Category Archives: Stupid People

We’re now up to that chapter.

Leave a reply

I’ve been following along with Geno Samuel’s Chris Chan: A Comprehensive History. If you’ve never heard of it, then you’ve probably also never heard of Chris Chan.

If you were to get into it, it’s a doozy of a rabbit hole. In summary, Chris Chan is one of those people who is infamous on the internet, and is easily the most well-known among internet infamous people. To the point that there are documentary series’ and there have been entire wikis that cover his antics and various facts about him.

About two-and-a-half years ago, it came to light that Chris Chan has been committing incest with his own mother. This set off a firestorm that resulted in Chris Chan trending on Twitter, culminating in Chris Chan’s arrest, and subsequently legacy media outlets have reported on it, exposing aging boomers to the Chris Chan phenomenon.

For those who have been following along, we knew that the time would come that Geno would come to these events in the timeline of his docu-series.

Well, here we are:

Chris Chan’s crime was disgusting. But as bad as he looks, this chapter made Bella look worse.

When I heard about Bella’s mythically horrible exploits, at first I thought that they were embellished. If even half of what I’ve heard about her was true, she was a magnificently bad person.

As bad as she looked in the documentary, it didn’t touch on everything. After all, the documentary was about Chris Chan. But people like Bella are the reason why prisons exist.

Of course, she got off because her parents worked for a three-letter agency.

As much as I’d like to quip with some insightful takeaways, what can be said that wouldn’t be obvious to just about all of us?

  • Don’t commit incest with your own mother,
  • Don’t associate with shitty people like Isabella Loretta Janke,
  • If you’ve committed a crime, don’t be so smug that you drop hints to people who might turn you in,
  • And, for that matter, don’t make a long, unprompted, and highly-descriptive confession to the same crime (oldie but goodie),
  • If you have an EPO against you, don’t violate it,
  • If you’re down and out, don’t prioritize buying a bunch of shitty toys,
  • And again, to emphasize: Don’t commit incest with your own mother. Ugh.

See what I mean? Who really needs to be told these things?

But whether or not there are lessons to be learned from the debacle that is Chris Chan’s life, it is still nonetheless fascinating, in much the same sense as watching a train crash in slow motion, with every last failure being meticulously documented, and every person who was impacted being carefully studied.

But with Chris Chan now being free, apparently having avoided the consequences of his actions, it now falls on the connected network of those monitoring Chris Chan to keep a careful eye on him, to mitigate the likelihood that he would reoffend, as Chris Chan is once again a danger to the public.

Cart Narcs may be just what’s needed to restore your limited faith in humanity.

Leave a reply

You may have heard of the “shopping cart test”. It goes like this: If you return your shopping cart to the cart return (or corral, or whatever you call it), then you can function in society. If not, then probably not so much.

The reason why it’s so effective as a test is because it’s a simple ethical consideration: you get nothing for bringing the cart to the cart return when you’re done with it, but it’s a little thing that’s expected of people to keep society running smoothly.

If you don’t, and you leave the cart loose in the parking lot, then that means that you’re only considering your own convenience, and are expressing indifference towards other people who may want to use a parking space that the cart might occupy, or that the cart might damage a car if it were to roll away.

Do you do your small part to keep society neat and orderly, or are you only concerned with your own convenience?

That’s something to consider when watching the Cart Narcs, who confronts the lazy and self-centered among us, in the interest of getting the “lazy bones” among us to reconsider their choices.

The Cart Narcs are social media personalities who go to parking lots, and confront the lazy people who don’t bring their carts to cart returns when they’re done with them. It’s a simple premise, but pure entertainment.

See for yourself. Here’s the latest update on their YouTube channel as of this posting:

One thing that I can appreciate about what the Cart Narcs does is the risk that they take with each confrontation. After all, if someone is the kind of person who places their own convenience over keeping society running smoothly, they’re probably simple-minded to the point that they don’t think things through, and might tend towards violence.

Yet, such people are seldom physically fit, so they wouldn’t be great at that, either.

