A friend of mine is one of the oldest "pan-nationalists," a philosophy that amounts to the paradoxical-sounding idea that everyone comes together separately by isolating each ethnic and religious group in its own territory.

It seems to me that there is a broader principle here which goes to the heart of what I dislike about organized religion, despite being a fairly religious person myself. That is, if you have good/evil you also have victim/oppressor.

That creates not only a "get out of jail free" card for the victim, but a license to steal from the "oppressor." We are seeing this pop up again with the "Cornell 7," which seems to involve some gross fraternity group sex by people with Star Wars names, and a "victim" who changed her testimony from saying the sex was consensual to alleging that it was assault.

Let us first approach the case in a legal analysis: she sank any chance of prosecution because of her first statement. Whether it was true+complete or not, it made the likelihood of successful prosecution vanishingly small. This was a strategic error on her part if her second statement is correct, and opportunistic larceny using the courts if her first statement was correct (true+complete).

But more broadly, we have to consider this case in an economic and psychological context. If you give people a magic "get everything free" button, they use it. This also applies to expanding the welfare state, "racism" and fake lynching reports, doing things in the name of national security, banning things for the children, only voting for programs that benefit the poor, u.s.w.

When you have a diverse society, whether that is ethnic/class/racial/religious, each group sees itself as a victim of some other which is then styled as an oppressor, and demands a get out of jail free and license to steal privilege, a type of property against which it can borrow by claiming rape, national security, "racism," etc.

Pan-nationalism means we each get our own societies, and can celebrate each other by not being united. We do not even have to like each other, or consider each other at all. But when we each do our own thing, no one gets judged and no one gets exploited by rage/pity bait.

Consider this innocent activity:

The first ever Pan-African Fabric Fashion Showcase was held on September 26, 2026 at the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art in Washington DC.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DeLs851eTUvY

Pan-African means all African groups, and this expo shows off fabric design and nothing more, but that builds culture, and in turn, builds self-esteem in Africans. That makes them less likely to want to associate with non-Africans.

You can see another example here where someone builds up culture with positive feedback loops:

To me, black women *own* beauty. Every time a non-black woman makes my head swivel, itâ(TM)s because she has some feature that is proximal to black womenâ(TM)s beauty: thicker hips or lips, curlier hair, darker skin, etc.

On the other side of the coin, some are despairing at the inevitable injustice of diverse societies:

High IQ black men should conclude from social media along with history, why itâ(TM)s impossible for negroes to compete with Eurasians.

By "Eurasians," he means (as he clarifies later) people from the areas north of Africa, including Muslims, Europeans, and Asians. One of the people to post later in the thread makes an important distinction based on the Bell Curve within an ethnic group:

I donâ(TM)t necessarily believe that it automatically means theyâ(TM)ll be enthralled by non-Blacks however.

The top 2% of Black people could do it.

In other words, every group needs its own space... and a social hierarchy to connect its best thinkers with power. This begins by getting rid of the good/evil idea of worldwide brotherhood and pacifism, and replacing it with ethnic self-interest:

Race relations would be best when we are separated from each other but I donâ(TM)t have shitlib view of we all will respect and like each otherâ(TM)s cultures. Already I have intrarace blood feud with Bantus but only when we all separate can my vision of Bantu bombardment commence.

As the guy who ran the original Pan-Nationalism Movement website, I see great possibilities for the future in some parts of these comments. Cultures -- which are, since we are Darwinist, genetic -- need to celebrate the best of their people and achievements. They also need everyday activities like making textiles.

In a broader sense, however, we need to get rid of the good/evil victim/oppressor talisman/scapegoat duality. Like metaphysical dualism, moral dualism leads us away from reality and turns us into horrors in the name of "good."

The same applies to the "Cornell 7" case. Most likely, her first statement was mostly correct and her second statement is partially correct. Now a legal system can deliver only horrors: it either overpunishes the (albeit disgusting) fratbros, or it totally denies the episode of awfulness that the female complainant experienced.

My suggestion to the fratbros is to come up with a big wad of money and send it to her in exchange for her dropping the suit, issuing a statement that the parties will never agree on what happened, but you want to use free market principles to make everything better.

Who could object?

This Saturday, blast Slayer at everyone you know.

The National Day of Slayer is celebrated every June 6, everywhere.

Speaking of UFOs and why the USG is suppressing reports...

We tend to assume that everyone else is as reasonable as we are.

Quit doing that shit.

We have a century of UFO reports, no clear photos we can authenticate, and no artifacts.

We do however know that Roswell was designed to protect the TR-1 and similar projects.

If alien civilizations exist, they either (1) have self-destructed like ours is currently doing or (2) have made it past that hump and do not want to contact us and receive our disease.

The stuff submitted to government is exactly like the stuff people call into police tiplines, 99%+ not only wrong but maliciously deceptive.

Powerless, aimless, fatalistic, self-pitying, opportunistic and individualistic people like to deceive others in order to feel important.

