Sociopath Community

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Women aren't property and this statement that you made is gross. How you can say they're not slaves and then talk about them as if they'll leave if they aren't shackled shows where your head's at. 

 Ha ha ha. I read this last quote you responded to and it really seems like you're having some type of magical thinking episode or something. lol no one said she's property Nathan. Relax. It's all an illusion.

Yet "you would" blame the women for leaving, unless it is over the man being an unsuccessful handler. 

Would I ? Oh you have me all figured better than anyone including myself now eh ? HA HA, okay man.

Come on man, same situation, different terms used. Rather than saying it directly you say like fifty things adjacent to it while modeling off of heinous people. I know having your sexism highlighted makes you feel weird but you don't have to stoop to character attacks to try to divert away from the larger conversation. 

The points you make are unfashionable and some part of you find them gradually more embarrassing to say, but at least others when they say these things stand by them instead of trying to dodge. Even admitting when you don't understand something would be considerably more constructive than this. 

Let's not stray. I wrote and I quote myself: "Right winged women aren't slaves. Though it would delight you for her to leave him, she's free to do so for her own reasons regardless if they align with your ideology or not." 

I don't see an issue with that. 

Sure I can put her in a headlock, chain her down in the basement, be the asshole and invade her social interactions with others. But don't worry man, I'm not like that lol. 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

 Ha ha ha. I read this last quote you responded to and it really seems like you're having some type of magical thinking episode or something. lol no one said she's property Nathan. Relax. It's all an illusion.

Yet "you would" blame the women for leaving, unless it is over the man being an unsuccessful handler. 

Would I ? Oh you have me all figured better than anyone including myself now eh ? HA HA, okay man.

There's more than enough rhetoric that you've typed out in topics sprawling across this website, and past trials quoting them at you have just resulted in you acting unstably. 

I'm going to try to handle this responsibly and step back from here; once you get like this it becomes entirely unproductive. 

Come on man, same situation, different terms used. Rather than saying it directly you say like fifty things adjacent to it while modeling off of heinous people. I know having your sexism highlighted makes you feel weird but you don't have to stoop to character attacks to try to divert away from the larger conversation. 

The points you make are unfashionable and some part of you find them gradually more embarrassing to say, but at least others when they say these things stand by them instead of trying to dodge. Even admitting when you don't understand something would be considerably more constructive than this. 

Let's not stray. I wrote and I quote myself: "Right winged women aren't slaves. Though it would delight you for her to leave him, she's free to do so for her own reasons regardless if they align with your ideology or not." 

I don't see an issue with that. 

Sure I can put her in a headlock, chain her down in the basement, be the asshole and invade her social interactions with others. But don't worry man, I'm not like that lol. 

Dude you've had like a million rants about this stuff, why are you playing dumb? 

If you're done with Spatial then I'd be curious if you have thoughts on this:

What do you think of Thomas Sowell's point that the way the left is trying to fix the race problems actually widens the gap between the races in the longer term because we're not allowing black people to fairly compete with white people?

Spatial Mind said: 

In 2017 the PC gaming community was pissed off cause the crypto miners were buying up all of the GPU's, which caused the prices of the most sought after units to skyrocket.

To the haters we said, "It's a free and open market". Plus AMD and Nvidia were loving us. They even wrote drivers to optimize our operations.

The distributors couldn't stop us but they did limit GPU purchases to 2 per day with no reservations. I've had days where I managed to snipe 4 GPU's.

The complainers complained and did nothing while I collected 27 GPU's and other people collected more or less. But instead of complaining, they could've become vultures we did and monitored the supply before swooping into with the stampede. Buying one or 2 at a time was simple. They were available almost every other day.

Of course now things have simmered down. The moral of the story. I think its a good thing how we can buy sell and trade anything as much as we like.

I think that's one part. But there are other benefits too. By allowing a free market, we're monetarily funding the development of better GPUs as well. So in a sense we end up killing things that are not useful to society and promote things that are useful to the society. And we also ensure that structures that promote performance last in the society, and structures that discourage performance don't last in the society. It's really an ultra efficient ultra scalable system.

My question is, why wouldn't an open and free market NOT be a good thing ?

