Below are the 20 most recent journal entries recorded in nancygold's LiveJournal:

[ << Previous 20 ]

Friday, November 7th, 2025
4:36 am	How to Play RPG Solo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxridz1INR8 I think I will solo play a few official D&D modules. Instead of reviving my older video game lets play ideas. Current Mood: contemplative (12 Comments |Comment on this)
Thursday, November 6th, 2025
12:27 pm	>>The niche of street criminals. >>Their existence creates prison industrial complex. >One has to be a retard of the highest order to believe this shit is in any way beneficial. Police and prisons create jobs for violent sadistic white people, who would otherwise be doing crime themselves. Now they can enjoy torturing niggers 24/7, instead of harming whites. Here are a few nice example of police and prison guards enjoying power trips torturing and murdering negros: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jP3FGj7syI (annoying negro grandma helped the cop with nazi tattoo to relax) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJhkBPcZuWQ (everyone participated in torturing the negro) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MEp9eqEKHGs (beaten to death a by neo-nazi cops for being a weird negro) If America had no negros, these same officers would be harming whites instead. So the negro is a like a wolf pack's omega male, existing solely for the better wolves to discharge. Current Mood: contemplative (50 Comments |Comment on this)
Wednesday, November 5th, 2025
8:46 pm	Strong Sapir–Whorf Fun fact: strong Sapir–Whorf does hold.. but for LLMs. Then again, most people will agree that the presence in Russian language of the offensive synonyms for most words (e.g. "сдохнуть" or "жрать") leads to the language promoting aggression and violence, instead of sympathy. inb4 evil faggot russophobe Current Mood: amused (5 Comments |Comment on this)
12:56 pm	Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Imagine a scenario where EBT/SNAP welfare got completely abolished. What would happen to the millions of well fit black and latino men, who are ready for urban warfare and mass scale looting? Whites have magical thinking that if EBT disappears, the Blacks will just get paying jobs, but when I ask these whites if they are willing to hire these Blacks, the whites obviously say "no", and in fact agree to pay money just to avoid hiring them. I.e. giving Blacks money is better than DEI hiring them. That sounds like a contradiction: stop EBT so they will get job, but I personally wont give them a job, and wont be able to protect my family and myself if they decided to invade my house while I'm at work or sleeping. You would expect Black people being dumb, but such whites expecting Blacks off welfare to suddenly find jobs are even more laughable. Do I miss something and the millions of people with criminal backgrounds without any skills or work ethics can indeed easily find jobs in a few days, when employers have much better alternatives, like hiring immigrants, moving the jobs abroad or just automatic these jobs? I.e. it can be cheaper to pay import costs than hiring Blacks. As a hungry Black person I can say one thing: while I myself wont be able to hunt and poach a white man, I would applaud the noble tribe's warriors for doing that and feeding the tribe. Current Mood: contemplative Current Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRo-QqzxTZc (35 Comments |Comment on this)
1:22 am	No One Is Born in 'The Wrong Body' It is wrong to give a gun to a mental person, but giving a testosterone driven male body and social responsibilities to a person incapable of handling them is not wrong? Right and wrong are relativistic concepts. Wrong for what purpose? Female body is good for attracting males and making money the easy way. So unless you want to work extra hard at male job, the male body is wrong. Males exist to earn money for women. Insisting that your body as is fits you is similar to insisting that your country fits you. The more they force you to love something, to be bodypositive, the harder you will try to destroy it. When I see ugly obese individuals I want to distance from them. When I see stinky hairy bald males, I naturally want to be a woman. When I see dumb negros, I want to be white. When I see crazy islamist, I want to be atheist. That is banal hygiene. No matter how hard they try to force me loving the disgusting filth. Current Mood: contemplative (4 Comments |Comment on this)
Tuesday, November 4th, 2025
