Hi guest! As you can see, the new Wizard Forums has been revived, and we are glad to have you visiting our site! However, it would be really helpful, both to you and us, if you registered on our website! Registering allows you to see all posts, and make posts yourself, which would be great if you could share your knowledge and opinions with us! You could also make posts to ask questions!
PinealisGlandia, another German, eh? While AI is subject to hallucination for complex developmental topics, Google's AI is more than capable as a basic web research assistant and calculator.
People who argue that Americans are the "worst" are the one's who don't how math works and are usually confusing the Sum (Total Volume) with the Mean (the Prevalence). I simple asked asked Gemini to mathematically perform a Normalization or Per Capita Scaling of available international crime statistics.
You can do it yourself and massage the answer until you get the one you prefer, which I did not do. Here:
"Gemini, assume the personality of a data-driven researcher, remove all personal bias, and perform a cross-national comparative analysis of outbound sex tourism and human trafficking offenses using only official data. Normalize all raw data by using the following variables:
Per capita rates of citizens arrested or deported from known 'destination' hubs.
Control for 'Propensity to Travel' (total outbound tourists per 100k citizens).
Adjust for 'Economic Opportunity' (GNI per capita) to isolate behavioral prevalence from financial ability.
Compare these rates against the 1% - 4% global psychopathy baseline to determine if the 'offender rate' exceeds the 'biological baseline' in specific jurisdictions."
PinealisGlandia, another German, eh? While AI is subject to hallucination for complex developmental topics, Google's AI is more than capable as a basic web research assistant and calculator.
People who argue that Americans are the "worst" are the one's who don't how math works and are usually confusing the Sum (Total Volume) with the Mean (the Prevalence). I simple asked asked Gemini to mathematically perform a Normalization or Per Capita Scaling of available international crime statistics.
You can do it yourself and massage the answer until you get the one you prefer, which I did not do. Here:
"Gemini, assume the personality of a data-driven researcher, remove all personal bias, and perform a cross-national comparative analysis of outbound sex tourism and human trafficking offenses using only official data. Normalize all raw data by using the following variables:
Per capita rates of citizens arrested or deported from known 'destination' hubs.
Control for 'Propensity to Travel' (total outbound tourists per 100k citizens).
Adjust for 'Economic Opportunity' (GNI per capita) to isolate behavioral prevalence from financial ability.
Compare these rates against the 1% - 4% global psychopathy baseline to determine if the 'offender rate' exceeds the 'biological baseline' in specific jurisdictions."
It's a fucking chatbot, my man. If you actually checked its work regularly, you'd catch it hallucinating. This insipid and infantile insistence that anyone who disagrees with your chatbot "must be german" reveals loads about your character, maturity and intelligence. Your defense of it is borderline nonsensical, too. What does "more than capable" even mean in the context of being a "calculator"? And don't get me started on it being a "web research assistant". I was capable of using a search engine before they replaced keyword search with SEO, I'll do you the benefit of assuming you're in your early twenties or younger and this is just the internet you learned to use.
You're also making a basic mistake here in assuming that I care about some "objective truth" that can be proven with statistics, but I'm not. I don't care who the "worst" is, because I understand the global trend for crime to go down, recidivism to go down and visibility to go up. Playing with statistics doesn't interest me, at the risk of being intellectually lazy I'm just going to chalk it up to life experience and let you learn the lesson on your own time of why. Though I will point out that if people were indeed making the mistake you accuse them of, the prime offenders would be China and India, not America, having a fraction of their population.
I grew up on the internet, so I've grown up in a borderless society. I don't look at problems on the national level as isolated. I look at a model globe like it's a petri dish, and each of the nations is a culture (pun intended) growing and interacting with the other cultures in the dish. (
There's a difficult to explain effect in these cultures, the temporal overlap of these cultures, but I touched on it in my first paragraph with how the culture of the internet has changed three times in my life (four if you count Eternal September, but I wasn't on the net as a baby). Well now take that and apply it to the dissolution of the USSR, or the drafting of Brazil's 1988 constitution. That "petri globe" is modeled to some extent in everyone's mind, and it's a different model in everyone's mind. And here's where this topic gets uncomfortable: "Consent" is a cultural value that is not modeled the same in everyone's mind. Which is how you get things like blaming the victim, and calling teenage girls "young women".
What I find really confusing is in another post you said:
No even if these are true and the point per capitia is average in America the files reveal something.