An open and free market does practically lead to problems, like monopolies, pollution of oceans, or the billionaire class gaining too much power such that they become oligarchs. Those problems are currently patchworked through regulations, taxes, etc. However, the free market always finds a way. So we patchwork more. And more. And more. That ultra efficient system will always find a way around the patchwork. Hence regulation ad infinitum ad absurdum.

It's hard to think of a better solution however because the free market outperforms all other systems economically in the long term. So if we switched to a different system, all those other free market societies would take advantage of us and fuck us over, because they would have more powerful economies and we would have nothing to leverage over them. It's a game theory problem really.

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Yet "you would" blame the women for leaving, unless it is over the man being an unsuccessful handler. 

Would I ? Oh you have me all figured better than anyone including myself now eh ? HA HA, okay man.

There's more than enough rhetoric that you've typed out in topics sprawling across this website, and past trials quoting them at you have just resulted in you acting unstably. 

So that's your excuse to not to prove yourself ?

I never acted unstable over someone quoting me. I'm quite consistent, and how does one pull that off you wonder ? Simply sticking to the truth. 

I'm going to try to handle this responsibly and step back from here; once you get like this it becomes entirely unproductive.

Says you of course. As if your goal is to repair me while it's all slander without evidence. I do think you'll manage to fool the foolish though. And of course I have no choice but to think they're foolish for going on your word. Literally no choice. 

Come on man, same situation, different terms used. Rather than saying it directly you say like fifty things adjacent to it while modeling off of heinous people. I know having your sexism highlighted makes you feel weird but you don't have to stoop to character attacks to try to divert away from the larger conversation. 

The points you make are unfashionable and some part of you find them gradually more embarrassing to say, but at least others when they say these things stand by them instead of trying to dodge. Even admitting when you don't understand something would be considerably more constructive than this. 

Let's not stray. I wrote and I quote myself: "Right winged women aren't slaves. Though it would delight you for her to leave him, she's free to do so for her own reasons regardless if they align with your ideology or not." 

I don't see an issue with that. 

Sure I can put her in a headlock, chain her down in the basement, be the asshole and invade her social interactions with others. But don't worry man, I'm not like that lol. 

Dude you've had like a million rants about this stuff, why are you playing dumb? 

 When you say "This stuff" it's actually stuff you're being vague about. I believe your claim is I'm some type of oppressor of women, but if there is anything people know about me and women is....

1) I don't chase.....

2) MGTOW resonates with me....  

For the 3rd time I said.....

 "Right winged women aren't slaves. Though it would delight you for her to leave him, she's free to do so for her own reasons regardless if they align with your ideology or not." 

And that triggered you while what I wrote is in HIGH favor of the dickless. ( Real woman )

Here's the thing Nathan. One of us believes in God. That our lives are being monitored. For one who believes we're to be held accountable for everything we've ever said and done, it would be foolish to lie. 

I know for a fact someone who doesn't believe in God, has no problem being guilty. 

One thing for certain, this is an argument of Truth Vs. Lies....

"There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him:

- haughty eyes,

- a lying tongue

- hands that shed innocent blood,

- a heart that devises wicked plans,

- feet that make haste to run to evil,

- a false witness who breathes out lies

- one who sows discord among brethren.

^I know you're all of those things Nathan, and like I said before, you're a weasel and your goal is for women to cast off from men and for women take you with them, and you do it with deception, and maybe you can stick your dick in one of them, like you used to.

Jada said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

In 2017 the PC gaming community was pissed off cause the crypto miners were buying up all of the GPU's, which caused the prices of the most sought after units to skyrocket.

To the haters we said, "It's a free and open market". Plus AMD and Nvidia were loving us. They even wrote drivers to optimize our operations.

The distributors couldn't stop us but they did limit GPU purchases to 2 per day with no reservations. I've had days where I managed to snipe 4 GPU's.

The complainers complained and did nothing while I collected 27 GPU's and other people collected more or less. But instead of complaining, they could've become vultures we did and monitored the supply before swooping into with the stampede. Buying one or 2 at a time was simple. They were available almost every other day.

Of course now things have simmered down. The moral of the story. I think its a good thing how we can buy sell and trade anything as much as we like.

I think that's one part. But by doing this, we're monetarily funding the development of better GPUs as well. So in a sense we end up killing things that are not useful to society and promote things that are useful to the society. And we also ensure that structures that promote performance last in the society, and structures that discourage performance don't last in the society. It's really an ultra efficient ultra scalable system.