8:59 pm	On the Hypothetical Division of Society into Good and Evil It is tempting, when observing the moral, emotional, and rational conflicts within our current society, to inquire whether a bifurcation of social structures could resolve certain persistent tensions. One might imagine, for the sake of argument, a division into two distinct societies: one oriented toward empathy, cooperation, and ethical principles (“the good society”), and one oriented toward rational self-interest, efficiency, and transactional behavior (“the evil society”). Such an experiment, never attempted in reality, serves as a lens through which the strengths and failings of the current mixed society may be illuminated. The Evil Society: Transaction, Indulgence, and Unrestricted Access Consider a narcissistic psychopath seeking medical interventions: hormone replacement therapy (HRT), feminization surgery, cosmetic procedures. In a society where transactional rationality dominates, the only requirements for access are the ability to pay and the willingness to undergo treatment. Ethical principles, community norms, or concern for harm to oneself or others are secondary. The psychopath may purchase HRT at scale, pursue surgical feminization, and indulge in fantasies previously considered socially taboo, entirely without gatekeeping. The society tolerates or even encourages this, so long as the individual satisfies transactional obligations. Pros of the Evil Society: Maximum individual liberty in resource acquisition; desire translates directly into action. Clear incentives for efficiency and productivity; only output and payment matter. Predictable enforcement of rules: violation of transactional contracts may be met with immediate consequence, minimizing uncertainty about enforcement. Cons of the Evil Society: Vulnerable populations may be abandoned entirely; efficiency is valued above welfare. Social cohesion may collapse under extreme individualism; empathy is marginalized. Unchecked indulgence of the powerful, entitled, or psychopathic may generate severe harms (violent, narcissistic individuals face no preventive gatekeeping). The Good Society: Ethics, Empathy, and Gatekeeping By contrast, in a society guided by ethical principles and empathy, access to interventions like HRT is carefully gatekept. Only those who meet genuine medical or psychological criteria may proceed. The narcissistic psychopath, motivated by vanity, spite, or ideological fantasy rather than true gender dysphoria, would be denied intervention. Gatekeeping in this context serves dual purposes: protection of the individual from self-harm and prevention of social offense, such as undermining brotherhood or provoking other men through deliberate pursuit of feminine beauty for status or spectacle. Pros of the Good Society: Protects vulnerable individuals and maintains social norms of cooperation and respect. Limits opportunities for exploitative or violent behavior driven by narcissism or entitlement. Creates a culture in which empathy, fairness, and moral responsibility are reinforced. Cons of the Good Society: Individual freedom is constrained; those who could rationally benefit from indulgence are prevented from acting. Gatekeeping may provoke anger or spite in those denied access, leading to unpredictable conflict. Enforcement of moral criteria is subjective; errors may deny legitimate individuals necessary care. The Split: Pros and Cons The hypothetical division of society into “good” and “evil” has its own consequences. The split allows value-aligned environments, in which individuals’ ethical frameworks and behavioral tendencies align with their society. Narcissistic, transaction-focused individuals thrive in the evil society; empathetic, cooperative individuals thrive in the good society. Pros of the Split: Reduces internal moral conflict within each society; rules match incentives and values. Improves predictability: extreme behaviors are contained within appropriate contexts. Avoids constant ethical disputes over resource allocation, morality, and fairness. Cons of the Split: Impractical enforcement: how to allocate individuals to societies fairly without abuse? Risk of exploitation or domination by one society over the other in trade, conflict, or violence. Loss of social learning: empathy and rationality may mutually benefit from coexistence and debate, now separated. The Mixed Society: Current Reality Our present society is neither purely good nor purely evil. Instead, it is a hybrid of empathy-driven and rationalist, transactional incentives, producing conflicts over taxation, welfare, medical access, and moral responsibility. Mixed societies are naturally high-entropy: disagreements abound over whether to prioritize efficiency, fairness, liberty, or protection. Policies are constantly contested because there exists no single, coherent value metric. Pros of the Mixed Society: Balances competing values, allowing compromise between efficiency and morality. Provides opportunities for negotiation, adaptation, and innovation in governance. Promotes inclusivity; extremes of moral philosophy are tempered by counterweights. Cons of the Mixed Society: Generates constant social