It is a psychological disease shared by most of humanity with the highest percentages among the poor, third world, and women.

The Metallica Problem occurs when an information-product like music, books, or cinema adapts to what its audience wants, which is by definition less focused than what the original creators envisioned, and so you end up with the same old slop that made shows like "C.H.I.P.S." and "Happy Days" so bonebrained moronic back in the day.

Every product over time comes to reflect its audience, but what the audience wants is a projection of themselves as they are, not what they need, which is something different to challenge them and wake them up a bit.

Thus Metallica goes from groundbreaking speed metal to 1970s country-tinged AOR over time, and no one notices because the original fanbase is tiny compared to the new fans acquired as a result of broader exposure.

The Pantera Problem occurs when other firms or bands, seeing the success of one entity, are afraid not to emulate it, so that over time, all of the entrants in that market or genre resemble each other including corner-cutting.

Both The Metallica Problem and The Pantera Problem end up at the same place: entropy reducing uniqueness and replacing it with a lowest common denominator average projected by the Crowd.

I thought this post on the groupthink nature of social media was relevant:

The recommendation algorithm of mainstream social media platforms is prime for creating echo chambers. Like animals? It will recommend more to you. Dislike a certain video game? The platform will recommend you similar things to dislike. Eventually all you will see is stuff you want to see, because that best drives engagement. Who cares if what you see eventually morphs into some specialised kind of slop if you keep scrolling. This is where the concept of âoedoomscrollingâ comes from. Just keep scrolling and scrolling and maybe eventually you find something interesting, or you keep the amusement above extreme boredom.

I am one of those âoesee all the sides of the storyâ kinds of people. I know those people are annoying, but I like seeing all sides of the story. It almost seems like the modern media landscape exists directly opposed to that motion. The news sources themselves will talk about whatever is most sensational since it will get them clicks and by extension ad revenue. The social media âoeinfluencersâ will talk about whatever is the most enraging because it gets them attention and by extension ad revenue. Attention is money (more on that coming eventually).

It reminds me of something many of us in the free speech community mentioned back in the 1980s, which was that in a relative universe, unless we hear about other viewpoints, we might not know they exist, and that means our own thought could be unbounded from lack of things to compare it to.

Time to haul out the link on viewpoint discrimination again:

Viewpoint discrimination is a form of content discrimination particularly disfavored by the courts. When the government engages in content discrimination, it is restricting speech on a given subject matter. When it engages in viewpoint discrimination, it is singling out a particular opinion or perspective on that subject matter for treatment unlike that given to other viewpoints.

To me, most speech is offensive...ly nonsensical, poorly analyzed, unrealistic, impractical, emotional, social, or otherwise delusional. But I want to hear from people nonetheless. In part, I think people need to be able to express themselves and talk it out to know what they think, and to grow intellectually, but also, you never know what someone will come up with and at least initially I want to find out what they might have discovered.

A number of people had asked, so I created an offensive music thread on the Fediverse. Expect pro-Islam, pro-Satan, pro-Purge, Luciferian, and generally intolerant or ornery lyrics and sounds. I am hoping I can get at least one Western government to ban this thread!

I'm putting this here mainly so I do not lose it. I have bookmarked a billion things and only looked up a million later. But this is a great riff on open source documentation:

In the realm of Open Source software development the adage "good enough" is often interpreted as this software is good enough for general use.

It should read "good enough for me", speaking only from the software author's perspective. ...Why are people supplying instructions that are way too complex for the new user? I know the answer to that question. It's rhetorical in nature.

"Because it's good enough for me"

It seems to me that all software needs to be focused on the user and their needs, without requiring much technical involvement. This is the reason for the success of Apple and Microsoft at least, and what has doomed FreeBSD to obscurity.

Good documentation and scripting of complex technical tasks can go a long way. Users use computers for purposes other than computer-focused stuff. Hobbyists mostly do computer-focused stuff. There needs to be a bridge there, at least in my own thinking.

I was lucky to be able to participate in a chat about return to the land, the death of diversity, the failure of bureaucratic-corporate society, and the need to return to nature and culture on "Knight of the Black Sun" podcast.

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DUOyY11KutP4

I have no idea how to embed this stuff, but for all four of you who like visit this profile, you might enjoy this chat about heavy metal, punk, the collapse of Western civilization, and where we go in the post-political era.

We are seeing it now. The post-1990s web, with its emphasis on containers and safe code, is perishing because people want to get things done the right way without many layers of unnecessary code. If a 400k website does the job, who needs the rest?

Many ordinary businesspeople are now seeing IT as a liability not a form of leverage. It grew out of control and is now a major expense for many businesses, without returning proportionate value. Sure, the people who got CS/IT degrees have lots of things to talk about, but how many relate directly to doing business?

