under achiever retweeted
It’s important to remember that the most iconic dystopian fiction is not a vision of the future or an insight into the darkest tendencies of human nature.
The most iconic dystopian fictions are specifically insights into the nature of the British.
Orwell was not painting a vision of the future, he was opening a window into the minds and hearts of the British. Perhaps not all British people are this way, but enough of them are and enough of them have clawed their way onto the fulcrums of institution that they stomp upon the face of their kinsmen until they can all down in misery together.
Terry Gilliam’s Brazil is one of the most enlightening pieces of media and arguably the greatest depiction of proper dystopia through the lens of actual relevant sourcing: British culture and governance. In Brazil you very clearly see a society that instills a tyranny of convolution upon its populace. Everyone drowns in tubes and wires. Bureaucracy stretches out onto an exponential infinite dimension of torturous agony. The film culminates in the highest ideal a British person strives for in life, which is to torture a friend viciously for the sin of having transgressed an absurd law.
It was always laughable that high school teachers and armchair midwit philosophers would dangle the likes of 1984 in front of us as some cautionary warning against something that could ever happen to us. The truth is that while a police surveillance state or oppressive dictatorship is always a very real possibility, the excessive horror of that existence is not really something that’s universally applicable. It is nightmare that the British distinctly occupy. A cruelty that excessively morose is exclusive to certain specific societies, one in which drab misery was always present. The Russians are a good example as well, their Bolshevik communist hellscape could only have been facilitated by a people already used to trampling upon each others existence through a history of harsh cruelty. Most dystopias have generous pockets of humanity to give reprieve from the cruelties of the state, which are mostly done logistically without excessive need to crush humanity
The UK is unique in this tendency. Their cold shitty damp swamp origins fostered a brutish people who have developed an attraction to suffering, a hunger for it, a need to crush their fellow man in order to feel any sense of fulfillment. The most autonomous and independent of their ranks left for the new world or some other colony. Britain’s best always choose to leave that damp shithole, despising the ravenous maw of chattering busybodies and chastising hags who will scurry away from stab happy Africans to hone in on random natives and harass them for the sake of existing.
This is why they were so prodigious an empire. They wanted to be anywhere else but home. It’s why the mutiny on the HMS Bounty occurred, the prospect of returning to London was a promise of entering hell itself. The fascinating combination of ignorance mixed with fictional-factual toned smugness makes the English nanny drones particularly tantalizing for hate. They are so specifically programmed for crushing their fellow man that it’s not enough to simply gawk at them and dismiss them. You want to actually go to England and beat them thoroughly with large iron rods. You want to reprogram their brains via a gun pressed into their mouth as tears stream down their face. Theirs a worldview so abhorrent to all natural principles of existence that they deserve to be corrected inside of a soundproofed shipping container.
Their laws jail you for purchasing dull cookware knives while daily rape gets completely dismissed. They are so specifically rabid in their crusade to suffocate life that they reach out to other countries to prosecute people for transgressing against hate speech laws. Their country swirls into the toilet and their final dying act is to pull down and drown their fellow kinsmen when they try to escape.
The most iconic dystopian fictions are specifically insights into the nature of the British.
Orwell was not painting a vision of the future, he was opening a window into the minds and hearts of the British. Perhaps not all British people are this way, but enough of them are and enough of them have clawed their way onto the fulcrums of institution that they stomp upon the face of their kinsmen until they can all down in misery together.
Terry Gilliam’s Brazil is one of the most enlightening pieces of media and arguably the greatest depiction of proper dystopia through the lens of actual relevant sourcing: British culture and governance. In Brazil you very clearly see a society that instills a tyranny of convolution upon its populace. Everyone drowns in tubes and wires. Bureaucracy stretches out onto an exponential infinite dimension of torturous agony. The film culminates in the highest ideal a British person strives for in life, which is to torture a friend viciously for the sin of having transgressed an absurd law.
It was always laughable that high school teachers and armchair midwit philosophers would dangle the likes of 1984 in front of us as some cautionary warning against something that could ever happen to us. The truth is that while a police surveillance state or oppressive dictatorship is always a very real possibility, the excessive horror of that existence is not really something that’s universally applicable. It is nightmare that the British distinctly occupy. A cruelty that excessively morose is exclusive to certain specific societies, one in which drab misery was always present. The Russians are a good example as well, their Bolshevik communist hellscape could only have been facilitated by a people already used to trampling upon each others existence through a history of harsh cruelty. Most dystopias have generous pockets of humanity to give reprieve from the cruelties of the state, which are mostly done logistically without excessive need to crush humanity
The UK is unique in this tendency. Their cold shitty damp swamp origins fostered a brutish people who have developed an attraction to suffering, a hunger for it, a need to crush their fellow man in order to feel any sense of fulfillment. The most autonomous and independent of their ranks left for the new world or some other colony. Britain’s best always choose to leave that damp shithole, despising the ravenous maw of chattering busybodies and chastising hags who will scurry away from stab happy Africans to hone in on random natives and harass them for the sake of existing.
This is why they were so prodigious an empire. They wanted to be anywhere else but home. It’s why the mutiny on the HMS Bounty occurred, the prospect of returning to London was a promise of entering hell itself. The fascinating combination of ignorance mixed with fictional-factual toned smugness makes the English nanny drones particularly tantalizing for hate. They are so specifically programmed for crushing their fellow man that it’s not enough to simply gawk at them and dismiss them. You want to actually go to England and beat them thoroughly with large iron rods. You want to reprogram their brains via a gun pressed into their mouth as tears stream down their face. Theirs a worldview so abhorrent to all natural principles of existence that they deserve to be corrected inside of a soundproofed shipping container.