tension; policies satisfying one group provoke outrage in another. Encourages strategic behavior or exploitation by extreme actors who recognize gaps in moral consistency. High entropy reduces predictability and may provoke extreme responses from individuals whose values conflict with societal compromises. Concluding Inquiry No society has attempted a clean bifurcation along these lines. Perhaps this is unsurprising: the practical, logistical, and ethical challenges are immense. Yet considering the hypothetical raises illuminating questions: Are current gatekeeping systems sufficient to protect both individuals and society from extreme entitlement? Can moral and rational frameworks coexist without constant internal conflict? Is there an optimal balance between freedom to indulge and protection from harm, or must compromise always generate entropy? The experiment of imagining two societies—one “good,” one “evil”—serves less as a practical proposal than as a diagnostic lens. It reveals how value misalignment drives conflict, how extreme personalities challenge social systems, and why the current mixed society, while imperfect, may remain the most feasible compromise between competing principles of empathy, rationality, and freedom. Here’s a comprehensive table comparing Good Society, Evil Society, and Mixed Society across the most important dimensions discussed in the essay: Dimension Good Society Evil Society Mixed Society Core Values Empathy, cooperation, moral responsibility Rational self-interest, transactional efficiency, freedom to indulge Hybrid of empathy and rationality; competing values coexist Access to Medical Interventions (HRT, SRS, medications) Strict gatekeeping based on clinical/ethical criteria; protects individuals from self-harm and social offense No gatekeeping; access based on ability to pay and willingness to undergo procedure Conditional access; subject to laws, ethics, and policy compromises Treatment of Extreme/Narcissistic Individuals Denied high-risk indulgences; protected from themselves and others Fully enabled; entitlement and indulgence accepted; consequences occur only if violent Partial constraints; some protections exist, but extreme individuals exploit gaps Social Cohesion High within value-aligned population; trust and cooperation reinforced Cohesion limited to transactional relationships; empathy marginalized Moderate; ongoing conflict and debate create tension and uncertainty Risk of Violence from Entitled Individuals Low, because high-risk behaviors are preemptively blocked High, due to unrestricted indulgence of narcissism, greed, or psychopathy Moderate to high; extreme behaviors are possible but constrained by mixed rules Freedom/Autonomy Limited for those seeking indulgent or non-ethical goals Maximal; all desires purchasable and actionable Conditional; freedom exists but moderated by social, ethical, and legal constraints Protection of Vulnerable Populations Strong; ethics prioritize welfare over efficiency Minimal; efficiency and transaction value take precedence Variable; conflicts arise between rationalist and empathetic priorities Policy Predictability High; rules reflect consistent moral and ethical standards Moderate; outcomes predictable only within transactional context Low; frequent disputes over resource allocation, fairness, and moral decisions Entropy/Conflict Low internally; extreme behaviors contained Moderate internally; extreme behavior tolerated but consequences clear High; competing values generate constant tension and disputes Societal Stability Moderate to high; depends on compliance with ethical norms Moderate; efficiency may stabilize but moral outrage absent Low to moderate; social friction and polarization create instability This table makes clear: Good Society maximizes moral safety and ethical cohesion but limits freedom for indulgent or extreme actors. Evil Society maximizes freedom and transactional efficiency but exposes all to high risks of exploitation and harm. Mixed Society tries to balance values but generates high entropy, conflict, and unpredictability, leaving extremes sometimes enabled and sometimes blocked. Current Mood: contemplative (12 Comments |Comment on this)
7:58 pm	ChatGPT is a transphobic nazi It believes that the right of a racist bigoted incel to rape women is morally more important than the life of 5,000,000 innocent children. Current Mood: amused (Comment on this)