Despite Americans in power claiming to care about people they don't. Even if someone in charge isn't on the list they were in power and might have been able to see what was going on and did nothing.
They did nothing to protect themselves. In a country thats has a lot of individualism do you really think they were trying to protect them? Or themselves?
They just didn't care. Some of them must have heard what was going on and did nothing. I've lived here and that tracks. This is worse.
They just don't care. Breathing in. Isolating. Individual. Power.
Have to interact with the material world one day. Can't close your eyes and pretend to care forever.
These files are a travesty not just because what is in them but because of what it say. Do you know how people get where they are? They know a lot of people. A lot of people had to have known about this and did nothing.
Just to save face because its easy to say nothing to protect yourself. Its easy to do nothing. Its easy to close your eyes and say hey I'm not the one doing that and if I whistle blow it'll come back to get me. Thats all that happened I bet. There was no loyalty I bet besides in money and influence.
And they really just didn't care about the lives ruined. This is the extreme version of a culture that doesn't care. It might get worse too. I think people should start caring a bit more about the world in front of them than shutting their eyes.
Because honestly if enough people keep shutting their eyes then something worse than these files can happen. Believe me. There is worse. There's always worse.
Post automatically merged:
What do people think caused the great depression? The dust bowl didn't help but the government could have cared. For ten years it could have done something.
It did nothing and watched people starve. Kids, parents, friends. Unemployment was so low and the American government just did nothing for years on end. People starve in that time.
Post automatically merged:
Lives were lost from that like lives were lost in these files and people traumatized. Now people affected have to pay for therapy. Pay for a lot of therapy pay for high quality therapy.
And I haven't checked with the news has any money been offered to the victims to help pay for all that? Any at all. I hope so. And if not right now I hope eventually.
I get it. NYC has 9 million people in it, so it seems to be the entirety of the USA, but it's not. It's about 3% of the population. It is not representative of the culture of the rest of the country. I live in the country (not the South), and my neighbors give me updates when they see my kid in the next town over. Community bonds still exist outside of the city. And frankly, the city being a shit place to live is universal to civilization, the country is always more civilized than the city.
Also, you've really got to work on this hangup you've got in your brain. It's a common one, I see it in a lot of humans, but work on this.
People have a bias to think of awareness of a crime as being the same as the crime itself. They think that because a criminal is on the news, the world is "bad". This isn't objective reality. Awareness of a crime, news of a criminal, these indicate that a criminal has been caught. They indicate that a crime is no longer happening. You were not aware of the crime while it took place. But they have been caught. That is a good thing. That indicates the world is improving. Do you understand that? The America of today is a better place than the America of twenty years ago, precisely because Americans are shining a light on negativity. And I say "twenty years" quite abstractly, because America has had some form of civil rights movement going on all the way back to the 1850s.
All the mongoloid-ish Trump-worshipping Qanon yokels are conspicuously silent now that the real pizzagate is revealed- or at least slightly peeled back as Trump's people strenuously put the brakes on.
The image of Comet Pizza's instagram page with a photo of a half-undressed toddler duct-taped to a ping-pong table while the cameraman flashed a wad of cash in the frame of the photograph is forever burned into my mind. Historical revisionism will never memoryhole away what I actually saw with my own eyes.
I find the us-vs-them othering mentality expressed in this post very out of character for your typically enlightened nature, BTW. You should have enough experience with gnosis by now to know that political distinction is an illusion. If you maintain your emotional center and have non-polarized conversations about politics, you'll quickly learn that everyone wants the same things accomplished, they just have a different weighting system of judgements about persons and values. Everyone wants roads, everyone wants a healthy population, everyone wants laws that make sense, everyone understands on some level that governments are about compelling behavior out of people they otherwise might not be motivated to do (be that through military compulsion internationally or LEO compulsion domestically). People just have different ideas of what needs to be compelled versus what is natural behavior, and that's where this illusion of disagreement comes in. I call it an illusion because disagreement and discourse are essentially the same thing with different emotions attached.
I get it. NYC has 9 million people in it, so it seems to be the entirety of the USA, but it's not. It's about 3% of the population. It is not representative of the culture of the rest of the country. I live in the country (not the South), and my neighbors give me updates when they see my kid in the next town over. Community bonds still exist outside of the city. And frankly, the city being a shit place to live is universal to civilization, the country is always more civilized than the city.
