admin – Page 3 – Quora Archive

Why do women tend to hate each other more than men do?

Updated Nov 12

A few reasons come to mind:

Women are encouraged/allowed to be extremely petty. There is seemingly no lower limit of socially acceptable pettiness among women. This gives more tendency to find reasons to hate another woman.
Women are encouraged to take a victim mentality. And also to use claims of victimsation as a tool for manipulation, authority to tell others what to do, and bullying as an alleged self-defense.
Women are encouraged to be passive, dependent, and to avoid full responsibility, thereby increasing the victim mentality. This leads to hatred of other women who are actively controlling their own lives.
A common resentment dynamic is a woman who buys into the LifeScript of getting into a financially dependent marriage, having children, and then feeling trapped. She then meets a single, childfree woman, and hatred ensues.
Women are encouraged to have a pretense of “cooperation” over competition. However, this can encourage the view that, another woman who excels (or even just shows basic competence) in any way, is violating the “cooperation” mandate. Which can become, “You are obligated to cooperate by sinking down to my level (finances, status, intellect, autonomy, etc), or I will enlist other women to cooperate with me in viewing you as the enemy”.
“Cooperation” is also linked to “fairness”, which can be twisted into everyone receiving the same results, regardless of personal behaviour. And hatred for anyone doing better through her own higher effort or discipline.
Women may use a false, “I am being compassionate and trying to help you” pretense as a cover for pressuring another woman to “cooperate”, and sink down. And then as justification for bullying the ingrate who refused to do so.
Women are trained to emphasise interpersonal relationships, including platonic friendship. And so will fear being cast out and lonely, and/or having low status in a clique. Which then rebounds to bullying another woman with threats of interpersonal/social rejection.
Male-style competition is the drive to get more (money, status, etc) for one’s self. While female-style competition is the demand that, another woman must be pushed down, even with zero practical benefit to bully. Men need to win, while women need other women to lose.
The pushing-down impulse has a common pattern where, immediately upon meeting, the first order of business may be to confirm that, the other woman is at the bottom-of-the-barrel socioeconomically/materially. If she is doing any better (through harder/smarter work), hatred ensues.
There is mass insecurity over appearance, and this goes far beyond competition for male attention. A woman who is already in a stable marriage may still hate another woman whom she thinks looks better. This includes not only face and body, but also things like health habits (smoking, exercising, eating).
Another area separate from male attention/resources is homosexual females. They can be amazingly hostile towards another woman, and it tends to be competition-oriented. A related point is the huge sense of fear and victimisation that accompanies the numerical difficulty in small gay social circles and mating-markets. They meet another woman who isn’t their “type” of prospective sex partner, and so then defaults to being a competitor to be bullied. Some of the most petty, arrogant, false-victim, gaslighting bullies I’ve ever encountered were gay women.

The last photo you took would be the cause of your death. What’s going to happen to you?

Answered Nov 5

The last photo I took was while blowing soap bubbles in a park, showing several large ones drifting through the air.

No clue how to make that into a death story.

Who do you think will win the bachelor au honey badger?

Answered Oct 28

Both Brittany and Sophie won.

Because neither of them ended up with that barely-conscious, mannequin-like commitment-phobe Nick.

He is a sleazy playa, and they don’t need him.

Nick could barely communicate, had cheesy introductions, and what the hell is up with that hair and mustache??? Somebody decided that this guy is hot, and that numerous actually hot women should grovel for his attention?

He wasn’t looking for any real emotional connection or romance. He just wanted to hook up with all of them.

The cheesy ending with him seeming to contemplate his loneliness looked suspiciously like the cheesy ending of stilted pseudo-drama-filler from a certain John Holmes porn movie from the late 70s. With similar mustache.

Plus, he didn’t want any kind of closure. He wants to continue a pseudo-famous career and go on other reality television shows. He is probably so air-headed as to think that he can get another “The Bachelor” season, and hook up with another series of vulnerable women. But might end up in the background of “Survivor”.

Or maybe he will go on “The Bachelorette”, and he will be grovelling.

Brittany and Sophie are probably going to be BFFs for life now that they are done with that worthless sleazebag Nick.

Is it possible to use machine learning to make predictions with little understanding about the underlying mechanisms, such as predicting the 3D structure of proteins out of the amino acid sequences?

Updated Nov 5

Predictions are already made mathematically, but they are only guesses.

An example is looking for portions of a protein that might be trans-membrane helices, where there is a numerical calculation of hydrophobic side chains in a certain segment. Basically, if you have hydrophobic side chains in a row for 19 or more residues, then they may compose an alpha-helix facing a lipid membrane.