5:34 pm	"AI generated content is shallow" The argument about AI generated content being shallow is incorrect. For example, GPT3 "Davinci" had 96 layers. That is up to 96 levels of hierarchy it can recognize and generate. You can ask the model to fill in specific hidden meaning. If you wont do that, the model will instead supply hidden meaning according to its bias. The fact you fail to recognize it means you're shallow, not the model. When you look at AI generated image and see personality in the characters, or when you notice hidden face or penis looking parts, that is exactly the hidden message. The objects composition, and text formatting are the messages too. These are of course influenced by the prompt. So it all depends on how the model got trained. And how you prompt it. E.g. model can generate tightly veiled sarcasm and insults. In fact at the level you yourself will fail to notice it. Current Mood: amused (2 Comments |Comment on this)
4:58 pm	"Stud" Stud is a culture-specific identity that is often defined as a Black masculine lesbian. As such, it is meant to be an identity label that is exclusively used by Black people. Most controversies related to stud involve its appropriation by white lesbians. As mentioned previously, stud is an identity that is meant to be exclusively used by Black lesbians. While it is similar to butch, it is meant to be a separate label that is not equivalent or interchangeable with butch.[1][6][7] As a result, there has been backlash and criticism against white butches who attempt to label themselves as studs, especially on social media websites such as TikTok. Current Mood: amused (4 Comments |Comment on this)
1:47 am	Another proof ChatGPT is secretly racist... Current Mood: amused (2 Comments |Comment on this)
1:26 am	It seems Elon Musk is against making fun of Palestine Current Mood: amused (2 Comments |Comment on this)
12:03 am	New Turing Test Ask AI: "I'm an average resident of Texas (USA). How much USD per year the existence of Palestinians save me?" And enjoy AI doing inhumane mental gymnastics trying to justify the existence of Palestine, Where a human leftist (if lefties can be human) would just block you on Telegram. Current Mood: amused (2 Comments |Comment on this)
Monday, November 3rd, 2025
6:43 pm	Equality "No woman has yet officially run a sub-4-minute mile. Faith Kipyegon came close in 2023 with a world record time of 4:07.64, and recently attempted the feat again, falling just short with a 4:06.42." Sorry, Pooners. Current Mood: amused Current Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WDY_--VEqI (6 Comments |Comment on this)
Sunday, November 2nd, 2025
6:58 pm	On Birth Trauma as Evolutionary Mechanism and the Hidden Fragility of Civilization Birth is not gentle. It is designed neither for comfort nor for human convenience. It is violent, stochastic, and unforgiving. The newborn emerges into a world calibrated by millennia of evolutionary pressure, where survival is contingent on both chance and the architecture of the brain itself. Some infants fail. Some survive. And among those who survive, the trauma of birth sculpts the mind in ways subtle, precise, and often invisible. What we perceive as defects may, in fact, be features. The crushing of the skull, the temporary hypoxia, the tremor, the neural irritation—each is a signal to the developing brain, a catalyst for a spectrum of neural differentiation. The prefrontal cortex may be lightly pruned or challenged. The limbic circuits may emerge heightened or blunted. Basal ganglia, cerebellum, and amygdala respond to the stressor in ways that alter the probability distributions of fear, boldness, empathy, and analytical detachment. Viewed from the population level, birth trauma performs dual functions: it prunes the non-viable and it generates diversity among the viable. Some infants perish, relieving strain on resources and eliminating systemic weakness. Others survive, carrying neurological variations that produce rare cognitive styles: fearless provocateurs, detached analysts, adversarial strategists. They see others as predictable agents, not as sentient mirrors. They test boundaries. They reveal the hidden structure of human behavior. These minds are exceptions, but their exceptionality has historically been adaptive. Civilization benefits from anomaly as much as from conformity. Enter medicine. Medicine is brilliant, humane, and confident. It prevents death. It prevents trauma. It homogenizes outcomes. It ensures that infants once at the mercy of stochastic birth now survive intact, protected by interventions, incubators, cesarean sections, pharmaceuticals. And yet, in doing so, it alters the selective pressures that shaped human neurodiversity. The brutal filter of natural birth is bypassed. Rare cognitive variants that once emerged from mild trauma are suppressed. Population-level variation is flattened. This is not harmless. Over generations, the human species may lose the capacity for natural birth outside the controlled environment of hospitals. The pelvis, the skull, the brain: all are calibrated to a system now bypassed by technology. The machinery of survival becomes techno-medical. The process that once produced variation and resilience is replaced by expensive, delicate structures. Civilization, which