One of the reasons why I appreciate the Cart Narcs as much as I do is because I once worked as a cart fetcher at a supermarket. In fact, the store was so busy that that was just about all I did throughout my shift while I was there. And in my time there, I got to see humanity on full display, complete with its entitlement and laziness.

I often did see customers just leave their carts between parking spaces. It was a mild inconvenience for me, but I didn’t see it as so much of a problem that it would have been worth confronting anyone about it. And it often went that it evaded my notice until after the customer drove off.

It didn’t take long working that job to see it all, after which point returning for another shift was like tuning in to a rerun for a show that was never fun to watch to begin with.

I’ve seen quite a few lazy people, and in the case of many of them, it wasn’t hard to see that they’re not right in the head. It’s because of this that I respect the efforts of the Cart Narcs. There’s also the fact that there are people out there who really need to hear what the Cart Narcs have to say.

Also, they make me remember how glad I am that I no longer work in customer service. Some people out there are only fit to be drowned.

Vaush opened the wrong folder.

1 Reply

When I first heard about the breadtuber Vaush, I assumed that he didn’t really believe what he was saying, and would have guessed from his vocabulary that he was talking way over the heads of the pro-socialism typicals who love the big words they don’t know the definitions of, and that Vaush was yet another grifter who was gaming the algorithm because he knew how. Thus, I didn’t much discuss him because I didn’t want him to have any more publicity.

But then, on a Feb 7 stream, he demonstrated a flagrant lack of basic datasec. He opened his own private stash on livestream.

Which, by the way, was on a folder on his desktop. And there among his stash was a folder labeled “Taxes”.

The use of the term “private stash” may have given you an idea of just the kind of stuff that his live viewers were treated to. But to be more specific, much of it was “horse stuff” and loli art, some of it seemed to have been AI-generated.

Since then, Vaush has gone on damage control, describing the characters with the loli aesthetic as being more “goblin” in body shape, as though he was into fantasy art, and explaining that he thought that the loli was just drawings of women with “short stack” builds. Basically the “she’s actually 3000 years old” defense.

While some of his viewers and critics may be wondering whether Vaush is going to jail, right now, it seems like the answer is “no”. While loli may be illegal in many places in the world, it is not illegal in the United States, where Vaush resides (the U.S. has the 1st Amendment, which protects free expression, and the apparent contents of his folder falls under protected speech). Of course, just because something is legal doesn’t mean that you’d tell your mom about it, or that it’s allowed in every setting.

Nonetheless, that Vaush has accidentally outed himself as possessing horse and loli “stuff” has some interesting optics when you consider that in the past, he’s insisted that Nazis are pedophilia adjacent because they favor relationships with power imbalances, and similar takes.

When someone virtue-signals often, pay attention to what they say, as such a person tends to project.

While Vaush has had some questionable takes, there was some plausible deniability for a while, though I know not everyone has been giving him the benefit of the doubt. One could have easily assumed that he was making obvious efforts to stoke controversy in an effort to game the algorithm, and watch all the ad revenue roll in from all the room-temp-IQ muh-free-stuff socialists that will come to his defense by virtue of being in the same tribe. But now, much of what he’s had to say about bestiality and other topics has taken on some interesting new optics.

While this whole drama has made just about everyone an expert on datasec, I think there’s something that can be said about being more careful about who your influencer heroes are, particularly the ones who behave like Vaush does on social media. After all, even ordinary heroes are disappointing every now and then. But if someone has a habit of deliberately posting horribly offensive shit publicly, then maybe it’s a better idea to keep your distance. And when SHTF, you can look on as some of his ilk continue to defend him, and know that those who do are the true believers in his cult, willing to come to his defense no matter what, which is probably just the kind of following he really wanted.

I don’t know what’s in the future for Vaush, but at this point, it’s easy to imagine that few outside of his small clique of cultists will take him seriously, and that even his fellow breadtubers will want to keep their distance. Basically similar to what happened with Jack Murphy as his cuckolding controversy played out.