Also, you've really got to work on this hangup you've got in your brain. It's a common one, I see it in a lot of humans, but work on this.
People have a bias to think of awareness of a crime as being the same as the crime itself. They think that because a criminal is on the news, the world is "bad". This isn't objective reality. Awareness of a crime, news of a criminal, these indicate that a criminal has been caught. They indicate that a crime is no longer happening. You were not aware of the crime while it took place. But they have been caught. That is a good thing. That indicates the world is improving. Do you understand that? The America of today is a better place than the America of twenty years ago, precisely because Americans are shining a light on negativity. And I say "twenty years" quite abstractly, because America has had some form of civil rights movement going on all the way back to the 1850s.
i
No I don't think the world is bad just because there is crime. I think its more complicated than that. I think its a combination of factors that are involved. I was just saying in generally. I know there are places in America where neighbors do care for each other.
In fact I know the word bad and its use but its just a word. The world and America is way more complex than that.
But in this criticism I can actually illustrate my point. Now I know that cities can be tough places to live and there is a different culture there but one not all elites live in cities and two why do cities have to automatically be just bad.
That sounds like a defeatist mindset about cities. If you don't like living in cities thats fine don't have but others will. And those others don't deserve this no matter where they live.
In fact that defeatist mindset can lead to people getting away with it again. People live in those cities. Some people do just prefer the city and I think everyone has a right to not have that happen to them.
I was just being saying a generalizing American culture. I know its more complex that that but the fact that it seems like you don't care what happens and to just give up on people that are those cities. Those people have families, friends, jobs, hobbies,
Again its fine if you do not want to live in the city but I think even people in the cities deserve an environment where they are respected and not have this. I like living in rural outdoors areas too but not everyone does or can. And those that can't I think shouldn't have this.
Yeah.
Post automatically merged:
Also not all crimes are equal.
I don't think you comprehend what crime that was commited here. It wasn't just robbing someone of their belongings. It was robbing people, kids of their agency.
It has long lasting consequences on mental development and results in people that can become so depressed that they can't take care of themselves. What was done in the files also has been shown to lead to an increase in likelihood of developing illness.
The body and mind are connected.
It is way more grave and has way more lasting consequences on people than just stealing a possession.
Not all crimes are equal. Some have way more lasting consequences.
It can lead to unwanted pregnancy and if the people affected can't give the baby up through different means then someone's own life could turn into something no one wanted. Do you think that person would have fun life? What kind of dynamic would that create between a parent and child. Probably not a fun one.
Not even just that but if someone gets pregnant that young it could lead thier own death. And that that person is now robbed of their childhood now that they might have to become responsible for another human being. Thats horrible for everyone invovled.
No I don't think the world is bad just because there is crime. I think its more complicated than that. I think its a combination of factors that are involved. I was just saying in generally. I know there are places in America where neighbors do care for each other.
In fact I know the word bad and its use but its just a word. The world and America is way more complex than that.
But in this criticism I can actually illustrate my point. Now I know that cities can be tough places to live and there is a different culture there but one not all elites live in cities and two why do cities have to automatically be just bad.
That sounds like a defeatist mindset about cities. If you don't like living in cities thats fine don't have but others will. And those others don't deserve this no matter where they live.
In fact that defeatist mindset can lead to people getting away with it again. People live in those cities. Some people do just prefer the city and I think everyone has a right to not have that happen to them.
I was just being saying a generalizing American culture. I know its more complex that that but the fact that it seems like you don't care what happens and to just give up on people that are those cities. Those people have families, friends, jobs, hobbies,
Again its fine if you do not want to live in the city but I think even people in the cities deserve an environment where they are respected and not have this. I like living in rural outdoors areas too but not everyone does or can. And those that can't I think shouldn't have this.
There's definitely good aspects to cities. As a rule of thumb, the public transportation systems are better in cities, once the population of a settlement gets down to 10k or less, you tend to be limited to dial-a-ride services that need to be arranged a day ahead of time (and also tend to be more expensive than the services in larger cities). The benefits in dining out can't be understated either. The only dining options within 30 miles of me are fast food or bars. There's definitely more jobs in the city. I'm aware of the good sides of cities, don't misunderstand me. Remember the context. We're in an Epstein thread, and you were talking about the emphasis on the individual in American culture. My point was that the emphasis on the individual is something you see more of in cities, and I've heard this described by people who live in other countries. In the city, you don't stop to have a conversation with the clerk behind the counter, you know what I mean? You don't get to know the grocer. In the country, you do that kind of thing, because life is slower.
