Arnoud retweeted
Is zo.
Zonder X zouden miljoenen mensen in de #EU denken dat er in Frankrijk enkel sprake is van een vreedzaam scholierenprotest......
Thank you, Elon!
Dit zijn geen protesten, dit is een insurrectionele veldslag.
⚠️🔴 À REGARDER JUSQU'À LA FIN
JE NE PEUX PAS DÉCRIRE CE QUE JE VIENS DE VIVRE À MARSEILLE.
#17octobre
Communisme herkennen we doorgaans als een revolutie die de macht met geweld pakt, en daarna iedereen arm maakt. Het kan echter ook door bureaucratische oversturing; als meer dan de helft afhankelijk is van de overheid, dan is de weg naar communisme of teloorgang vrij.
Hier ligt gewoon de oplossing voor @VVD en @Minister_FIN Eelco Heinen. De overheid is veel te groot geworden en daardoor niet efficiënt.
Elk normaal bedrijf zou precies daar het mes in zetten als de uitgaven te groot worden.
Maar @VVD kijkt weg en zoekt de socialistische oplossing door nog meer geld van ondernemers en spaarders af te pakken.
Als dit onzalige plan doorgaat heeft #VVD geen bestaansrecht meer. Ze zitten er nog voor spek en bonen.
Arnoud retweeted
All the focus on Fauci is burying the more important story, which is that scientists enforcing a common narrative to the detriment of truth has become extremely common. It's a strong case of in-group behavior in academia that, I believe, most of them are not fully aware of.
As @LocasaleLab put it so aptly "the academic system punishes honesty".
And this is the real story: This isn't just about Fauci. Fauci is just an extreme and very visible example in a case that has attracted a lot of public attention. But misleading the public about the status of scientific research has become extremely widespread.
Arnoud retweeted
Those of us bitterly opposed to communism fall into two different groups.
A) Those who argue that it must be abandoned because it has show us that it doesn’t work.
B) Those of us that are so bitterly opposed to collectivism applied to dissenting individuals that we are relieved that it *cannot* work. A happy accident. Those who don’t care if it *could* be made to work: we’d continue to fight it. Working or not working is irrelevant. It’s just bad. Period. The end.
If Communism could actually be shown to deliver stable high levels of growth and innovation, broadly distributed, with low inequality,
I believe I would still fight it to my dying breath.
My opposition to communism has little to nothing to do with the fact that it doesn’t work as an economic system. So, it’s merely a relief that it doesn’t work. A convenience for its opposition.
Communism and collectivism are intrinsically soul killing for people who are hyper-individualistic . So let’s stop hiding behind the fact that they don’t work as economic or governance systems.
Some of us who aren’t the biggest fans of naked capitalism red of tooth and claw, hate communism not because we think capitalism is intrinsically fair. It isn’t. We oppose it because communism hunts the individual.
For us, It’s not communism vs capitalism. That is a businessman’s argument. Instead, it’s communism vs individualism for me. Show me a system that fights harder to let a dissenting individual thrive more than brutal market capitalism (which also barely works), and I am all ears.
Not everything is a market after all.
Arnoud retweeted
Wat zijn er gaandeweg eigenlijk enorm veel zaken die wie - door migranten - niet meer kunnen doen: Sinterklaas, vuurwerk met Oud en Nieuw, een dagje naar het strand, een avondwandeling maken op je oude dag, als vrouw alleen naar de stad of zelfs maar fietsen, als homo's door Amsterdam wandelen, naar de kermis, naar het zwembad ... en er is vast nog meer. Stap voor stap zijn we almaar minder vrij geworden.
En nu dus ook de Nijmeegse vierdaagse.
Arnoud retweeted
Ik ben niet zeker of iedereen mee is in het smerige spel dat vandaag is gespeeld om dat gedrocht erdoor te krijgen, vandaar korte uitleg:
Een meerderheid van de aanwezige Europarlementsleden stemde vandaag tégen Chat Control.
Normaal zou dat volstaan om zo’n voorstel weg te stemmen.
Maar de EU-top besliste eerst om via een uitzonderlijke spoedprocedure de spelregels te veranderen.