I’ll say that the legal stuff that Vaush has on his computer is his business. But what’s really creepy about him is that there’s some less legal stuff that he’s been low-key attempting to make acceptable. That doesn’t put him in great light.

Daniel Larson has finally been jailed.

Leave a reply

It’s finally happened: infamous TikToker Daniel Larson has finally been jailed.

If you’ve been following his misadventures, you might be thinking, “What could he be in for?” After all, there are many things he has done that could have landed him in the slammer. Pulling a fire alarm? No. Remember, this is the United States, where representatives can pull fire alarms, and it can be caught on tape for all the world to see, and the law would still look the other way.

So then, did he commit another act of violence? As prone as he is to those, not this time. Trespassing on a college? Nope. Threatening an act of mass violence? Not this time. Threatening public officials? Still no.

What he’s in for is a misdemeanor evasion of justice. Because you know, he’s a celebrity, and he’s just so busy with celebrity things, such as posting videos, crushing on celebrities, and attempting to attend a college he never applied to. Showing up for his own trials is just such an undue hardship on a music star such as himself.

Bond has been set to $20,000, so I get the idea that, even though it’s a misdemeanor, they don’t want the guy out, but they’re still willing to free the guy if they’re getting enough money. What a world we live in.

Let’s get real here: Daniel Larson is a dangerous individual. He’s prone to violence, goes on unhinged rants, trespasses frequently, has threatened gun violence (even though he doesn’t have a gun, as far as I know), and on top of all that, he’s a pedophile. But while most pedophiles understand that such attractions would make them social pariahs, Daniel Larson is more of the attitude of extending an olive branch, like it’s possible to make peace with society in spite of his affection.

And more scary still, Daniel Larson doesn’t seem to comprehend that he’s doing anything wrong. As he tries to crash in businesses as a vagrant, he’ll insist that he belongs and has a right to belong there, even as he’s asked to leave. As he trespasses, he’ll argue belligerently with anyone who confronts him about it, and even claim himself as the victim. He doesn’t seem to comprehend when he’s in the wrong, even when it’s explained to him in a way that any normal person would be able to follow.

Just what is society supposed to do with someone like that?

I know that when it comes to this kind of thing, people might say not to worry about people like Daniel Larson. But the thing is, when people blatantly disregard the law and keep getting away with it, the criminal justice system inspires less confidence. While most of us avoid breaking the law, at least because we don’t want to get caught, or even because there’s some overlap between what’s legal and what’s moral, there are people out there who just don’t care. And Daniel Larson is the kind of person who should be in an institution, for the safety of himself and society as a whole.

So all the Chris Chans and Daniel Larsons of the world actually are something to be concerned about. Because there’s no telling when, in the event that you go out to pick up some goods, while you’re out, you meet someone who’s internet famous for the wrong reasons, and you either upset them in some way, or get the kind of internet attention that normal people just shouldn’t want. They’re the kind of people that you should want to avoid, and there are institutions that exist for their safety, and everyone else’s.

As I see it, it’s hard to imagine the Daniel Larson story ending in anything but tragedy. He’s a danger to himself and the people around him. While the people who troll him and egg him on do hold some of the blame, it’s still a fact that Daniel Larson is a dangerous and unhinged individual.

But the way things are looking now, the streets have just become a little safer.

I’m a little concerned.

Leave a reply

The doomscrolling stops here. This is the kind of thing that can keep you up at night (13 minute video in the embed):

Here are the main takeaways:

  • The man being interviewed is Charlie Kraiger, a cybersecurity specialist for the White House,
  • His date was James O’Keefe of O’Keefe Media Group, whose only disguise was dyed hair and glasses,
  • Charlie spills about Biden’s declining mental state,
  • He also spills that the current administration is not confident that Biden will win, but that he will be nominated anyway, by nature of being the incumbent,
  • He blabs about how they considered removing Kamala from the ticket because she was so unpopular, but are keeping her on over intersectional optics,
  • And, oh boy, is she unpopular. So much so, that even black staff members quit en masse because of her,
  • Charlie is a sincere Covid cultist, telling other dates to bugger off because they didn’t want to get the vaccine,
  • Again, Charlie Kraiger is a cybersecurity specialist for the White House.