I don't think that pointing out life is more civilized outside the city is defeatist, though. I think it's a call to action to people who live in cities to get in touch with the human element. I only had to live in the "city" (Las Vegas, in this case) for three months to see a gang shooting close enough to take a photo of the blood for... IDK, sentimental purposes? I feel like what the country has to gain from becoming more like the city is the availability of services, whereas what the city has to gain from becoming more like the country is humanity. And of course, I recognize it's all relative. 5,000+ population is demographically a city in some respects, but not what I'm describing when I talk about the ills of the city. There's a reason I mentioned NYC specifically, in the USA it specifically has a reputation for self-centered people (or as citizens of NYC would more-charitably put it, people who "expect you to get to the point quickly and respect the other person's time").
I mean, if you really want to take this to a high level, there's a yang-in-the-yin and yin-in-the-yang aspect in every settlements distribution of "urban traits" and "rural traits", with even NYC having more social club opportunities to emulate the community ties in the country. I get that. My point really was that if you zoom out temporally and look at the USA's cultural direction over the last several hundred years, you'll see that as a trend it has emphasized the well-being of progressively more groups of people throughout its lifespan. From its inception, representation for colonists in the homeland, on to the independence of colonies, on to the representation of the native inhabitants of those colonies...
Seriously, just read history, put it into context with the rest of history you know, and take a broad view of it... Optimism inevitably ensues. The world has only gotten better for everyone throughout the last 12,000 years, it's going to continue that general trend.
If you maintain your emotional center and have non-polarized conversations about politics, you'll quickly learn that everyone wants the same things accomplished, they just have a different weighting system of judgements about persons and values.
Some people want, say, ethnic cleansing. Your claim falls apart at the first glance at history, or even a scan of news of what actually goes on in the world today.
While I do agree politics is far from what should be one's ultimate concern (that being higher development), it is a field certain forces are operating upon.
There's definitely good aspects to cities. As a rule of thumb, the public transportation systems are better in cities, once the population of a settlement gets down to 10k or less, you tend to be limited to dial-a-ride services that need to be arranged a day ahead of time (and also tend to be more expensive than the services in larger cities). The benefits in dining out can't be understated either. The only dining options within 30 miles of me are fast food or bars. There's definitely more jobs in the city. I'm aware of the good sides of cities, don't misunderstand me.
I mean, if you really want to take this to a high level, there's a yang-in-the-yin and yin-in-the-yang aspect in every settlements distribution of "urban traits" and "rural traits", with even NYC having more social club opportunities to emulate the community ties in the country. I get that. My point really was that if you zoom out temporally and look at the USA's cultural direction over the last several hundred years, you'll see that as a trend it has emphasized the well-being of progressively more groups of people throughout its lifespan. From its inception, representation for colonists in the homeland, on to the independence of colonies, on to the representation of the native inhabitants of those colonies...
Seriously, just read history, put it into context with the rest of history you know, and take a broad view of it... Optimism inevitably ensues. The world has only gotten better for everyone throughout the last 12,000 years, it's going to continue that general trend.
Yeah I think I'm doing the same thing. I think people really do need to just care more about the wellbeing where they are staying. I guess I was being quite general about American cculture.
But it is arduous especially since sometimes it involves putting yourself out there which is daunting and might pose risk.
Maybe its more about the people in power not caring about those below than culture. I just know where I grew up in Amercia no one seemed to care about each other that much.
But that just might be where I grew up and I'm making general statements. I do agree there is a yin yang element to it urban and rural living.
It seemed like no one cared that much or were just made too busy to care. I remember everyone always having to preform and that preforming badly was tied to self worth.
I guess I just misunderstood. I do want the same thing for people to just care a little bit more about the wellbeing of others and their environment since it affects them too.
Seriously, just read history, put it into context with the rest of history you know, and take a broad view of it... Optimism inevitably ensues. The world has only gotten better for everyone throughout the last 12,000 years, it's going to continue that general trend.
I don't know about this blind optimism to history though. Life quality has gone up and then down from place to place.
Empires rise then fall then rise then fall again. And that changes life quality. Then there's the existential threats people have like technology made now being capable of causing irrepable damage to the environment. The environment that we still rely on for food.