Absolutely. I seriously thought I was participating in something important for the world, a financial revolution but tech wise yeah. Right now Nvidia is the biggest company in the world worth 3.4 trillion as I'm writing this ( Not comparing it to Blackrock ). I personally don't mine anymore cause it's not nice having it run endlessly from the extreme heat, however, I and mayne hundreds of thousands or maybe millions of people out there have freakin mining rigs which are basically super computers, we can allocate them toward machine learning and do some hard Ai shit at home. A nation that leads in Ai could potentially rule the world, and a nation without miners are behind in the rat race. 

My question is, why wouldn't an open and free market NOT be a good thing ?

An open and free market doss practically lead to problems, like monopolies, pollution of oceans, or the billionaire class gaining too much power such that they become oligarchs. Those problems are currently patchworked through regulations, taxes, etc.

You know the DNC is the party of oligarchs. It's true. Look at Google, Meta, Microsoft, all of silicon valley. Berkshire Hathaway. The music industry, Hollywood, the mainstream media these are a lot of companies and brands. Soros. This upcoming next 4 years is going to be veeeeery interesting because these people, did everything they can to stop, him. Yes. him. 

I don't know what's in a monopoly these days. It's not video games or apps. No one really cares to make another operating system, and if they do they'll modify Linux like Google did with Android and then it has to be free. Everyone is selling everything like never before in this digital age. 

Pollution can be solved if we used more hemp products, but they don't do it cause hemp is so reusable. Like they don't want us carrying jugs and other ways of packaging to the grocery store, but we should. Basically they want us to purchase disposable goods, like paper towels and such, so we buy more.   

It's hard to think of a better solution however because the free market outperforms all other systems economically in the long term. So if we switched to a different system, all those other free market societies would take advantage of us and fuck us over, because they would have more powerful economies and we would have nothing to leverage over them. It's a game theory problem really.

 Technology is progress. Too much might not be good, but yes, we need to have world trade and the ability to distribute the goods to one another. It's not just quality of life, but something that keeps things running smoother. If all of this stopped we'd suffer greatly then perish. The free and open market makes it all happen, as nothing can be done for free. 

I think it's cool how we managed to exchange currencies on a global scale. 

It might sound crazy, but I think a 1 world government would solve some of our issues. War for example. If Canada became the 51st state then the CAD would combine with the USD and well, cost of living would take a nosedive and we'd prosper quite well. If say the entire world came together and combined currencies, that would have an interesting effect on the affordability of goods on a global scale. 

Spatial Mind said: 

Jada said: 

I think that's one part. But by doing this, we're monetarily funding the development of better GPUs as well. So in a sense we end up killing things that are not useful to society and promote things that are useful to the society. And we also ensure that structures that promote performance last in the society, and structures that discourage performance don't last in the society. It's really an ultra efficient ultra scalable system.

Absolutely. I seriously thought I was participating in something important for the world, a financial revolution but tech wise yeah. Right now Nvidia is the biggest company in the world worth 3.4 trillion as I'm writing this ( Not comparing it to Blackrock ). I personally don't mine anymore cause it's not nice having it run endlessly from the extreme heat, however, I and mayne hundreds of thousands or maybe millions of people out there have freakin mining rigs which are basically super computers, we can allocate them toward machine learning and do some hard Ai shit at home. A nation that leads in Ai could potentially rule the world, and a nation without miners are behind in the rat race.

I think it's true. The "magical" thing about the free market is that it requires no upkeeping. We don't need to provide a huge infrastructure that forces everyone to innovate, to produce new products, to work hard. It's really a feedback loop. So yes, the AI thing is a nice example.

For those who study MCMC, it's easy to understand how a stochastic process with no limitations will always outperform structured system, like those where we set up committees to do tasks for the society. An MCMC will always outperform structured algorithms  when the number of variables is more than 4. How many different variables are there in a society? Practically endless. Structured societies are a bad model. The free market optimises away all inefficiencies.

My question is, why wouldn't an open and free market NOT be a good thing ?

An open and free market doss practically lead to problems, like monopolies, pollution of oceans, or the billionaire class gaining too much power such that they become oligarchs. Those problems are currently patchworked through regulations, taxes, etc.