What is the state of cybersecurity in the White House when one of their guys spills the beans to James O’Keefe in a Clark Kent disguise?

Just how safe is our country? Who knows what all else that Charlie could have said in a busy coffee shop, where a Russian agent could have been sitting nearby?

And why do I get the idea that the guy was hired because he prefers sausages over roast beef sandwiches?

Presumably, the guy somehow got a security clearance. As for how he got it, I don’t know. but I’d like to imagine that, after this fiasco, it was immediately revoked, and he was entrusted with corrosion prevention.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t intend to pick a fight with White House cybersecurity. Those guys probably know what kind of exquisite artistry that I look up.

“Uh-huh.” -Probably you. (Source)

But I’m kinda concerned, because these are the guys that the rest of us count on for protection to not be dumb, at least for their own sakes. I’d like to imagine that they’d practice basic opsec, such as using virtual machines. But after this, I have my doubts.

Let’s get into why this incident is worrisome.

If your idea of hacking came from movies, you probably think that the majority of hacking is opening a command prompt and then keyboarding away at some code, or some shit. And maybe much of it still is. But there’s a new kid in town: social engineering.

Sure, you can go to the trouble of typing up some malicious code, and hoping that your intrusion attempt goes unnoticed. But the fact is, data security measures have gotten pretty sophisticated. You know what’s easier? Tricking people.

And that’s just what social engineering is.

If someone calls you up at work, identifying themselves as IT and asking for your password, you should be a little suspicious, even if they call it “routine” or relax you by bringing up the sports scores. If you answer them honestly, then you just gave away your account.

Or there’s this one: tricking people on social media. Like showing a chart with anime characters by month, then saying “Your birth month determines which anime character you are!”, then stupid people take to the comments and give away their birth month. Then, on another post, they give away something like the day of the month they were born on, or otherwise give away their age or other personally identifiable information that can be pieced together with other personally identifiable information that they just give away.

Stuff that could be used to impersonate them.

Or stupid shit like “If you put together the name of the first street you lived on and the name of your first pet, that’s your superhero name”, and then people proceed to give the answers to their bank account security questions.

Do you see the issue? When you have datasec measures that are as advanced as they’ve become, their biggest weakness is people.

It’s because of this that your most important datasec skill is knowing when to keep your mouth shut, especially when the person sitting across from you looks just like James O’Keefe wearing glasses.

It becomes more important still when 330 million people are counting on you to not be a dumbass.

But if the White House is staffed by people as bright as Charlie Kraiger, this country is in trouble.

My Opinion of the Keffals/Chris Chan Interview

1 Reply

Just this morning, Keffals has uploaded an abridged version of his interview with Chris Chan. For those who care to view, the following is the video:

I may have indicated as much already, but when Chris Chan trails off into pseudo-spiritual babble, I mostly just trail off, assuming that he’s adding nothing of value to the discussion. But I have noticed some amount of consistency in his delusions, which indicates that he has given them some thought. Whether he sincerely believes his own bullshit, there’s at least some amount of premeditation in his spouting-off.

Having said that, when someone has a guilty conscience and therefore a motive to obfuscate, and they’re not making sense, it’s not a bad idea to ask whether their statements are truly designed to be understood.

During the interview, Chris said something revealing in a way that he probably didn’t realize. While he still vehemently denies committing the crime with his mother that he previously gave an unprompted and disturbingly detailed confession to, he stated that the crime was committed by another Chris Chan in another dimension. But this was considered important for Chris Chan to bring up, even though he denies that that other-dimensional Chris was actually himself.

For one thing, this sounds like a form of dissociation, an obvious way for Chris to cope with the guilt of committing a crime by convincing himself that the crime wasn’t really himself, but instead a different version of himself in another dimension.

What’s more, this explanation opens the gateway to potential gaslighting on the part of Chris, where Chris can attempt to convince people that their memories of Chris’ crime, and his confession to it, are actually memories that leaked from another dimension, causing us to remember things that, according to Chris, didn’t actually happen with the Chris Chan of this dimension.