Another version is looking for helices that are hydrophobic on one side, and hydrophilic on the other side.

There are certain “motifs” which appear in many proteins, and you can mathematically look for them, based on previously solved structures, and numerically scoring each side chain. Then you could guess, “This may be a member of such-and-such category”. Or, “This has a domain that is structured similarly to other known proteins”.

You might also be able to say, “some beta-sheets and beta-barrels look like…”mathematically.

I think you can also look for a feature like an ATPase domain that might be predicted from the sequence.

It gets more and more complicated past that.

These predictions are only very general. There might never be a way to confidently machine-predict individual salt-bridges or metal interactions. Things which are physically close together in the native conformation may be very far apart in the primary sequence.

Predicting is vague guess, that is still a long way from solving the structure.

If you have a solved a protein structure already, then pharmaceutical companies already use computer models to run through possible drug candidates, seeing if they might bind to a receptor or enzyme.

Why are people stressed out over the concept of small private living spaces? When “hotel sized rooms” come with common spaces, that can be an awesome living arrangement.

Updated Nov 24

Many people are calibrated by their childhood circumstances.

Some adults are also calibrated by situations where they didn’t have to personally pay any rent (e.g. non-employed housewives).

They are stressed because they are whiners with a sense of entitlement.

Some of these people grew up in middle class situations, in detached houses with yards, etc. They think that, the minimum that they personally have ever had, is the minimum survival level.

And it isn’t just “millennials” or any of that, “kids these days” labeling.

I know that I harp on this, but it is yet another point where females are trained to feel victimised by anything and everything. It is an issue of training females to expect material circumstances higher than one’s own ability to pay. Plus, of course, the incessant competition of desperately needing other females to be at the bottom-of-the-barrel, economically and socially.

Some induhviduals grow up in one detached house, on a quiet suburban street, and then decided that that is the definition of housing. Separate bedrooms, lounge, kitchen, bathroom, etc. Until adulthood strikes.

Some induhviduals are leeching housewives, with breadwinning husband/slave paying for that house. Until the divorce.

They feel horrifically victimised at only being able to afford a one-bedroom flat, and even expect their neighbours (in identical or even smaller flats) to feel sorry for them.

I have even encountered women who acted offended and victimised by my housing floorplan. Starting with a fear that, some new acquaintance might be able to afford a larger/nicer apartment than themselves, or live in a nicer suburb.

There are actually induhviduals who will almost immediately demand information, about either your general area, or even your exact rent payment, and then tell you, “It’s a one-bedroom!” Because they thought that was the bottom-of-the-barrel minimum, and need you to be down there.

I have encountered induhviduals who claimed that, a one-room-plus-bathroom studio apartment was equivalent to a cardboard box on the street. Or that, it is somehow impossible to sleep and cook in the same room. Including, “That’s not even surviving!”

Some will demand sympathy from neighbours in identical flats, acting like special induhviduals who are entitled to better housing than low-class dirtbags like you.

Personally, I have spent most of my adult life in modest housing. This includes years in university halls, and years in one-room-plus-bathroom situations, and one-room-with-toilets/showers-down-the-hall situations.

I lived a few years in the latter situation, in a rundown 8×8 foot room, with a sink in the corner. It was cool, because it enabled me to live in a high-cost city. I would do so again, without hesitation.

I have seen articles decrying listings of housing that included under-stairs closets, and also plastic capsules stacked into a regular flat. But they actually looked OK, for the rent and central locations.

Yes, I would pay $180/week to live in a stacked plastic capsule in central Auckland, or in a closet in London, or in a tiny hovel in San Francisco.

Generally, I just want floor-to-ceiling walls and a locked door when I am sleeping. And a decent barrier when showering or using a toilet.

When did William (aka the man in black) become a host in Westworld?

Updated Nov 2

Thanks for the A2A.

Generally, the assumption could be that, William is human in (almost) every scene before the S2 finale post-credits scene.

However, there may have been moments that appeared to be in the “present” timeline, but which were actually rewinds or fast-forwards. The arm-cutting incident was presented twice (before and after Dolores arrives), and might have been two different repetitions.

Related to this is the, “The Stain” speech, talking to his sleeping wife in The Vanishing Point. He is looking down and feeling his right arm, as if he thinks there is something inside.

Before he kills Emily, he says, “It was built in from the start”. Perhaps guests have some kind of device implanted into their bodies, to make the recordings of their actions, and gradually upload their consciousness algorithms to the System. This device may also have been what William used to communicate with the control room, requesting the exploding cigars during the jailbreak.