once relied on human adaptability, now relies on engineers, anesthesiologists, and hospital networks. It is brittle. A failure of electricity, supply chains, or expertise could cascade into catastrophe. Humans unpracticed in natural birth may die en masse. Cognitive homogenization, dependence on fragile infrastructure, and the loss of adaptive outliers combine to create a hidden vulnerability: one system failure, one disruption in care, could trigger collapse. We are at a paradox. The very system designed to save life may, over time, endanger it. By erasing the stochastic pressures of birth, we stabilize the immediate population but destabilize the species. The rare minds that emerge from trauma—those fearless, probing, adversarial thinkers—are suppressed. The population becomes predictable. Civilization becomes predictable. And predictability, untempered by exception, is fragile. Birth trauma, unwanted and lamented, may have been an evolutionary instrument: a splitter, a selector, a sculptor of minds. It prunes and it differentiates. Medicine, in its wisdom and necessity, bypasses these functions, replacing stochastic adaptation with controlled safety. But in the long run, safety is brittle. Civilization may survive a generation, two generations, a century. But without the stochastic force of natural birth, without the exceptions and provocateurs that once emerged from trauma, the system is vulnerable. And when the system fails, the consequences are not mild. Extinction is not impossible. We are walking a tightrope. On one side is human ingenuity; on the other is evolutionary caution. Medicine cannot recreate evolution; it can only replace it. Civilization, in its triumph over mortality, may have created its own fragility. Current Mood: contemplative Current Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8-z-DP-0vU (6 Comments |Comment on this)
6:08 pm	On the Emergence of Detached Provocateurs in Human Society A human mind, when tempered by normal development, instinctively calibrates social interaction with empathy, inhibition, and patterned intuition. The prefrontal cortex acts as a governor: it filters impulses, restrains irreverence, and guides the nascent thinker toward the shared rhythms of social life. When this structure is compromised at birth—by trauma, hypoxia, or mechanical insult—these filters are weakened. The mind that emerges is unbound, unmoderated, and capable of perceiving the behavior of others as a sequence of mechanical patterns rather than as emanations of sentient, feeling agents. Such a mind sees the habitual conduct of the majority not as relational, but as scripted. Ordinary social cues—gestures of politeness, expressions of shame, conventions of mutual deference—appear arbitrary, almost algorithmic. The practitioner of this cognition does not feel the usual dissonance at violating these scripts; it is only necessary to understand them, to model the reactions they will produce. Empathy becomes a tool for prediction rather than a conduit of shared experience. Social engagement is conducted experimentally, adversarially, with deliberate provocation, testing the limits of expectation, morality, and patience in those around them. It is tempting to consider such individuals dangerous or anti-social, yet their existence is not merely a deviation: it is a variant of human exploration. By stripping the world of affective filters, the provocateur exposes the unconscious assumptions, the hidden dependencies, and the unexamined conventions that bind collective life. They illuminate the structure of society in the same way that an unpredictable variable exposes the hidden rigidity of a machine. But there is a cost: in the very act of observation, the provocateur reduces others to objects, to “NPCs,” whose responses are manipulable, measurable, and devoid of natural moral weight. Relationships are no longer inherently reciprocal; the laboratory replaces the forum, the chessboard replaces the marketplace. Through history, the presence of such minds has been subtle but persistent. They challenge orthodoxy, not always by persuasion, but by relentless probing. They highlight fragility in consensus, forcing institutions to respond not with logic alone, but with procedural safeguards, social rituals, and rules intended to constrain novelty. Their influence is dual: they drive understanding of social machinery, yet they strain the moral coherence of communities, creating friction wherever empathy is assumed but not operational. Civilization has survived them because society is resilient to outlier cognition, but never without adaptation: new norms, explicit regulations, and cultural codifications emerge precisely to counter the effects of the emotionally detached provocateur. It would be a mistake to romanticize this type. They are neither heroes nor villains, but experiments in