Remember that Chris Chan has previously stated his belief in a “dimensional merge”. Whether he believes in it or not, it still is something that he can view as a tool to exonerate himself.

Also, at some point in the interview, Chris pivoted to talking about Donald Trump, for whom he clearly has disdain, even though nothing about Trump’s presidency or political career has had any noticeable impact on Chris, himself. Another example of how parroting left-wing talking points can melt an already weak mind.

Chris Chan also brought up Russia, making them out to be a modern-day Babylon, and in the process, sounding like so many false prophets of days gone by. He said that Putin would “fall by his own sword”. As I see it, Russia has a high likelihood of facing a collapse for some reason or another within the next few years. But the idea that Chris has any amount of special insight about it is laughable.

By the way, Chris Chan really needs to drop the whole schtick where he pretends to be Jesus Christ. Anyone of Christian background would find this grossly offensive. What’s more, Bible prophecy indicates that, when Jesus does return, the coming would be with great glory, and the entire world would become aware of Christ. This doesn’t sound like what’s happening with the author of Sonichu.

I’ve suspected previously that Chris Chan’s messiah complex was some form of malingering, an obvious attempt to further an insanity defense. Chris Chan’s insistence long after his trials indicates a sincerity in his delusion.

Chris Chan did a lot to attempt to capitalize on the discussion, wanting to convince those who block him on X that they were just going to get harassed anyway, whether they block him or not. This is, of course, shitty reasoning, as anyone aware of Chris Chan is aware that he’s the kind of guy you want to stay away from, as he tends to bring with him some unwanted attention.

Of course, Chris Chan still sees himself as the victim of his own bad reputation, which he himself did plenty to cultivate. He brought up Bluespike, even though Chris could’ve easily handled him by not responding to him. He brought up the gal-pals who were actually trolls, when he could’ve been skeptical of anyone claiming a strong interest in him in spite of never meeting him, and being scammed by multiple people with the same routine in the past.

Like many predators that have been outed, they want people to just leave the past in the past, and just pretend that they never did what they did. Because Chris can’t identify with normal people, he doesn’t comprehend how normal people handle forgiveness. If someone has had a career in grand larceny in their history, and we all collectively decide to not punish him, that doesn’t mean that we’d consider him just the same as everyone else for a position as a bank teller.

Chris Chan committed incest. While he may have avoided punishment, most people would still prefer that he not attend conventions. Especially considering that he continues to deny that he committed the crime, in spite of the evidence. We don’t want him near our kids, we don’t want him near ourselves, and we don’t want him leaving replies on our X updates.

If you’re interested in one transgender asking another transgender softball questions, the interview doesn’t disappoint. That aside, it’s plain to see that, between Chris Chan and Keffals, it’s Keffals who is operating with more intellectual horsepower. It just so happens that that horsepower is directed towards degeneracy.

The Collab Between Chris Chan and Keffals Makes Kiwi Farms Easy To Justify

Leave a reply

Apparently, Chris Chan is planning a collab with Keffals. This was according to Chris, as he posted the following on X:

You may know who Chris Chan is, as he is considered the most well-known of all lolcows. A couple years ago, he committed a sexual offense involving his own mother, becoming a case study in true crime, and ascending to horrorcow status.

Keffals is a bit more obscure, but perhaps far more enraging. He became known for making HRT drugs at home to sell to minors without their parent’s knowledge or consent, and ran an infamous “catboy ranch”.

The packaging for his bathtub-made HRT contains the phrase, “Keep out of reach of parents.”

Both persons are males who pretend to be women, and both hate Kiwi Farms with a passion, so it wasn’t terribly unlikely that the two would have eventually found each other.

If you’re unfamiliar with Kiwi Farms, it’s an online message board that initially focused on discussing Chris Chan, but has since pivoted to discussing the ridiculous things that social media personalities do. It’s often made out to be a hive for online bullies, and while it’s true that many of its members are unsavory individuals, I think the board as it is now can be justified. In fact, I’ll go ahead and do that now.

