposed solutions, though I think he is correctly identifying the problems. I haven't paid much attention the difference between Pisco and Destiny, although I am more pessimistic about the average human being, so I would most likely align with Destiny more than Pisco.

Ah yes, and the owner of the most significant speech platform in the world changing algorithms in his own favor and then running a campaign for Donald Trump did play no role in the election. Just imagine Zuckerberg doing the same on Facebook or Instagram. The fact that this is not even noticed by the side that talks about evil billionaires and the deep state constantly is telling.

You just have to look at how popular the video is, and how popular Joe Rogan is in general. He is a misinformation factory, he can be lucky that he is getting any views. His visibility on the platform should reduce every time he lies and brings on guests that lie.

Even if this was true, look at the alternative: Elon bought twitter and changed the algorithms such that his tweets will be the most viewed on the platform. He then proceeded to use his voice to rally for Trump, while demonetizing people like Destiny on the platform. Like how can you complain about the Rogan podcast and not about that?

The video was absolutely available on youtube, I checked it myself. It was a completely baseless lie, lol. It wasn't Trump voters who made the difference in this election, he got as many as he did last time. What made the difference here is that many democratic voters didn't go to vote.

He probably promised Elon Musk to put Tariffs on Chinese EVs so that he could remain competitive, in exchange for Elon's propaganda apparatus.

When it implodes the right will blame it on the deep state, that's the problem. They are too delusional to ever come into contact with reality. The consequences of their actions can be dismissed and spun into into their narrative.

You have to ask yourself where the resentfulness comes from. If your parents are ugly and low IQ, do you also feel resentful that they had you as a child, being born ugly and low IQ? Why would you be resentful, if the alternative would be to not exist at all? I think it is reasonable to be resentful of your parents willfully put you into a scenario in which you would live a life unworthy of living, meaning a life that is so filled with suffering, one would rather have never been born. Most resentfulness of inbred individuals towards their parents is a function of cultural discrimination towards such relationships, rather than a genuine function of individuals being angry at their parents because they might have been born with worse health outcomes than the average person. If two genetically blind individuals have a child, I don't see a reason why the child could be rationally resentful towards their parents in a meaningful way that would not also translate to basically every other human that exists. By that logic I could be resentful towards my parents because my mother was over 40 when I was born. Some of my health outcomes could be attributes to the fact that my mother had me so late. But if my mother didn't have me at 40, I would simply not exist at all. If she had a child when she was 30, it would not have been me who was born. I think it's important to understand that inbred people do not live a life of suffering. They might (keyword might) have some difficulties, and in the worst case more severe disabilities, but that does not equate to a life of suffering or a life not worth living. Born in poverty could have a far greater impact on your well being than being born with some minor or even severe defects due to your parents being related, or disabled and so forth. The option that is reasonable here is that you should educate individuals of risks and encourage wise procreative choices. If you have a certain moral view on the matter, advocate for that view. Either way, current standards have nothing to do with an underlying moral view, but are simply a symptom of discrimination on the basis of primitive feelings of disgusting and revulsion towards a certain act. There are deeper problems with eugenics, but I think it is likely that we will use technologies to eliminate certain diseases and risk factors.

We don't consider individuals who might have a higher chance birthing individuals with problems as "abusive" towards those children. We allow individuals with Huntington’s disease, hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, Down syndrome, Tay Sachs, cystic fibrosis and so forth to have children despite the risk ratios being higher as well as the conditions children will suffer from being far more devastating. We support such individuals in their reproductive choices and give them medical guidance and assistance, rather than shaming them and framing them as abusive. When parents give birth to such children, we have great sympathy for the parents, rather than condemning them. There is also the non-identity problem, namely: Giving birth to an individual that might be born blind is not harmful to that blind person, because that individual could not have been born without that condition. In this case, you are simply saying that individuals born with certain genetic inferiorities ought not to be given the privilege to exist. A harm would be causing damage to a child when it's existence would not depend on that limitation, namely if you drink alcohol, smoke or do not consume enough folic acid during pregnancy. In that case, a child who would have been born healthy will be born with a significant impediment to it's well-being. In the case of inbreeding, or breeding between individuals with genetic inferiorities or genetic disabilities, the resulting child existence depends on being born. It could not have been born healthy. The reality is that you can mitigate significant problems with inbreeding through medical intervention and screening of fetal development early during a pregnancy. In principle, inbreeding is far less risky or devastating than individuals who generally have low quality genes procreating, or individuals who have significant genetic disorders as mentioned above. Incestophobia simply leads to irrational discriminatory attitudes, as well as, ironically, the shaming of individuals who are born of inbreeding. People make fun of inbreeding all the time, and directly mock traits inbred people might have due to genetic disorders that might affect them. In other words, incestophobia gives you a free pass to dehumanize and mock disabled people, specifically on the basis of their disabilities, or malformations. All of it while people proclaim a concern for those very children, to justify their knee jerk hatred and disgusting of individuals who engage in incest or inbreeding. People who are born of inbreeding feel incredible shame around that fact, which is a direct result of our culture.

Incestophobia is a cultural thing, similar to homophobia. It's an irrational aversion and demonization of incestuous relationships or activities.

I love how they had to add some incestophobia in the end as if that had to do anything with the matter. This person is clearly intersex.

Lex and Russell Brand are probably russian ops. Nobody should respect them or anything they have to say..

The reason why Joe Rogan seems on the fence about it is because he does not want to appear to be biased. He wants to come across as a normal dude who is reasonable, and who just looks at the facts and in the end has to admit that he has to vote for Trump because that's the only way sadly. But it's obvious from his audience what kind of person he is. They are all conspiracy brained MAGA types.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1gk3dys/joe_rogan_says_its_the_last_election_says/

Look at him: Remember him talking about conspiracy theories about how billionaires control the world and influence everyone and so forth? You can't make this shit up, he is rim-jobbing the richest man on earth who literally bought the biggest social media platform to push a particular political candidate and who changed the algorithms so he his tweets would be the most seen on the platform.

Yes after he convinced half the nation of this nonsense. And these individuals weren't informed enough to have these debates. It creates a completely skewed picture. And like I said, he also had a debate with a vegan on, and HE ADMITTED THE VEGAN WON and proved that meat causes heart disease and so forth. A week later he was on a carnivore diet and continued to say that meat is healthy for you and so forth. The guy is a dishonest baffoon.