Keep it simple. Make it reliable. Simplify and remove the burdens of constant updates and many layers of frameworks. The new wisdom is that websites and in-office IT are not a wild frontier, but a type of utility, and so you want to minimize costs by relying on fewer more capable people instead of many drones following rules.

Luckily, the exodus from California has provided the rest of the world with enough competent IT workers (and many incompetents) to last a lifetime.

So it seems Silicon Valley is imploding and hopes that AI will be its next bailout, but it seems that yesterday faith in AI hit a new low. What next? All of our innovations happened decades ago and we are building on them, but none of the promised efficiency gains have come about. Silicon Valley now looks more like a parasitic utility.

On the other hand, people are realizing something about social media and its algos: they are reflecting what interests people, which tends to be more controversial and conflict-oriented than what we see in the media, academia, religion, and government. We are hitting that dystopian point that William Gibson and Queensryche wrote about.

All told, looks like big changes on the horizon. I'm hoping for monarchism and space exploration.

Mind-Blowing Discovery: Peacocks Have Lasers In Their Tails

Applying a special dye to multiple areas on a peacock's tail, researchers from Florida Polytechnic University and Youngstown State University in the US went on the hunt for structures that may emit a very different signature glow.

In a mind-blowing first for the animal kingdom, they discovered the eyespots on the fowl's fabulous feathers have unique properties that align light waves by bouncing them back and forth, effectively turning them into yellow-green lasers.

There's some crazy science news going on out there, but this one sort of wins me over. Nature decided to go all-out with peacocks, hummingbirds, hawks, and other exceptional birds, as if apologizing for the dinosaur years.

Houston 2600

When: first Friday of every month, 7-9pm (next: August 1)
Where: Taco Cabana, 3905 Kirby

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hou2600.org%2F

Most recent episode of "Metal Cosmos"
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.deathmetal.org%2Fradio%2Fmetal_cosmos_-_0003.mp3

Also a discussion of how Swedish language influenced their death metal
https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DMOpDeMVKexw

The first is a metal radio show smuggled into podcast format, the other a more traditional podcast of discussion at a leisurely pace.

Also look toward our early radio

https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kcuf.com%2F

A story of hackers and metal:

"In the 80s, BBSes were the most important thing to the hacker world. They were where people met, talked, exchanged information," said legendary hacker Erik Bloodaxe, whose exploits with the hacker group Legion of Doom stirred many imaginations back in the day. "They were the central meeting places where you could find those people who actually cared about the same things you cared about."

Bloodaxe would know. In addition to being "the best hacker I ever met," according to Loyd Blankenship, the technologist and hacker who wrote "The Hacker's Manifesto" that was later quoted in the cyberpunk-slash-teen drama Hackers, Bloodaxe edited one of the first hacker publications, Phrack. Phrack -- named for a combination of the terms "phreak" and "hack" referring to phone and computer exploitation, respectively -- and is an expert at finding information. Especially hidden information, or data that is marginalized because it does not comport to society's view of itself.

I should call these posts "the gateway to Hell" because I end up flirting with the most dangerous issues of our time. The conflict is where the growth is, I guess. I can feel the flames.

Tech is... boring. Sometime around Y2K the takeover by the same people who would have been eyeless MBAs in the 1980s began, and now Google and social media preside over a world that is basically as limited as 1980s four-channel television.

Tech is broke because it has not invented anything new since that time, only refinements of the same, and broken because it has no plan for innovation. Tech is now a jobs program for mediocrities instead of the Wild West that attracted me back in the day.

Science is under threat, but not from where you expect. The federal funding thing will blow over because private business will step up, especially since R&D is deductible. If you pay out the amount of your expected taxes in R&D each year, you will pay zero taxes. That's a non-issue.

No, science is dying from what killed academia, careerism. You must publish to get noticed, and you need some attention-getting radical topic. So you write about how the treatment of bugs in Gabriel Garcia Marquez' works is a metaphor for sexism and make a broad conclusion about transgenderism being the ultimate fulfillment of feminism in a Marxist quantum mechanics view. It's buzzword gibberish but you get that full professorship. Now imagine millions of people doing the same, and you have a gibberish engine. The same is now true of science.

There's good happening in tech and science, but I tend to post science news because it is less stale than tech at this point, and I go for all that solid nerd shit. I like creative and realistic innovation like the MIT AIDS vax:

Researchers from MIT and Scripps have unveiled a promising new HIV vaccine approach that generates a powerful immune response with just one dose. By combining two immune-boosting adjuvants alum and SMNP the vaccine lingers in lymph nodes for nearly a month, encouraging the body to produce a vast array of antibodies. This one-shot strategy could revolutionize how we fight not just HIV, but many infectious diseases. It mimics the natural infection process and opens the door to broadly neutralizing antibody responses, a holy grail in vaccine design. And best of all, it's built on components already known to medicine.

Uses known components, combines them advantageously, and works by training the immune system in the natural way... this is well-done science. At this point, that interests me more than the latest frameworks, AIs, or Twitter-enabled fridges.