Suppose that arson was legal. As in, you could do it, and the law wouldn’t lay a finger on you. Would you do it?

If you’re like most people, your answer would be, “No!”. This is because most people would see arson as immoral, regardless of what the law allowed.

But suppose that, not only was arson legal, it was actually incentivized. Five dollars for each house destroyed. Odds are, most people would still refuse to do it, and would be outraged at such an incentive, if it were to exist.

However, some people would jump at the offer. “Five dollars, per? Hells yeah!” they’d scream, before getting to work. We would call such people “sociopaths”, because what little they’d have to gain is something which, in their minds, outweighs the suffering that they’d cause.

But suppose that homes were being destroyed, but rather than by acts of arson, instead through influence. Suppose that a level of abstraction separates the act that destroys the home from the home being destroyed, in such a way that allowed for plausible deniability on the part of the influencer.

The influencer might influence people to drink base liquids, eat laundry detergent, dive from moving speedboats, take prescription drugs without a prescription, idolize dangerous terrorists, make self-destructive lifestyle choices, and many, many more acts which, if people were to try them, the likely outcome is that families could be torn apart, property could be damaged, and even lives could be lost. And while all this is going on, influencers are financially rewarded just for the attention that they get.

If this were to happen, and if it were financially incentivized, would you see that as a problem?

Let’s drop the hypotheticals. After all, you probably knew what I was getting at when I brought up the influencers. The fact is, influencers do encourage destructive behaviors. These behaviors have caused damage that these influencers didn’t have to face consequences for. And yes, these influencers are being financially incentivized to accrete attention to themselves, even if the attention is through the promotion of destructive and socially corrosive ideologies and activities.

These influencers are the sociopaths who don’t give a damn what damage that they might cause for you or for anyone else, so long as they’re getting the attention that they want, and the money that they really care about.

These sociopaths are among the many influencers on social media.

They don’t have to believe what they’re saying. And they usually don’t. They don’t have to see the communities, families, or individuals whose lives they are destroying. And they couldn’t bring themselves to care. They might even convince you that they’re your friend, when in reality, your mere attention only slightly enables the transaction that is their sincere desire.

By now, you’re probably wondering what can be done about these influencers. The answer is to shine a light on them, and subject them to the ridicule and satire that is richly merited.

That’s where Kiwi Farms comes in.

If it weren’t for Kiwi Farms, deviants such as Chris Chan and Keffals would have a much easier time being the predators that they are.

And now that the two have found each other, it’s become much more important that an eye is kept on the two. Because if the two are the miscreants that they are independent of one another, just imagine what they can come up with working together.

Goofball Finds Support For Israel In Fast Food Wrapper

Leave a reply

You’re not ready for this. You’re about to laugh the hardest you have laughed in a long time.

You sitting down? Here we go:

As much as I’d like to believe that this was all some act, I know that people like this actually exist. When you’ve had a job in which you have to interact with the public, you see many different kinds.

But this is truly special. Here’s the kind of person who listens to a televangelist, and thinks that the sermon had some kind of special, hidden message that was intended specifically for them. The kind of person who makes financial decisions based on horoscopes, and names their kids after the first name they hear after turning on the radio, because fuck any chance they could have at living normal.

“Wow. What does that resemble?” Could it be the McDonald’s logo? A helpful reminder of where you just spent your money? The icon to blame for making you fat?

The moment you heard the woman say, “This is in support of Israel.”, you couldn’t see the guy’s face, but you could hear it drop. I know that wage slaves are under enormous pressure to maintain a veneer of professionalism, but I can’t imagine any manager out there would fault him for saying, “Are you serious?”

But you heard her tone, she was as totes cereal as a sack of processed grains at the supermarket.

What are the odds that two basic colors used on fast food packaging could coincidentally resemble the colors of Israel’s flag? So low that, according to the people who put watermelons in their X posts because the colors are similar to the colors of the Palestinian flag, it couldn’t be a coincidence, and must necessarily indicate support for the state of Israel.