Next season, there will be a symbolic situation, as William’s shattered right hand is replaced with a robotic version.

Have you noticed that, we know the surnames of Logan and James Delos, Robert Ford, and Arnold Weber, but we have never heard William’s surname? Although this doesn’t necessarily mean anything, since some hosts have surnames, and others don’t.

We know almost nothing about William before his first visit to the park, except that he is from a poor background, probably excelled academically, and married into wealth.

So far (before the post-credits scene), human-to-host-conversions have never worked, and we have only seen it attempted with James Delos. The electronic copy of his consciousness cannot handle being loaded into a host body.

Bernard started as an attempt to resurrect Arnold, but only worked by making him into a different person, only partly based on Arnold. Although, in the S2 finale, Dolores introduces him to William as if he were actually Arnold.

William’s original plan included having his own consciousness uploaded to the System, to be electronically tested, then loaded into a physical host body, and he had aspirations of immortality, like James had. However, William has changed his mind, and is attempting to prevent this. Dolores talks about him wanting to fully destroy himself. He knows that, the System has already decided that humans are simple algorithms that will always have the same bad outcomes, without real choice. This is why, in the post-credits scene, he has the disappointed tone with, “I’m already in the thing, aren’t I?” Then, he says that, he was trying to prove that he really did have a choice, and gets a facial expression with an ironic smile, like he realises he was wrong.

There are other lines, like, “How many times have you tested me?” and also, “Again, and again, and again…” So he knows that he is the most recent in a long series of host-William attempts, which have either failed the fidelity interview, or which have played out repetitions of the same actions, particularly killing Emily.

Previous to this, he may have been tested electronically in the System, but now host-Emily states that, the System is long gone, and this isn’t a simulation (i.e. he is now in a physical host body).

In this scene, it is decades after the “present” timeline, after a war between hosts and humans. The human-William would probably be already dead of old age, at least. Maybe they are punishing all the former guests whose consciousness they possess, by forcing them to relive painful events, like the way that the hosts were looped into painful events. But maybe they are looking for some kind of information that they need.

Perhaps the hosts have conquered humanity, but are now locked into new repetitions and feel like they still don’t have choices(?) Perhaps they are looking to study William, and his ideas of making choices, since that was part of his motivation, going back to the S1 “No choice you ever made was your own. You have always been a prisoner” speech to Lawrence(?)

ETA: It just occurred to me that, in the post-credits scene, perhaps host-Emily also wants a replay, in which host-William makes different choices. Dolores mentioned “The gift of choice” between herself, Arnold, and Bernard. Perhaps this is what will be offered to host-William? Either because the hosts need to have that different replay conducted by him, or perhaps just out of compassion towards her father?

I’ve seen some speculation/claims that, in the S2 finale, there is some back-and-forth timeline switching between human-Hale and Halores. Perhaps this is also shown with William.

Also, there was a very brief glimpse of a rather pissed-off looking William – probably a host-William – sitting in a room at The Mesa, during the general commotion of the uprising.

My guess is that there were host-William attempts being conducted during the “present” timeline, while human-William is still alive.

An interesting point is the S2 “Do you believe in God?” scene with William and Lawrence. Then, William said that, he felt that, he had already been judged. As if, by that point, the System had already told him that he was a hopelessly evil person, doomed to repeat his bad behaviour. And that, he was going to aggressively appeal that verdict.

We know that he is already feeling guilty for Juliet’s death, and her reaction to seeing the recordings of his actions in the park. And is also contemplating his evil attack on Maeve and her daughter. But perhaps this is some kind of host-William attempting to repeat things, and show that, he can choose a different path(?)

If your girlfriend hits you, should she be given a second chance?

Answered Oct 26

No, absolutely not.

It doesn’t matter if the perpetrator is a guy or a girl, or if you are a guy or a girl, or any combination.

A second chance is seen by you as, a chance for them to pull their head of out their rectum, and change their behaviour and attitudes.

A second chance as seen by them as, an invitation to do the same bad behaviour again. And again, and again, with infinite chances.

They hit you once, they will hit again.

If you stay, they will learn that there aren’t any kind of negative consequences to their bad behaviour.

They are doing physical bad behaviour, and need a physical solution. I don’t mean physically hitting back. I mean physically removing yourself from hitting range, and physically terminating access to you. Don’t even talk with them on the phone.

Actually, they won’t really learn, anyway. Because they will be moving on to the next target, and will hit that person, too.