I asked MS Co-Pilot for the definition of “stochastic,” and adapted it. You still misused it.
Honest question, Richard. As a former alt-right stalwart, do you think that Tyler Robinson went through a groyper period & then leapfrogged into the welcoming arms of the trans-left?
I think honestly you’re not humble enough to know your intellectual limitations and are bad at compensating for them, since you refuse to have AI explain why you’re wrong, so there’s no point in engaging further.
I just responded to your note. I'll do so again here.
“Challenge accepted. Chat, what is the meaning of the word ‘stochastic’ and does Hanania misuse it?”
Answer: Stochastic means random but with a probability structure. Hanania calls assassinations stochastic to dismiss them as meaningless, then spends the essay drawing political conclusions from them. Contradiction noted."
Have fun fucking off. But I'm still interested in whether you can answer my question: did Robinson go through a groyper period?
Regarding my "intellectual limitations" - I have to laugh. Any good faith objective observer can see I took you apart. I critiqued your misuse of the word "stochastic." I eviscerated your illogical, poorly-written post. I responsed to you courteously on MY Substack, and you have the unmitigated chutzpah to come to my Substack and insult my intelligence? You are fit company for Candace Owens.
I'm not going to block you but get lost and stay lost. Further responses will be deleted.
He’s at his best when his work is well researched, long form, or when he’s speaking in person/on video. He’s at his worst when he’s off the cuff or tweeting. It feels like two different people! It’s when he’s most contrarian, attention seeking, and snarky. When you read vs watch him talk it’s genuinely difficult to imagine some of the shit he says online coming out of his mouth on stream; on steam he’s affable, polite, and argues in good faith. He’s none of these things in twitter/substack notes and I think he just gets off on being this way. He thinks people on the right hate him because he’s unafraid to speak truth (and there are lots of people like that to be fair) but a large amount of it is because he just acts like an asshole to everyone he disagrees with.
Math nerd backing you up on stochastic. It would typically describe the forces input into a system, not the resulting effect (in this case, the assassination itself). Your gut was correct. One could view the assassinations as stochastic eg when analyzing their impact on our political culture.
Intellectual humility doesn’t appear to be one of Hanania’s assets. His analytical skills have devolved considerably in recent months. Sad because he used to have an interesting voice.
Most people who have a lot going on for them aren't going to blow up their lives. So of course assassins are mostly nutters.
But these nutters often have a sense that what they are doing will gain them notoriety, fame, and justification. They believe this because people tell them so.
The proof of the moral rot of Trump and his movement is not dependent on any particular assassination, so I did not do what you said.
Irrelevant.
You distorted & misused the word “stochastic.”
https://technium.substack.com/p/richard-hanania-is-a-bully
Go ask ChatGPT if I did! It’s good for moments like this when you’re confused.
Deflection.
I asked MS Co-Pilot for the definition of “stochastic,” and adapted it. You still misused it.
Honest question, Richard. As a former alt-right stalwart, do you think that Tyler Robinson went through a groyper period & then leapfrogged into the welcoming arms of the trans-left?
I think honestly you’re not humble enough to know your intellectual limitations and are bad at compensating for them, since you refuse to have AI explain why you’re wrong, so there’s no point in engaging further.
I just responded to your note. I'll do so again here.
“Challenge accepted. Chat, what is the meaning of the word ‘stochastic’ and does Hanania misuse it?”
Answer: Stochastic means random but with a probability structure. Hanania calls assassinations stochastic to dismiss them as meaningless, then spends the essay drawing political conclusions from them. Contradiction noted."
Have fun fucking off. But I'm still interested in whether you can answer my question: did Robinson go through a groyper period?
Regarding my "intellectual limitations" - I have to laugh. Any good faith objective observer can see I took you apart. I critiqued your misuse of the word "stochastic." I eviscerated your illogical, poorly-written post. I responsed to you courteously on MY Substack, and you have the unmitigated chutzpah to come to my Substack and insult my intelligence? You are fit company for Candace Owens.
I'm not going to block you but get lost and stay lost. Further responses will be deleted.
Interesting exchange. Pardon my ignorance but what in the world is a groyper? Take care.
He’s at his best when his work is well researched, long form, or when he’s speaking in person/on video. He’s at his worst when he’s off the cuff or tweeting. It feels like two different people! It’s when he’s most contrarian, attention seeking, and snarky. When you read vs watch him talk it’s genuinely difficult to imagine some of the shit he says online coming out of his mouth on stream; on steam he’s affable, polite, and argues in good faith. He’s none of these things in twitter/substack notes and I think he just gets off on being this way. He thinks people on the right hate him because he’s unafraid to speak truth (and there are lots of people like that to be fair) but a large amount of it is because he just acts like an asshole to everyone he disagrees with.
He's rage baiting to generate subs and engagement.
Kind of weird for someone w/38K subs to engage w/me: 700 or so.
I enjoyed it.
Math nerd backing you up on stochastic. It would typically describe the forces input into a system, not the resulting effect (in this case, the assassination itself). Your gut was correct. One could view the assassinations as stochastic eg when analyzing their impact on our political culture.
Love the subtitle to the 'stack btw
Stochastic means random. I know some math as well, and Richard’s use of the word seems fine.
You can’t say something is random (even if that’s not the meaning of the word, but whatever) and then write a whole post blaming Trump.
The first entry in the dictionary definition of stochastic is “random” (see: merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stochastic)
No.
Hanania calls assassinations “stochastic." By definition, that means no single event can be *directly* caused by political rhetoric *with certainty.*
But he immediately draws political meaning from it — he treats the assassination as if Trump or right-wing rhetoric somehow “explains” or predicts it.
Worthless comment.
Ha! So I was right in the first place -- assassinations *aren't* stochastic.
Thank you!
PS It's interesting how a word can be not merely misused, but twisted - literally.
Intellectual humility doesn’t appear to be one of Hanania’s assets. His analytical skills have devolved considerably in recent months. Sad because he used to have an interesting voice.
Most people who have a lot going on for them aren't going to blow up their lives. So of course assassins are mostly nutters.
But these nutters often have a sense that what they are doing will gain them notoriety, fame, and justification. They believe this because people tell them so.
Telling someone ‘you’re in over your head’ is the rhetorical equivalent of shoving them into a locker.
Probably happened to you and Hanania a lot in high school.
He misused ‘stochastic.’ This isn’t a Usenet newsgroup with endless ‘did you read what I wrote?’ exchanges.
Crawl back under your rock.
You are banned.