I get the fact that stupid people believe in synchronicities to help them cope with the fact that they’re going to die someday, and that there is nothing special about them, but it’s time to keep it real: belief in synchronicities can destroy your mind. And the above video has shown us a great example.

Dude No Longer Has Free Wi-Fi, Complains To Neighbor

Leave a reply

Sometimes, a guy with a screw loose will come right up to you, and surprise you with what they say. This is one of those times.

A man visited his neighbor complaining that he put a password on his wi-fi, so he can no longer use it for free. And the exchange was caught on video:

I can say first of all that, depending on where you live, it may be illegal to access your neighbors wi-fi without their permission, even if it’s not password-protected.

Second, while it’s great that the man learned well enough to put a password on his wi-fi, he’s probably got some double-digit IQ datasec practices if it took him two years to figure out that that it’s a good idea, and only arrived at that determination after hearing advice. Wi-fi has been widespread for about two decades, and its best practices have been pretty well-established. I can imagine that he’s still yet to use a VPN or ad-blocking software.

Now, let’s get to the heart of the issue at hand. A man has been using another man’s wi-fi for free, without permission. And he’s been doing it for so long and justifying it with his own flawed reasoning that when he suddenly had to do without, he feels slighted.

So, what does he do? He goes up to his neighbor and complains about it, and two worlds collide.

I can only imagine what the guy has been doing with his neighbor’s wi-fi that caused it to slow down to the point that it’s become noticeable. Perhaps he’s been downloading the latest Final Fantasy games in a handful of European languages, not because he has any intention of actually playing them, but because if he’s going to do something so illegal, he may as well go for the gusto.

Of course, we can appreciate just how goofy a guy is that he doesn’t seem to understand how wi-fi works. He knows well enough how to hook up to an unsecured network, but seems to think it’s location based, as though one device on a network can’t tax bandwidth if it’s used outside of one’s personal property. I get the idea that the guy may have had some help connecting.

While the guy suggests a couple solutions to his new lack of access to wi-fi, I have a better one: stop being so cheap and get your own ISP.

Bin Laden and the Algorithmic Manipulators

Leave a reply

Before we get into this, I’m curious how many of you had “leftists voice agreement with Osama Bin Laden” on your bingo card for 2023. It’s understandable if you didn’t, but what a year this is turning out to be.

In the year 2002, Osama Bin Laden, the very same Bin Laden that ran the terror network Al Qaeda, had issued a letter titled, A Letter to America, wherein he laid out his rationale for the 9/11 terror attacks.

I, for one, am skeptical that Bin Laden actually authored the letter, as he had initially steadfastly denied being involved in the attacks, and each of the hijackers actually attended the Al Quds mosque in Hamburg, Germany, which was never shut down, as far as I could tell.

In the letter, Bin Laden pointed out that there was no such thing as innocent civilians in the U.S.’s democracy, pointing out that his violent actions were a reaction to the policy positions of representatives that civilians voted into office. He voiced such an opposition to U.S. policy that it sounded suspiciously like it was intended to feed into a casus belli for further American intervention. Hopefully it’s understandable why I’m skeptical.

The letter had been published by British news outlet The Guardian, who took it down when a recent spate of TikTok videos appeared expressing surprise at the contents of the letter, with some expressing agreement with Bin Laden’s sentiments, saying that they’ve had their preconceived notions challenged, and encouraging their viewers to also read the letter.

Normally, I’d embed at least one example of such a video here, but I’m not doing that this time, for a reason that I’ll get into later on in this post.

When it comes to a letter from Osama Bin Laden, I’m curious what people were expecting. Did they expect something like five paragraphs of hand-wringing and mustache-twirling, proceeded by cartoon-villain cackling? The guy had a following, and he had a following for a reason: he was able to justify his positions, even if through faulty reasoning, and he did so in such a way that would have been considered convincing to those who lacked the ability to comprehend true evil, or at least those who would be dumb enough to fall for his arguments.