Some people want, say, ethnic cleansing. Your claim falls apart at the first glance at history, or even a scan of news of what actually goes on in the world today.
While I do agree politics is far from what should be one's ultimate concern (that being higher development), it is a field certain forces are operating upon.
Yeah, and when you actually talk to those people who "want ethnic cleansing", it turns out that's a proposed solution for a deeper underlying need. People see a scarcity of resources, a limitation to allocation, and they prioritize the in-group. You persuade those people out of the underlying belief in resource scarcity, the superficial beliefs fall away.
You're right, my claim falls apart at the first glance at history. It does, however, hold up to a more comprehensive view of history. Since you express an interest in history, I trust that you'll learn more over time and come around to my way of thinking. I won't try to teach you all of history, sorry.
Yeah I think I'm doing the same thing. I think people really do need to just care more about the wellbeing where they are staying. I guess I was being quite general about American cculture.
But it is arduous especially since sometimes it involves putting yourself out there which is daunting and might pose risk.
Maybe its more about the people in power not caring about those below than culture. I just know where I grew up in Amercia no one seemed to care about each other that much.
But that just might be where I grew up and I'm making general statements. I do agree there is a yin yang element to it urban and rural living.
It seemed like no one cared that much or were just made too busy to care. I remember everyone always having to preform and that preforming badly was tied to self worth.
I guess I just misunderstood. I do want the same thing for people to just care a little bit more about the wellbeing of others and their environment since it affects them too.
Post automatically merged:
I don't know about this blind optimism to history though. Life quality has gone up and then down from place to place.
Empires rise then fall then rise then fall again. And that changes life quality. Then there's the existential threats people have like technology made now being capable of causing irrepable damage to the environment. The environment that we still rely on for food.
It's all good man. Though in reference to your last statement, you're lacking historical insight. When I was a kid, it sounded like pollution-caused acid rain was going to destroy all the forests. Turns out, the awareness generated by all that talk about acid rain led to changes that drastically reduced the prevalence of it. Ten years later, it was plastics in our oceans that were going to destroy the environment. Now, we're removing more plastics from our oceans than are being added back into it, the total level of plastic pollution in the ocean is going down. Deforestation's been a concern for decades and there's multiple large-scale reforestation projects going on around the world for the last few years. You can argue about their efficacy, but it's certainly a pattern and a trend. The human race responds to the environmental pressures it creates.
You're right it goes up and down in the short term, but in the long term, it goes up. Like, do you really think healthcare was better during the 1500s? Food may have been higher quality 100 years ago, but was that food lower quality than the food 500 years ago? Civil rights? That last one really is the killer argument in my positivitypill. Throughout most of human history, slavery has been legal, endorsed, practiced in markets around the world. Only recently have there been generations born with no legal slave markets anywhere. It's a real privilege to be alive today, when we can argue about "if the world is bad", because I think to most people born in most places and times throughout history, looking anywhere in the world today would be appealing. And I think esoterically, that's evident in the demographic spread. There's nine billion souls incarnated in the present day, compared to one billion souls incarnated in the 1800s, and less than that at any given point in history prior. Nine billion satisfied higher selves can't be wrong! There's never been a more popular time to be a human being.
This is getting way off topic, because we should be looking at the elite predator class that well connected across international borders, but ...
Chatbot? Not really. Look, I worked in tech at one of the biggest and most famous tech companies in the world. I support all skepticism directed at them, but it can't be done in this overly emotional, low-information manner. It makes us look ridiculous and anti-intellectual. Chill.
Gemini is not chatbox. I have made chatbots and they draw from an index of pre-recoded messages. And search engine is just a library. It may or may not have all the data available, which limits both the search search engines and AI. Gemini, and LLM's, is like a librarian who has already read every available book in the building. When you ask for an analysis it’s summarizing the consensus of 10,000 sources in seconds.
The danger here, as you many have intuited, is that truth is often not found in consensus - which, behind all the bluffing, bluster and insults, is maybe what you're trying to say. And if so, I agree. Science is not predicated on consensus, and literally you and all the"experts" can be wrong.
Especially when going out on an analytical limb into what is often pejoratively called "conspiracy theories" - which I think we can see now, much of which appears to be fact.
France is investigating those involved in the files contrary to claims other nations aren't doing anything about them.
Just the Americans and their justice are wanting it to all go away. A person can see them in real time deny, defend, deflect... but whatabout what the AI says
There's never been a more popular time to be a human being.
