 | YouTube is the number one video-sharing platform in the world with more than 95% of the internet population using it. It provides videos ranging from silly pranks, heartwarming stories, news about the latest global issues, people's personal interests, information about cutting edge science, genuine debates between people who disagree but want to understand each other, lies to serve a political agenda, the ramblings of mentally ill people and everything in between.
YouTube has an algorithm that focuses on overall audience satisfaction, over providing people with a neutral, objective or balanced perspective on the world. It suggests videos based on how users with similar viewing patterns to your own reacted. It personalizes its recommendations based on channels to which you’ve already subscribed. This poses a risk of limiting people's access to information, that they didn't know they would have wanted to know.
I created this topic to exchange informative and educational videos with other people, who might have been algorithmically limited to other content than I am myself. I do suggest to limit this topic to informative and educational content, because there are already enough other topics for fun and questionable stuff.
Although politics and climate change can be categorized as informative and educational, there are already enough other topics debating politics and climate change. Science in general isn't political, neither is (or should) philosophy. Religion is associated with politics, but honest debates on this topic are not political, in my opinion. If you think these subjects are all terribly boring, I don't agree, but then this topic is not for you. That's OK. |
only registered users can see external links
Again, it's not for you.
Actually, the latter may be suitable for you. Here's the link:
only registered users can see external links
It's the HitlerLeute (Hitler's people) song. Written and sang for Hitler's birthday. Take it and change its lyrics to make it suitable for your supreme leader's birthday.
You're welcome.
It doesn't help grow food,it doesn't build anything, it doesn't shelter anything,it doesn't save any money,it just makes you sound like you might know something.
So uh, here is a video you need to watch, your poetry won't help you!
only registered users can see external links
The Insane Influencer Logic That Tricked Millions of People
only registered users can see external links
Another class in learning how to recognize when people are lying to you.
She looks hot in that 'uniform'. Still, the name of the restaurant is a bit misleading.
It doesn't really deliver on what it's advertising.
which is also related to their attractiveness.
It seems to be your opinion that all women should be willing to monetize their looks,
at least to some extend, if they have the assets to do so. Am I correct?
Do you think that there is something wrong with them, if they don't like that?
Do you think that women are defective somehow, if they don't like attention to their
sexual attractiveness, from customers or co-workers? That would be strange for me, considering you come from a country full of extremist Christians, with very puritanical beliefs, who are generally more allied with your side of politics than mine.
Or is it your opinion that all employers should be able to monetize the looks of their employees, by picking a dress-code that enhances their sexual attractiveness?
Personally, I'm not a fan of prudishness, but I think that a society should respect personal beliefs, as long as people don't force them onto others. In the case of women, that is related to their own choice in how much they want to advertise their sexual attractiveness. They should not be forced to do anything else than what they choose for themselves. If women want any attention to their sexual attractiveness in the workplace, they should have the freedom to chose from multiple employers, to dress the way they want, within reason. Employers should of course be free to have standards for employees being representational, within a broad societal standard.
“True freedom is a balance between all our individual desires and the common good.”
A woman cashing in on her looks to me should be a option if they so choose and I am glad not all are snobs.
And frankly, instead of women hollaring they can't get a job, perhaps they need to look in a mirror and realize, hey, i look good, people want to see me, i can make money, instead of whining and pissing and moaning and wanting governemtn help.
a purpose. If they don't, the demands should be minimized to employees being representational, within a broad societal standard. Many employees are not dealing with customers. As long as employees maintain collegiality, there is no reason for employers to take even more of our personal freedoms away.
Are only women "hollaring they can't get a job"? Do only women need to look in the mirror? Are only good looking people allowed to make money? Why would women more than men be whining and pissing and moaning and wanting government help?
They are already better educated than men in the US. They want to be useful.
They want to be valued for their skills and actions. Their body is not for everyone.
The funny thing is that if a woman actually does achieve something, you accuse them of having used sex to get what she has. They need to walk a tight rope, to please you.
I'm expecting some MAGA chick to suck and fuck herself to the top and you happily voting her in for president.
only registered users can see external links
"The #1 Best Natural Foods to Clean Out Arteries"
only registered users can see external links
If you have hypertension, clogged arteries, hearth disease or diabetes, watching this video can provide new insights to improve your health with your food habits. It gave me some ideas for changes.
I've watched her before.
Because I'm working in pharma, my family asks me about meds.
Some GP's are just following a standard treatment with statins,
instead of taking the time to investigate benefits vs risks.
My father was prescribed statins, because he had a mini-stroke a few years back,
but his cholesterol, blood pressure and blood glucose levels were all totally fine.