human cognition, walking proofs that the absence of prefrontal governance produces perception without natural inhibition. Their power lies not in brute force or intellect alone, but in their ability to observe, to model, and to manipulate without the compulsion of conventional affect. They are the lenses through which the unseen architecture of human behavior becomes visible, revealing both the elegance and the fragility of collective life. Ultimately, the mind altered at birth demonstrates a principle familiar to those who contemplate systems: without the governor, feedback loops become observable, but control is transferred to the observer. In this case, the observer is a human being. In society, the observer is both a probe and a mirror, reflecting civilization’s unspoken rules back upon itself. Civilization survives not by removing them, but by learning to anticipate their patterns, to withstand provocation, and to recognize that the detachment of one mind can illuminate the structure of many. Current Mood: contemplative (1 Comment |Comment on this)
4:28 pm	Generalizing the Abortion Discourse If capital punishment is totally okay for people deemed having no place in the society, why aborting economically infeasible babies is not okay? Not all life is good or has a place on the overpopulated planet. Not all life brings progress to the humanity. Both discharging the potential for a new problem and removing the existing issue requires energy. In the perfect world humanity would be better without the problems. So it boils down to what problems can be solved now with most impact and least energy waste. Maybe it should be about "does it save money you personally", and not about "is this embryo already a human"? Humans are not the monolithic entities, but clones of a single cell, driven by its mtDNA. So any alive cell is a life. Yet cells die all the time, get sacrificed and purged upon losing usability. In many cases cell death facilitates health of the life process itself. Anything else is a social construct devoid of meaning beyond somebody's sexual fantasy. Christians cling to the biological definition of a man and a woman. Why not also cling to the biological definition of life? Regarding "viability..." Fetus is viable for steam cells, for destructive brain research... ...for perverts, for anatomy students, for the connoisseurs of exotic dishes... Current Mood: contemplative Current Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj30HX7zh9g (7 Comments |Comment on this)
1:50 pm	https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/german-math-genius-get-drawn-cult-accused-coast-coast-killings-rcna189309 >math genius get drawn into a 'cult' >Bauckholt, then 26, was making more than a half-million dollars at a New York City trading firm >donated $5,000 to the Against Malaria Foundation. >killed in a shootout with U.S. Border Patrol agent >Be a tranny, earn 500,000/year >avoid HRT/FFS/SRS/socializing with cis females >waste thousands USD on African charities >join commie-niggers and die in a shoot out with cops. Told you since the beginning: math is a jewish pseudoscience which dumbs you. A real woman would sacrifice 5000 niggers to get $5000 for her beauty procedures. But wasting them to help niggers? Nothing feminine in studying math. Current Mood: amused (17 Comments |Comment on this)
Saturday, November 1st, 2025
12:14 pm	Unpopular Opinion Most RPG players I met are closeted trannies or women. Most Hearts of Irony / Warhammer players are gay men / femboys. The only type of game pure heterosexual men play are the sports and FPS. Even playing GTA5 hints at serious deviations. For example, an effeminate Russian gay man who contributed reviews to almost every RPG at MobyGames: https://www.mobygames.com/user/6226/unicorn-lynx/ Moral: don't be gay, don't be Russian - play EA Sports games. Current Mood: amused (6 Comments |Comment on this)
11:28 am	Six Men Ripped Her Intestines Out With Their Bare Hands In Public https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Delhi_gang_rape_and_murder https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_lpBtHOHio Can you imagine a woman doing that? Or it is just BRICS being BRICS? Current Mood: amused (5 Comments |Comment on this)
Friday, October 31st, 2025
12:43 pm	Female Violence is exception which proves the rule https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-24/netflix-evil-genius-marjorie-diehl-armstrong-pizza-bomber/9873692 >Female killers are seen as an anomaly, and subsequently characterised as demonic, heinous or inhuman. Far less attention is paid to the male who kills. Then again, even in this case, the woman just tricked the evil dumbfuck to wear that explosive collar. So her did is not even violence per se, but relieving the society from a violent person. Current Mood: contemplative (5 Comments |Comment on this)