Basically the title, it's such bullshit.
You hear this all the time when advocating for initiatives like better pay for teachers. "tHeY sHoUlDn'T bE iN iT fOr ThE mOnEy". FOH.
Same deal with paying EMTs, social workers, and several others poverty wages (nobody should be getting paid povery wages, but I think everyone here already recognizes that).
You even see this in the private sector. Companies saying shit like working on X initiative that is going to do Y for the world is a benefit.
A libertarian argument against a vaccine mandate is that you can’t force someone to pay a cost in order to benefit others. However, this argument holds only if getting vaccinated has a negative expected value relative to the alternative. If getting vaxxed is good from a selfish perspective, we’re not facing an utilitarian tradeoff anymore (individual cost to create positive externalities). (To be sure, one can also argue that forcing someone to take care of themselves is wrong but that’s another kind of argument.)
Have you seen any reliable calculator of odds (by age, conditions etc or even merely for the average human being) of dying/being seriously damaged by Covid vs by the vaccine? My feeling is that it is probably net positive expected value for most age cohorts (possibly excepting preschool kids) but I haven’t seen a nice quantification of this calculus.
I expected Zvi had written something about it but can’t find it. Rob Wiblin did something in the early stage of the vaccination campaign but those numbers are probably not valid anymore.
So I (M34) am a guy who has some troubles dating. IRL or online dating, for short term or long term, it is the same... few dates and most go nowhere.
I am not the most good looking and confident guy, but the feedbacks I received were more going I the direction: "I would be a great partner but I am too skinny/too feminine/not dominant enough". Well a look issue for me.
But a few friends brought the point that feminine/not dominant thing was maybe not just physical but as well linked to me being "too altruistic". It is true, as much in my life as in dating, I put other people well-being before my interests, trying to not hurt anyone.
For example, a friend told me "you are choosing to sacrifice your life to protect the environment but your life would be better, including for dating, if you were closer to the societal norm and using a part of your money to at least display a bit of status with frequent travel, a fancy car..."
It is the same with women: according to my friends, I would probably have more success if I was following mostly "my agenda" and caring less for the well-being of the women I am in touch with: "they are adults after all". So, for them, I should be more direct, more dirty and less respectable. I should show I want them and that "I know what I want": that includes complimenting women on their body, chasing women, trying to flirt more, sending unsolicited invitations for sex on apps, asking for nudes, sexualize earlier while dating, be more pushy...
I have to admit that due to my education and a previous bad experience I am a bit reluctant with being pushy and so direct with women. I would not say that I never try to sexualize, but I am taking my time. Plus I have the feeling while reading on reddit that the vast majority of women don't like guys who are pushy, sexualizing too much too early.
But as my friends said, what I am doing is rarely working so I could not have much less results if I tried being more egoistic.
So what do you think? Is being "altruistic" severely reducing my chances with women? Or is my problem elsewhere? And is it the same for short term or long term relationships?
Edit: thank you all for you inputs, kind messages and remarks. I probably won't have the time to reply to everyone but I am reading every messages. It is very interesting.
On my friends: They are a group of guys and girls in their 30s-40s, most of them in good relationships. Maybe it was misunderstood but they way more open sexually than
... keep reading on reddit ➡I made a post about my ex earlier but I missed some details and had more questions so I decided to make a new post.
Can narcissists be altruistic and let you go so they don't hurt you? My ex said some very weird things before ghosting me. He said that he knows he's a bad person, that he's selfish, and he's scared of taking advantage of me.
He said that he hates himself and knows he'll just leave me when it's convenient, please don't let him do that to me. He said he would feel horrible knowing he's doing that to me (and said he felt guilty for getting ready to delete me) He said that he knows he needs to work on himself but doesn't know how or where to start. Then he said he knows I deserve better he just can't give me what I need and that I'm better of giving my attention to someone who deserves it and is able to return it.
What is this? I've never seen someone talk like this before and I'm just wondering why he decided to just let me go instead of rising to the occasion and trying to be a better person for me if knows I "deserves better". Was this just him trying to seem like a nice guy knowing that he doesn't want me anymore, or was he genuinely trying save me from himself and his behavior?
Its like I feel bad for him, I'm mad at him, yet I miss and love him all the same time. Everything happened so fast and I'm just confused and sad
Do you believe there is a moral imperative, or do you feel a moral responsibility, to use your superior intelligence to benefit society in some way (e.g. alleviate suffering, promote human flourishing, etc.)?
###This giveaway is over:
Winners:
🔸 @astro_tz Raynb0w LMG
🔸 /u/ItsHanger Sea Wanderer
🔸 p3ar_b3ar#0131 Flamefang
To force hackers to give back to the community, we will be hosting a giveaway every week for a chance to win a random Contra taken straight from hackertagged accounts! Winners will be announced the following day in this post
How to enter
-
Comment your IGN (must be level 20+ to participate)
-
Say an interesting fact you know (highest upvoted fact gets 2000kr, contra will be picked randomly)
Other ways to win - (Contra giveaway for each platform!)