He wanted to stop them, because of the side effects, but the GP wasn't budging.
That's when I started to investigate. He got off the statins, be he kept using a
blood thinner.
But this video in a very direct way, demonstrates the downside to it all, notice how the healthy fellow becomes a couch potato of about 400 pounds and no longer plays with his robot, uses virtual reality ,leaving her programing unfulfilled.
I would assume having a robot take care of everything would be like a drug making you happy for about 2 weeks then needing more of it until you were addicted and couldn't get enough. But being partially disabled and socially inept, I can't help but think it would help in a case like mine to have a non judgmental companion to help me thru the remainder of my days..
only registered users can see external links
One can be good exercise and the other not so much.
Before I found my girlfriend, I was very much socially inept.
She had her problems too, but we grew together, by complementing each other.
My employer helped me a lot too. I took on several courses.
Social skills can be trained, like every other skill.
In real life, I'm much easier to deal with, than I'm being here.
I'm here to pick an argument. I only do that in real life, when I'm challenged to it.
I think you have a lot of patience. That's important in a relationship.
Accept that any woman has her fault, and she will accept yours.
Just make your existence known to enough women, so one will notice you.
There might be one character issue that you could work on; try to see the good in people, instead of assuming the worst motives for any move they make and any word they speak.
Most people are actually not that bad.
i am not that concerned about sex with the robot, unless it can clean it's self up.but i think the cooking and cleaning and entertainment aspect of it would be nice. i could concentrate on things more important to me than cleaning.
The robots will be expensive for ever. Those are just billionaire toys. It would be cheaper to hire a cleaner, a cook and entertainment, for the foreseeable future, even when the robots will replace humans for jobs.
Make your cooking and cleaning as efficient as possible, and it will at maximum cost an hour a day. I had planned this all out, but then I found my girlfriend. She cooks very inefficiently. If I didn't work 10-15 hrs/week more than her, I would prefer to do the cooking myself. We split the cleaning about 50/50%. She started the washing machine, so I can put it in the dryer when it's finished.
by picking a silly debate on hotdogs with ChatGPT.
only registered users can see external links
I think this is both very funny (bone dry humor though) and educational.
only registered users can see external links
Nice to hear my country as the first example.
Ricky Gervais in a discussion about religion and evolution.
only registered users can see external links
If you're annoyed that he doesn't get push-back here,
you're free to provide it.
only registered users can see external links
Which town are we actually talking about? I didn't hear him say.
I would like to check why it was called that.
That's what I always call 'anecdotal evidence'.
[Anecdotal evidence is information based on personal experiences or observations, often presented as stories or examples, rather than through systematic research or data analysis. It's valuable for understanding individual experiences but generally considered unreliable for drawing broad conclusions or making decisions.]
The one person could be completely right or almost completely wrong. Why almost? Because anecdotes still provide SOME evidence. In a court case, testimony is considered strong evidence. It can send someone to prison, for years to life.
However, in science it's considered to be the weakest evidence. If you tell a scientist: "But, I really saw it!", you get the answer: "I believe that you believe that you saw it,
but bring me actual evidence. I can't base anything on your observation. Do you have
a hypothesis proposal to test your claim?".
there will always be those that perpetuate the hatred,on both sides, those that act in such a way that reinforces the ideas that prompt racism, and those that will push it where there may not even be any. all for media spectacle,attention
Sometimes it takes "media spectacle" to solve problems.
Your president is creating "media spectacle" every day to distract from his problems.
"where there may not even be any" keep dreaming.
only registered users can see external links
One hint: it's based on 'Equivocation' of religious 'truth' with scientific 'truth'.
This is the best logical argumentation analysis that I have ever seen.
I know he doesn't believe anything he says, because his lies are too complex.
He really is a master at what he does. He's even better than Tucker Carlson.
I respect the skill, but condemn the character of these people.
This only happens this much on the right. They LOVE being lied to.
only registered users can see external links
The first time heard him speak was on the radio. He was less confusing then.
I have watched many of his talks and debates on YouTube, but often with push-back.
I have an interest in philosophy and logical reasoning, of which recognizing fallacies is a very useful tool, which I also often use in my job. I'm part of a team that supports biotechnological pharmaceutical production, by analyzing problems and generating solutions. Logical thinking is very important for understanding a problem and how to solve it effectively and efficiently, without creating new problems.
When Jordan Peterson started off his career, he certainly had some useful things to say. Some lefties and liberals were outraged by his individual responsibility doctrine, but it is very much in line with the existing capitalist system. I'm as socialist as they come, but I understood at a young age that I had to improve myself, to thrive.