Their laws jail you for purchasing dull cookware knives while daily rape gets completely dismissed. They are so specifically rabid in their crusade to suffocate life that they reach out to other countries to prosecute people for transgressing against hate speech laws. Their country swirls into the toilet and their final dying act is to pull down and drown their fellow kinsmen when they try to escape.
Keeping it cool and not missing a single note while being harassed
294
923
9,236
824,244
under achiever retweeted
we must consolidate this historic victory with the symbolic rehiring of all cancelled victims of wokeness to jobs commensurate with the ones that were taken from them
for example i would be an excellent Trust & Safety officer for X. RT if you agree
for example i would be an excellent Trust & Safety officer for X. RT if you agree
3
55
165
7,137
under achiever retweeted
>>>I’ve already seen this movie play out ~ the ending is very sad with all those pets & zoo animals being eaten
1
3
13
1,023
under achiever retweeted
This does not fill me with confidence
Did you know a heat pump is 3x more efficient than a gas boiler?
Meaning it generates 3 times more energy than it consumes.
Check if a heat pump could be suitable for your home gov.uk/check-heat-pump
#HeatPumpWeek
35
10
144
16,154
under achiever retweeted
“Calories in / calories out” is bullshit.
You can make mice eat 4x the calories and end up the same body weight, as long as the calories are from soda.¹
Scientists restricted one amino acid (isoleucine) in mice. This made them eat twice as much, have ~75% less fat mass, and live 33% longer.²
The metabolic rate increases in response to protein-deficient overfeeding works in large part thru a circulating factor called FGF21.³
This explains the lifespan increase and lower body weight despite higher food intake, as we saw the same thing in genetically-modified mice that over-express FGF21.⁴
The mice that ate more and weighed less had much more FGF21. We have data showing up to a 44x increase FGF21 in response to protein deficient overfeeding in humans.⁵ There was individual variation, though, and some had a blunted increase in energy expenditure from FGF21 and gained more weight.
FGF21 can be induced to match energy intake, though, as in ref 5. However, if the liver sees more calories than the rest of the body (i.e., MCT + fructose), whole body energy expenditure can increase more than food intake thru FGF21 over-induction,⁶ lowering bodyweight. (The liver releases FGF21)
This suggests a high calorie low protein paradigm, with plenty of sugar and MCTs, would be ideal for weight loss without restricting calories, so long as the human doesn’t have a blunted metabolic response to FGF21.
While the proponents of the “calories in / calories out” idea claim it's just thermodynamics, they use it as an argument to eat less.
This is an implicit assumption that only “calories in” is flexible and calories out is inflexible. The name “calories in / calories out” now means “calories in is the only thing that matters.”
Mouse data show clear interventional evidence that you can change the metabolic rate to change weight outcomes.
Human data shows that these mechanisms are conserved, but no one has done the necessary ‘randomized controlled trials’ because the dietary interventions are anti-paradigmatic: lower protein in the context of a high calorie, sugary diet.
I don’t expect these trials to pass IRB review, so you must go forward and be n=1.
You can make mice eat 4x the calories and end up the same body weight, as long as the calories are from soda.¹
Scientists restricted one amino acid (isoleucine) in mice. This made them eat twice as much, have ~75% less fat mass, and live 33% longer.²
The metabolic rate increases in response to protein-deficient overfeeding works in large part thru a circulating factor called FGF21.³
This explains the lifespan increase and lower body weight despite higher food intake, as we saw the same thing in genetically-modified mice that over-express FGF21.⁴
The mice that ate more and weighed less had much more FGF21. We have data showing up to a 44x increase FGF21 in response to protein deficient overfeeding in humans.⁵ There was individual variation, though, and some had a blunted increase in energy expenditure from FGF21 and gained more weight.
FGF21 can be induced to match energy intake, though, as in ref 5. However, if the liver sees more calories than the rest of the body (i.e., MCT + fructose), whole body energy expenditure can increase more than food intake thru FGF21 over-induction,⁶ lowering bodyweight. (The liver releases FGF21)
This suggests a high calorie low protein paradigm, with plenty of sugar and MCTs, would be ideal for weight loss without restricting calories, so long as the human doesn’t have a blunted metabolic response to FGF21.
While the proponents of the “calories in / calories out” idea claim it's just thermodynamics, they use it as an argument to eat less.
This is an implicit assumption that only “calories in” is flexible and calories out is inflexible. The name “calories in / calories out” now means “calories in is the only thing that matters.”
Mouse data show clear interventional evidence that you can change the metabolic rate to change weight outcomes.
Human data shows that these mechanisms are conserved, but no one has done the necessary ‘randomized controlled trials’ because the dietary interventions are anti-paradigmatic: lower protein in the context of a high calorie, sugary diet.
I don’t expect these trials to pass IRB review, so you must go forward and be n=1.
63
73
1,125
207,906
under achiever retweeted
I was bullied by the "tolerant" degods community bc my avatar doesn't have a 2-way multichain bridge - like the fast+innovative example invented by frank degods
This strands me on ethereum, the only chain in the universe founded by a man who's embarrassed of having a large penis
This strands me on ethereum, the only chain in the universe founded by a man who's embarrassed of having a large penis
6
4
48
7,092
under achiever retweeted
They use "household income" to obscure the fact that 100% of the growth since 1970 has been the liquidation of social capital
Two-income households are like Uber drivers converting a depreciating asset into cash, but instead of a car the asset is their family, culture, community
Two-income households are like Uber drivers converting a depreciating asset into cash, but instead of a car the asset is their family, culture, community
@aestheticist_ @0dinbot @PandasAndVidya >Household income
I finally put my finger on why these graphs always feel off. It's the "household" part.
26
234
1,342
125,211