• https://discord.gg/krunker
• https://twitter.com/krunkerio
• https://www.tiktok.com/@krunker.io
I don’t remember when I started being so angry and hateful. I suspect it is because of an array of bad major experiences with people/friends that I went through in the past, all occurring at around the same time. The thing is, I often see INFJs being typed as very friendly, non-confrontational, and altruistic people. I’m sure they mean the “healthy” INFJs, but I really don’t fit that part of the description. I dislike how they’re painted out to be these all-good altruistic folks– It’s almost like an expectation to be met.
I may be friendly to people out of politeness as I think no one should be treated rudely for no reason upon first impression, but I realize that it really is all just an act. I feel so angry and bitter inside, and I find it hard to really care about them intimately. Of course, I try not to show this. I find that I’ve gotten overly blunt and straightforward, argumentative when I believe someone is wrong, and just straight up cynical. Sometimes I wish for their demise if I deem them an inconsiderate and selfish person. I’m also often met with disappointment when I see someone I’ve become fond with does not have the same sense of loyalty and honesty that I have. I end up feeling alone and even more bitter.
I’m very sure I’m an INFJ. I’ve been typed as one on every test, and I have also researched cognitive functions and how they work to confirm. I’m probably just an unhealthy INFJ wallowing in self pity, but does anyone else here feel this much anger and bitterness internally? It feels as if I will never find anyone that will give to me as much as I give to them. It feels lonely honestly. It gets harder to trust each time and I’m afraid I’ll never be able to trust again if it continues.
I primarily solo queue, which sometimes can be a really garbage experience, but when it’s not? Idk man. Just really love that feeling of playing with three strangers who all do gens, rescue each other, run distractions away from players who have been two hooked, etc, and we all get out alive when at least some, if not all, of us would have died if we didn’t have each others back, playing a really tough but fair-playing killer where no one did a toxic thing to anyone else the whole time. Really lovely first match of the day for me.
Sometimes strangers are assholes to each other, but there are a lot of nice, positive players out there too, and y’all don’t get enough shout outs.
hi all! i like to run different builds on different survivors so if i wanna play a certain way i'm sure to revisit survivors that might just gather dust otherwise. i was just wondering what perks you guys would say are the most altruistic + what they are good paired with. thanks much :D
By definition: “Altruism is the unselfish concern for other people—doing things simply out of a desire to help, not because you feel obligated to out of duty, loyalty, or religious reasons. It involves acting out of concern for the well-being of other people.”
I just don't get it, I don't know if I'm really generous, or just as I have found, an altruistic narcissist
And if happened to be the second possibility, how would I stop this wothout therapy ?
All help will be appreciated :)
I’ve been seeing quite a few posts recently about the game being difficult for killer cause of perks, flashlights, exit game BM, t bags and whatnot , but I don’t find many opinions about enjoying those kinds of games … I find flashlight clicky squads to be the most enjoyable kinds of DBD games when I’m killer. For the most part , almost every survivor is involved trying to go for cool and fancy clips , and the clicking usually suggests to me they’ll give me fun chases instead of throwing every pallet down. I just find defending generators to be quite boring , so getting clicked at and having survivors go for cool clips and stuff gives me an excitement that I guess is really unpopular on this sub.
My theory is that the manga showed us two different timelines, a white background timeline where the characters follow the philosophy of altruistic collectivism and a black background timeline where the characters follow the philosophy of rational self-interest. As we were two sets of characters acting upon opposing philosophies, character motivations seemingly did not add up in the manga ending, leading to some strange fan interpretations of the unresolved AOE content.
On the one hand, the AOR-types see the Eren portrayed black backgrounds only as a facade and focus only on the white background scenes where Eren is characterised as a suicidal bastard that is willing to sacrifice himself for his friends and the Alliance is willing to sacrifice themselves to save people that are actively trying to genocide their kind. In the final volume, their interpretation of the story comes true as all characters set aside their rational self-interest for what they believe is the good of humanity. This is an ending where self-interest is defeated by the philosophy of collective altruism, which holds that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue and value. Not only were these themes consistently defeated throughout the whole story, but all the black background scenes are directly opposed to the manga ending philosophically as they all focus on what the characters want to do rather than what they think they must do.
On the other hand, the YB-types completely ignore the Eren portrayed in white backgrounds and focus on the black background scenes where Eren is characterised as fully prepared to go through with full rumbling, not for the sake of others but for himself, and Jean is shown to be both be wanting to rely on Eren and willing to protect his future with Mikasa. In all the black background scenes, characters are thinking about their wants as their goal. This is diametrically opposed to altruism. I theorise that the black background timeline is about accepting the consequences of their wants, fighting for themselves, living their lives for themselves. Hence, the AOE black background ending where characters reject their duty and moralism over their self-interest and free will is still ahead.
https://preview.redd.it/7eidgfcakw381.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=87e694ac978a8b0c30d6ad36319206d1a8bb73f5
In this post, I will
... keep reading on reddit ➡Spoiler since it does give some clues about the Stone of Golorr.
In last evening’s game my group of players finally got their hands on the Stone of Golorr. They knew that the stone was something everyone wanted and is probably the key to finding the hoard of Neverember. Two of the characters, once they got to a safe place that gave them the time, used a ritual casting of Identify to figure out just what sorts of abilities and powers this item has. This gave them enough info to realize that it was a powerful object, sentient, and required attunement.