I was never outraged at JP, for that. I just understand that socialism is all about supporting people to maximize their potential, while the American capitalist ideal is forcing people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps, with the threat of starvation.
Jordan Peterson is also famous for his ridiculous elaborate vocabulary use. That's not intended to explain something, that's intended to appear intelligent, to people who don't understand a single word he's saying. Every time highly intelligent people debated him, his 'arguments' were completely destroyed. I have had many 'fights' with his supporters, who just worshiped the word salad and his ideology.
I convinced a few of them with the following idea: "You are listening to him with the intent of making sense of what he's saying. You cannot follow 25% of it, but you end up at the conclusion that he wants you to believe. Now do the opposite; listen to him with the intent of finding logical errors in his argumentation. Understand that when he makes ONE logical error, his conclusion is unreliable."
Since he is a mass-production-falacy-factory, even the layman can find some faults
in what he's saying.
I also asked people why JP is incapable of explaining his ideas in transparent language. The real geniuses of history were able to teach the common man.
The biggest conmen in history used confusing language, to make themselves
appear superior and to confuse people into believing their lies.
He has been a mess for a while now. He went through bad times, suffering addiction. That was ironic, because he was famous for the idea of individual responsibility and finding meaning in a chaotic world. He was already rich, when he made a mess of his life, while he told people who start with nothing to get their act together.
Then he came out of that, not by including his life lessons, but by turning into a grifter for right-wing ideology. He's also a spokesman for religion, while he obviously doesn't believe in the deity as religions present them, he just believes that it is useful when other people do. It makes people nicely obedient and gullible.
Now i understand why, when I listen to him, there's much that seems to be reasonable, but I never understood why he talks so much, so angrily, why he can't say anything simple but has to embed it in what looks like a chaotic collection of sentences and why, often, there's no simple message.
He's not easily dismissed as reactionary (trump, vance, etc), he's not contradicting everything that comes from the left either. He has left me confused, to put it simply.
Your analysis above helps me put his approach in a firmer perspective. So, again, thanks for taking the time to write all that.
only registered users can see external links
You can't shame people who have no shame.
You can't win democratically from people who don't give a flying fuck about democracy.
THE MOTTE & BAILEY FALLACY / the motte and bailey shuffle.
only registered users can see external links
It's Jordan Peterson’s #1 trick, which was nicely exposed on Jubilee Surrounded.
Feminist SPANKS Charlie Kirk With This 1 Ancient Trick
only registered users can see external links
Who knows what trick is referred to in the title? Is it a fallacy?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Not just an opinion, but an analysis of fallacies.
Even if you like Charlie Kirk, you can still learn from his mistakes, and do better.
Or do you like his fallacies, and think they are debating tactics?
If so, do you think the goal of a debate is to win, or to discover truth?
only registered users can see external links
He did however get completely distracted with his diy projects.
But, I get it, he's a former Apple guy, so cares a lot about how it looks.
number 9 is 1 that most people fall for. i don't, i run shit till it breaks,then fix it.
However, I don't agree with the idea with Warren Buffet as example, of billionaires who don't spend money on new cars, expensive clothes, multiple houses, etc. Why would a billionaire not spend? Is it just about owning more and more money and assets? Why?
You can't take your money into the grave with you. Is he being a 'good capitalist' that way? He's just making money with money, which is useless when you reach a certain point, where you and all your heirs can never spend it all. That's just an addiction of money
and a lack of imagination. The idiot retired at age 95! He wasted his whole life working.
I don't envy people like that, I feel sorry for them.
1. Nope, never bought a new car yet. I hate new car smell. The dealer sprayed it in my car, during the last service/MOT-inspection. It's weeks ago and it is still bothering me.
2. We were lured, with the promise of nice prizes, into the den of time share sellers,
on the Greek island Rhodes. After a tour of one of their hotels, the salesman told me the program, something like 5 weeks of vacation, for €4000,-, excluding the flights.
I thought for 5 seconds and just said "No, that deal sucks!". Then HE was even accusing ME of wasting HIS time. I told him "not my problem", asked him for my prize and left.
The prize was some useless vacation discount voucher. No way, will I ever be even tempted to get into something like that.
3. I buy brand clothes sometimes, but only brands that deliver value for money. I wear a lot of PME Legend. I buy clothes that look and feel good and I spend more on 100% cotton, because micro-plastics are so damaging to the environment. Of course a coat is often made of plastics, because cotton would soak up the rain like a sponge. I use my coats for years. The price varies a lot. One summer coat costed about $50, but I paid $300, on sale, for a good winter coat. It's not an investment, I'm paying for comfort. I'm not paying (a lot) for status.