—> Daardoor volstond een gewone meerderheid van de aanwezigen plots NIET meer.
Er was ineens een ABSOLUTE meerderheid van 361 stemmen nodig, berekend over het volledige Europees Parlement.
En laat die stemming nu net midden in het zomerreces plaatsvinden, wanneer een groot deel van de parlementsleden afwezig is.
Het resultaat?
Een aanwezige meerderheid kon Chat Control niet meer tegenhouden.
Zo slaagde de EU erin om, via een procedurele kunstgreep, een democratische meerderheid buitenspel te zetten.
Arnoud retweeted
'het zou goed zijn': wat als ik nou als ouder gewoon zelf beslis over wat mijn kinderen wel niet kunnen zien? Hoe is het zo ontspoord dat de overheid en omhooggevallen weinigkunners in de politiek zich het eigenschap over mijn kinderen hebben toegeëigend? Hoe werkt zoiets? Ze hebben in politieke commissietjes gezeten en een studie politicologie of sociologie gedaan en daarmee een brevet hebben bemachtigd om te beslissen over hoe mijn kinderen zich in deze maatschappij mogen bewegen? We moeten echt eens af van dat clubje politiek loyale idioten die denken door hun volgzame bijdragen aan commissietjes in hun politieke kliek zich een recht te hebben verworven om iedereen te vertellen hoe ze hun leven in detail moeten leven en wat kinderen willen niet mogen.
Arnoud retweeted
VVD heeft niets meer met liberalisme, individualiteit en economie. D66 ging van democratische vernieuwing naar democratische vernieling. CDA stak zijn boerenachterban een dolk in de rug. GroenLinks vernielt natuur met windmolens & velden zonnepanelen. PvdA verruilde de A van Arbeider voor Allochtoon. CU verkocht zijn christelijke waarden & belofte om niet in een volgend kabinet Rutte te gaan zitten voor 30 zilverlingen.
En nu vormen ze samen effectief 1 grote fusiepartij in die in ons parlement een poppenkast van beleidsvorming probeert hoog te houden, terwijl men alleen nog mag beslissen over irrelevante etensrestjes die worden toegeworpen door Het PolitbEUro waar ongekozen arrogante figuren wetten maken die alle lidstaten sinds 2005 gedwongen zijn te over te nemen, en die worden doorgedrukt in het zeer onwaarschijnlijke geval dat het met klapvee afgevulde Europarlement een keer niet meeklapt.
Democratie is effectief dood en alle klassieke partijen zijn eenheidsworst geworden die er exact hetzelfde uitzien als je het flinterdunne oppervlakkige laagje cosmetica eraf poetst.
An interesting conversation @donalddhoffman and @AlchemyAmerican.
I believe I have described a model that can explain and correlate the big bang, spacetime, wave collapse on quantum level, entanglement, consciousness and entropy. This might help your research evolve.
It is a bit complicated and takes a fairly big step from accepted theories (although it does align with special relativity).
Arnoud retweeted
ANNOUNCEMENT: WE’RE SAVING SCIENCE!
We’re often told that science is “self-correcting.”
But that’s not really true.
Science doesn’t correct itself like a thermostat adjusting the temperature in your house. Science is a human institution run by human beings. And human beings are vulnerable to career incentives, groupthink, moral fads, political pressure, and fear.
And when those forces capture academic journals, peer review stops being a filter for bad ideas and starts becoming more of a credentialing system for fashionable nonsense.
This isn’t exactly new.
In 1996, the physicist Alan Sokal managed to publish a totally gibberish article in the journal Social Text full of trendy postmodern jargon. His point was simple: if you flatter the ideological commitments of certain academic editors, nonsense can pass as real scholarship.
Two decades later, @ConceptualJames, @HPluckrose , and @peterboghossian pulled off the “grievance studies” hoax, placing over a half dozen absurd papers in peer-reviewed journals. One paper used dog parks to analyze rape culture and queer performativity. Another rewrote parts of Mein Kampf in the language of feminist theory.
The problem wasn’t just that fake papers got published. It was that they were completely indistinguishable from the real thing.