The PCs have been working very faithfully with the Grey Hands they have gained a very good reputation with them. They have even done several things, in addition to the side-quest missions, to go above-and-beyond on behalf of the Grey Hands. It sounds like their intention is to turn the Stone over the Vajra Safahr, the Blackstaff of Waterdeep, as quickly as possible, since some of them think that is the “right thing to do.”
If that is what they decide to do I am trying to figure out what will happen next?
Their primary opponent throughout the campaign has been the Xanathar Guild.
I was rewatching and trying to look for the rare altruistic and honest / goodwiill acts by the Roys and extended Roys. These are some, but I have rewatched only s1 so might be missing a lot.
- Kendall reacting when Logan hits Roman.
- Roman going to pick Kendall from the menth-house. Don't know if it's selfless or just something that had to be done, I felt he genuinely cared about his brother.
- Tom asking Shiv before marriage that they could back out.
- A lot of Tom's actions and willingness to bend over backwards seems to be out of love as much is it out of ambition.
- To an extent, but Kendall trying to confront Logan
- Again to an extent, Shiv being against the new candidate
- Tom said yes to Greg's request of taking his blame too (again not clear what Tom is upto and I am worried)
- Conor had once taken Roman (and the other siblings) for fishing (?)
Any other goodwill or selfless acts people here can recall ?
I see a lot of hate for people who bring cameras to a concert. I can understand this if they are significantly degrading the experience with loud or bright equipment or using flash. However beyond that I think people should mind their own business and if the person is using a camera and not doing anything obnoxious you shouldn't spend so much time thinking about it.
For the people who don't like people who uses cameras during a concert because they are not enjoying it as much I agree with you but I don't think it's a reason to hate people who do it. Instead I think they are doing something altruistic. They are giving up some of their own experience so that other people can enjoy the concert. Because of the people who as an example lugged their VHS camcorder to a concert or paid to develop super 8mm film we get to see iconic bands performing at concerts which will never be recreated. Especially at that time and even now concerts don't always have a professional video or film crew. People who were not even born when that concert was held get to enjoy these concerts. Maybe 50 years from now video recorded today will be just as valued and appreciated.
So the next time someone shares a crappy vertical video of a concert with clipped audio with you instead of getting angry at them remember that they want to share the experience with you and appreciate it and also consider giving some polite advice on how to record better video so that the next time around they may better share their experience
In my opinion, almost no person, myself included, is truly altruistic. If you are the type to just say 'I'm just helping' even though people tell you not to, or that you are ruining things, you were doing it for yourself. Maybe you were bored and wanted something to do. Maybe you wanted validation.
Either way, anger is an inappropriate response. sadness maybe, but never anger
nothing add here to be honest, everything i wanted to ask for is in the title, the best examples i can think of are >!dogville, se7en, leave no traces(2021), jagten.!<
There are scenarios that would justify keeping it classified. The most straight forward one might be that the visitors want it that way, and they obviously are in the position get whatever they want since they are technologically far superior and annoying then is dangerous for everyone.
Another reason might be that the truth is so disturbing that they just agreed that it's better for most people's life quality to not know. For example, we are their livestock and we can't do anything about it.
It could be super complex. Careful considerations might lead to the conclusion that it's an advantage for humans to not deal with this. I likely can't even imagine what's going on or how much everyone knowing would complicated things for us or the visitors.
Or it could be egoistic of course. To gain an advantage against other humans. I'm not sure what's more likely.
Edit: I meant country in the title
I found this screenshot in /r/buttcoin of what appears to be an excel sheet of various crypto influencers, the fees they charge, and what the video "sponsor" gets in return. This is often times the reason why many bitcoin maximalists just outright call altcoins "scams." That screenshot can be found here, please note I cannot vouch for the validity of the content you see:
https://i.redd.it/qoljoiy6esz71.jpg
Tens of thousands of dollars for one video. Stop and think about that. Can you afford to throw that much money in to a new altcoin? See, this is one of the reasons I mainly stick with bitcoin and ethereum, but I can also advise you guys that if you see anyone working with any of these YouTubers, and if the coin you are thinking of buying is just a meme coin, well just remember that you have been warned.
I often hear people complain that someone did something good just to make themselves look good. They claim they should do it and not tell anyone or it makes them a bad person. I object to this reasoning. People should be lauded for good deeds, regardless of their reasons. If you do something good for someone, it deserves to be bragged about. Imagine a world where everyone competed for who could do the best for others. I think that would make for a better world.
There are many examples of this. Bill Gates is an example. I've heard people complain that he is only trying to prevent malaria for his own glory. I think any reason he does that is a good reason.
I've heard people complain about the youtubers that give away cars and money to people in need. "If they want to be good, they shouldn't do it in front of the camera", is what I hear. They should be complaining about the people that waste money on themselves. There's nothing wrong with that either, but spending money on others is nicer than spending it on yourself.
If I help someone, I want everyone to know it. If I can't tell anyone, I'm less likely to put in effort to help others. I don't think that makes me a bad person.