4. I do spend some money monthly on the state's lottery. I know it's incredibly unlikely that I ever win a big prize, but the video called it a "tax on hope". That hope is worth the money for me. For many people, it's the ONLY hope they have to ever escape their pitiful existence. I am lucky, I don't have a pitiful existence, I have wealth that is unattainable for many young people these days, and I'm pretty good at investing. Still, that "tax on hope"
is worth it for me. First of all, it's the state's lottery. Part of my money goes to prizes, part goes to charities and part goes to the government, which makes it a tax literally. I don't mind paying taxes, when the government uses it well, which they mostly do. The state is the sole shareholder, so I'm not further enriching some private owner.
Second, it encourages big dreams and motivates me to accumulate some wealth.
Still, I'm not postponing living, like Warren Buffet. I'm living for now too. I'm prioritizing a job that I like, instead of a job that makes more money. I'm working for 40 hrs/week and never even have to think of work outside of those hours. I work to live, I don't live to work.
DON'T try apps like Acorns or Robinhood, they are designed to make you gamble away your money, while their owners become wealthy from your sub-optimal decisions.
Use traditional trading platforms and don't think you can be a day-trader.
5. I never buy anything, except my house, on a loan. I did have student loans once, but those have long been paid off. I have a credit card, but any purchase on it is immediately deducted from my bank account.
6. I studied for 10 years, but in The Netherlands education is much more affordable. Without that education, I would not have been able to climb up to my current job.
Like I said under 5, my student loans have long been paid off. A country that makes education that expensive is hurting it's own competition strength. Education is not just an investment in your own future, it's also an investment for the country. Every dollar spent on education by the state, provides it with a $10 return in economic benefit over time.
7. I don't own a boat. The idea is to spend money on things that make you happy and more comfortable, not things to show your wealth, just to make you look important. I grew up in The Netherlands, where showing your wealth is considered to be vulgar. Our culture is defined by the proverb "Doe maar gewoon, dan doe je al gek genoeg.", which means "Just act normal, then you're already acting crazy enough.".
8. I pay around $40/month for life insurance, for both of us. When one of us dies, the other gets just enough money to be able to stay in our house. Insurance in general is much more expensive in the US than in Europe. The example calculations are bullshit. Insurance is not an investment, it's risk remediation. It's to protect your significant other, when you fall away, so they don't suffer financial disaster, besides the loss of you.
9. My current phone is the first one in many years that I bought new. The previous 4 were all cast-offs from my girlfriend. She is a heavy phone user and I only used phones for WhatsApp. Every time her battery-life declined too much, I just did a fresh install, with minimum apps, increasing the battery-life to days. But, I've been using the phone more,
so I bough myself a new one, with a good camera. And I have a subscription for 12 GB data. I don't even use a separate camera on my vacations anymore. I do have a PC and gaming hobby. I spend about $400 per year on it. For a main hobby, I think that's fine.
I fix things only as long as I think they are still worth fixing. However, when I buy things, one of my major criteria for the product is build quality and reliability. I buy quality appliances that last long. I don't buy French or Italian cars, because something always breaks on them. I own my third Japanese car, because usually they last at least 15 years, before their maintenance costs turn not cost-effective. Car parts are very expensive.
At some point in a car's lifespan, the parts become more expensive than their practical value and the functional value of the car. I must admit it's a luxury consideration, because not everyone has the money to replace a car, when that time comes. I can, but always make sure that I can, for when the need arises.
10. We aren't married, but it was only for a small part a financial decision. There was always some family struggle in my girlfriend's family. That would have meant that not everyone would or could be there. It would also have put a damper on the festivities.
That wasn't worth it to me. We did have a big party, when we were together for 25 years. Otherwise, we have a cohabitation contract and wills together. I also think that the whole promising to be faithful to each other and to stay together is bullshit. About 36% to 40% of marriages don't last. Why would people even promise something that they don't know if they truly want to keep? I'm not doing that and I'm not expecting that. We are not each other's property. We are lucky to have each other, but when that changes, some old promise won't change anything. My love and loyalty is my gift, not my obligation.
I don't expect anything different in return.
What was very telling, is that during this video, I got several adverts for ways to become financially independent, if I would follow their seminar or get into their investment program. All people who are trying to do exactly what the video warns about. I'm sure that many people even are attracted to those things, at such a time. Then they can help those people become financially independent, while they probably loose a lot of money themselves. Why do people get lured into crypto? Because rich people advertise for it, while they have a investment system trading hundreds of thousands of dollars, pump-and-dumping crypto's, and taking all the money from the small fish. It's a scam.
New Comment Go to top