And today, the problem is even worse.
We now have serious SCIENCE journals publishing papers about feminist lesbians marrying brine shrimp. We have disturbing papers that aim to “queer” and sexualize infants. We have scholarship on “lesbian-queer-trans-canine relationalities” and “trans-dog intimacies.”
But while Clown World papers are concerning because it makes a complete mockery of academia, the same broken, ideologically captured system is also publishing research in legitimate science and medical journals that pushes sex and gender pseudoscience, relies on deeply flawed data, and influences policies on the medical transition of children and young adults.
That’s not funny. That affects real people. It affects medicine. It affects law. It affects children.
And when critics try to respond, they often discover there’s no serious mechanism for correction. Submitted Letters to the Editor often go completely ignored. Contrary evidence is rejected without comment. As a result, the best critiques are often relegated to personal blog posts, social media threads, or newspaper op-eds, while the original paper remains in the literature wearing the armor of “peer review.”
That is untenable.
So Kevin McCaffree, editor-in-chief of Theory and Society (@Theory_Society), and I decided to do something about it.
Today, in the Wall Street Journal, we announced a first-of-its-kind article type called “Peer Review.”
The idea is simple: publication should be the beginning of academic scrutiny, not the end of it.
A Peer Review article can critique a paper from any scholarly journal. It can address problems with methods, evidence, logic, definitions, theory, or interpretation. But it has to focus on the claims and arguments, not personal attacks.
Submissions are capped at 2,500 words and go through a straightforward merit review instead of endless gatekeeping and ideological screening. We ask just one basic question: Is this critique coherent, serious, reasonable, or even popular enough to deserve scholarly attention?
If yes, it gets published.
And the authors of the original paper get a built-in right of reply, so readers can see the critique and the response in a legitimate academic venue.
That’s how science is supposed to work.
Science becomes self-correcting only when real people build the mechanisms that allow correction to happen.
That’s what we’ve done.
Now it’s time for academics to use it.
Read our announcement on the @WSJ below.
🔗wsj.com/opinion/a-way-to-cha…
Arnoud retweeted
Voor klimaatverandering moet je naar het grote plaatje kijken; en das duidelijk : huidig CO2 is historisch laag.
Arnoud retweeted
Draad. Ook lezen.
CIVILIZATIONAL AUTOPSY: The Forbidden Data on the Replacement of the West (THREAD)
DEPORTATION IS URGENT
The suicide of the West is not a tragic accident; it is a managed demolition. What we are witnessing across the United States and Europe is a calculated abandonment of the foundational principles that built the most prosperous civilizations in human history. Under the guise of "humanitarianism," an elite class of technocrats and globalists has sanctioned a borderless experiment that has effectively gutted the middle class, destabilized the social fabric, and imported a permanent underclass.
The following report is a surgical examination of the wreckage. If the truth is uncomfortable, it is only because the lie has been so profitable for the people selling it. Read on...
Arnoud retweeted
Most people think of philosophy as an abstraction that doesn't touch the real world, but they're wrong.
Most real world problems are philosophy problems, and most philosophy problems are "giving things the wrong names".
For example, if you call feral drug addicts "homeless people", then you can't solve the problem. You can only buy more houses for feral drug addicts to destroy.
In this case, we called the police and courts the "justice system".
But they're not. They can't be the justice system.
The function of a justice system would be to give everyone what they deserve.
Now, I deserve a hundred million dollars, a private Caribbean island, and a foot massage from Lauren Bacall in her prime, but I don't see the "justice" system lifting a finger to correct any of this, do you?
No, what we are supposed to have is a public safety system.
The function of a public safety system is to keep the public and their property safe.
If we understood that, we wouldn't care about what criminals deserve. We would care how likely they are to do it again. Or something worse.
In a public safety system, retardation and mental illness are not migrating factors. They are the opposite.
Because they mean that the criminal is more likely to pose a future threat.
We all understand this.
We all understand that the feral retard who stabs strangers on the train for being White and beautiful is a worse person than the man who murders his wife and her lover when he catches them in the act.
Not because of some abstract calculus of moral agency, of who is disadvantaged and who isn't, but because one is certainly going to murder more people if he can, while the other is a lot less likely to.