People with bad positions are usually able to justify their positions. Take the flat-earthers, for example. People know that flat-earthers are wrong. However, they take for granted that flat-earthers are wrong. So when they get into a debate with one, they imagine that it will be a piece-of-cake slam dunk victory. But then the debate begins, and the flat-earther runs circles around them, because they know how the game is played, they have rhetorical deceit down to a science, they came prepared with arguments that most people are not prepared for, and they themselves came prepared for the arguments and rebuttals that they could reasonably expect. The result is that a typical, middle-of-the-road thinker is left to kick dust on the way home, knowing that he lost a debate to a flat-earther.

While we’re at it, I’m curious as to what people think is in Hitler’s Mein Kampf. While it’s true that much of it is a hateful tirade made to appeal to one with an external locus of control, it’s also a political manifesto that would have been considered encouraging to a German who would have felt downtrodden in Hitler’s time.

Evil people are able to justify their wickedness, even if their reasoning is deeply flawed. To them, what most would see as wicked may be what they see as justifiable, or even banal.

By way of another example, there’s also the manifesto of Ted Kazynski, the person who is popularly known as the Unabomber. When his manifesto was published, the expectation would have understandably been the ramblings of a deluded psychopath who believed that the moon followed him as he walked around. As it turns out, he made some points about society that many people considered valid.

Returning to Bin Laden, I wonder how many people out there have forgotten that he was a religious zealot, whose own religion is pretty-much everything that a stereotypical leftist pretends that Christianity is. Bin Laden was an Islamist, who wanted to implement Sharia in the west.

The following is a few of Bin Laden’s policy positions:

  • Executing gays,
  • Normalizing slavery (and no, I’m not kidding),
  • Outlawing bacon,
  • Outlawing grown-up beverages,
  • Outlawing non-religious music,
  • A functionally-retarded banking system that’s somehow supposed to run without interest,
  • Normalizing pederasty, which has been legal in Afghanistan for decades,
  • State-sponsorship of a cult that discourages the pursuit of anything outside of itself,
  • That science is not allowed to question, among other things, that the earth is flat,
  • A judicial system that’s so capricious that tyrants are needed to maintain order,
  • That the testimony of a woman is either 1/2 or 1/4 that of a man in courts of law.

There’s a lot more. And a bunch of simpletons are impressed with this guy?

Now, let’s get into the reason why I’m not leaving a video embed in this post. Personally, I doubt that these people actually believe what they’re saying. The fact is, the TikTok algorithm boosts what gets plenty of engagement, and what’s rage-inducing (such as police-brutality videos) tend to get more attention. I suspect that these are just people who know how the game is played, and are attempting to farm the algorithm for views. I don’t want to give them a signal boost, because I don’t want them to have more attention.

But even if they don’t believe it, they still have followings that may take their words for it. And that’s how attempts to game an algorithm can have potentially harmful outcomes. We’ve already seen how videos of police brutality have inspired looting and rioting. Now, there are social media influencers out to make a quick buck who don’t care about the long-term social damage that can occur as a result of algorithmic manipulation.

But if the social media influencers were sincere, then there’s no telling how they’ll react when they get around to reading something that’s actually reasonable, such as the basic philosophical underpinnings of Libertarianism, or that of Austrian economics.

To get to the heart of the matter, however eloquent that his justifications could have possibly been, it still remains that Osama Bin Laden was a murderous nutjob who hid behind his religion, which played a significant role in motivating him to become the killer he ended up becoming.

Now, the indoctrinators of the political left are looking on in horror as the very children that they indoctrinated went on to side with terrorists like Al Qaeda and Hamas, simply because those terrorist organizations have been using similar rhetoric to justify themselves. And now said indoctrinators are losing control of the very generation with which they had hoped to usher in a revolution, and are losing control of them to a bunch of religious fanatics who are far more hateful than even themselves.

I can think of no better way to fight back than to make it known why their new ideology is not worth fighting for. Just because it’s obvious to me why this is the case doesn’t mean that everyone can be reasoned with.

If it turns out that the letter actually was a U.S. psy-op, the consequences might almost be funny. Except not quite.