We've known for centuries, if not millennia, that it's the same small percentage of people doing all the robbing, raping, and murdering, over and over and over again.
And we've known for centuries that if you physically remove them from society, that's 100% effective in stopping them from doing it again.
The only hurdle is philosophical. Call it a "justice" system, and you have to argue endlessly about morality and redemption, and then some leftie thug-hugger weaponizes your own Christianity against you.
Call it public safety, and you confine the argument to likelihood of reoffense. Then you are in the realm of statistics. Which you can compute.
It all starts with naming things correctly, according to their actual nature.
Crazed homeless man accused of slaughtering Iryna Zarutska on train found incompetent to stand trial trib.al/GsJMZC8
Arnoud retweeted
Kinderslot op pornosites?
Volgens mij kunnen EU en Nederland zich beter gaan richten op het dark web en de omvangrijke productie en verspreiding van kinderporno.
De QR-code van de pandemie is terug! Het ging dus nooit om een ‘virus’. Heb jij meegedaan met de vaccinatie-waanzin en anderen uitgesloten als ‘wappie? Dan ben je geholpen een digitale dictatuur in te voeren. Achterlijk!
telegraaf.nl/buitenland/nieu…
Arnoud retweeted
De QR-code van de pandemie is terug! Het ging dus nooit om een ‘virus’. Heb jij meegedaan met de vaccinatie-waanzin en anderen uitgesloten als ‘wappie? Dan ben je geholpen een digitale dictatuur in te voeren. Achterlijk!
telegraaf.nl/buitenland/nieu…
Arnoud retweeted
Yes
Elon Musk thinks the entire education system is built on a broken assumption.
That every student should learn the same thing. At the same speed. In the same order. At the same time.
Musk: “Everyone goes through from like 5th grade to 6th grade to 7th grade like it’s an assembly line. But people are not objects on an assembly line.”
The model was designed for a factory economy. Standardized inputs. Predictable outputs.
That economy is gone. The assembly line is gone.
But the education system still runs on its logic.
A student who masters algebra in two weeks sits through eight more weeks because the calendar says so. A student who struggles gets dragged forward because the schedule doesn’t wait.
Neither is being served. Both are being processed.
Musk: “Allow people to progress at the fastest pace that they can or are interested in, in each subject.”
AI doesn’t teach a classroom. It teaches a student.
One at a time. Every time.
It skips what a student already knows. It finds where they’re stuck and approaches it from a different angle.
It adjusts in real time. Not at the end of a semester when the damage is already done.
A student obsessed with basketball learns fractions through shooting percentages. A student who builds in Minecraft learns geometry through architecture.
The subject doesn’t change. The entry point does.
No teacher with thirty students can do this. Not because they lack skill.
Because the math doesn’t work.
AI doesn’t have that constraint.
Musk: “You do not need to tell your kid to play video games. They will play video games on autopilot all day. So if you can make it interactive and engaging, then you can make education far more compelling.”
The brain isn’t broken. The format is.
Kids learn complex systems and strategic thinking for hours voluntarily. Then walk into a classroom and can’t focus for twenty minutes.
That’s not a discipline problem. That’s a design problem.
Musk: “A university education is often unnecessary. You probably learn the vast majority of what you’re going to learn there in the first two years. And most of it is from your classmates.”
Four years. Six figures of debt.
And the real value comes from the people sitting next to you. Not the institution charging you.
The degree doesn’t certify knowledge. It certifies endurance.
Musk: “If the goal is to start a company, I would say no point in finishing college.”
The system was built to train employees. If you’re not trying to be one, it has nothing left to offer you.
Every lecture. Every textbook. Every curriculum. Now available instantly. Personalized to any learner. Adapted to any pace.
The question isn’t whether the old model survives.
It’s how long we keep forcing students through it while the replacement already exists.
Arnoud retweeted
Ongelooflijk dat je als ex-premier van een westers land in VN zo’n toespraak houdt. En ze is met haar mening & neigingen in het westen niet eens uniek. Hoe is het westen zo de weg kwijt geraakt?