You know the DNC is the party of oligarchs. It's true. Look at Google, Meta, Microsoft, all of silicon valley. Berkshire Hathaway. The music industry, Hollywood, the mainstream media these are a lot of companies and brands. Soros. This upcoming next 4 years is going to be veeeeery interesting because these people, did everything they can to stop, him. Yes. him. 

In the US this is something I worry about. I do wonder though when I look at Elon Musk as well, are we just entertaining a battle for power between different oligarch groups? The influence of the billionaire class has never been so transparent.

I don't know what's in a monopoly these days. It's not video games or apps. No one really cares to make another operating system, and if they do they'll modify Linux like Google did with Android and then it has to be free. Everyone is selling everything like never before in this digital age. 

Hm. I think monopolies are not a problem per se. It's the unfair business practices like buying out competitors because they can afford it that is the problem. I guess Google is a monopoly insofar as any company can be.

Pollution can be solved if we used more hemp products, but they don't do it cause hemp is so reusable. Like they don't want us carrying jugs and other ways of packaging to the grocery store, but we should. Basically they want us to purchase disposable goods, like paper towels and such, so we buy more.  

Interesting thought. However, I think the problem is that this requires structure to maintain.

If there was something self propelling like the free market but for the environment, I think we would be solve every environmental problem. Right now, it requires more structure. The answer to patchworking the free market is to introduce more structure, endlessly.

I worry that even if hemp were adopted we would still run into other problems. There will always be economical options that become cheaper when the environment around us is sacrificed.

 Technology is progress. Too much might not be good, but yes, we need to have world trade and the ability to distribute the goods to one another. It's not just quality of life, but something that keeps things running smoother. If all of this stopped we'd suffer greatly then perish. The free and open market makes it all happen, as nothing can be done for free. 

Yes.

One of the freaky things is that I've started to see why in the early 1900s people were advocating for eugenics. However, eugenics too is a structured exercise. What we've seen over billions of years is that setting measurable milestones, ie, survival (as opposed to money) produced the most optimal outcomes. The question now is whether or not evolution can be directed through any mechanism other than survival, and without a structured eugenics program. In China, women marry the richest men. They are hyper accelerating evolution. We are falling behind.

I think it's cool how we managed to exchange currencies on a global scale. 

It might sound crazy, but I think a 1 world government would solve some of our issues. War for example. If Canada became the 51st state then the CAD would combine with the USD and well, cost of living would take a nosedive and we'd prosper quite well. If say the entire world came together and combined currencies, that would have an interesting effect on the affordability of goods on a global scale. 

It might however also drive down competition and ultimately allow us to move away from a free market economy to something else. Maybe I'll finally become a hegemon.

Jada said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Absolutely. I seriously thought I was participating in something important for the world, a financial revolution but tech wise yeah. Right now Nvidia is the biggest company in the world worth 3.4 trillion as I'm writing this ( Not comparing it to Blackrock ). I personally don't mine anymore cause it's not nice having it run endlessly from the extreme heat, however, I and mayne hundreds of thousands or maybe millions of people out there have freakin mining rigs which are basically super computers, we can allocate them toward machine learning and do some hard Ai shit at home. A nation that leads in Ai could potentially rule the world, and a nation without miners are behind in the rat race.

I think it's true. The "magical" thing about the free market is that it requires no upkeeping. We don't need to provide a huge infrastructure that forces everyone to innovate, to produce new products, to work hard. It's really a feedback loop. So yes, the AI thing is a nice example.

For those who study MCMC, it's easy to understand how a stochastic process with no limitations will always outperform structured system, like those where we set up committees to do tasks for the society. An MCMC will always outperform structured algorithms  when the number of variables is more than 4. How many different variables are there in a society? Practically endless. Structured societies are a bad model. The free market optimises away all inefficiencies.

An open and free market doss practically lead to problems, like monopolies, pollution of oceans, or the billionaire class gaining too much power such that they become oligarchs. Those problems are currently patchworked through regulations, taxes, etc.

You know the DNC is the party of oligarchs. It's true. Look at Google, Meta, Microsoft, all of silicon valley. Berkshire Hathaway. The music industry, Hollywood, the mainstream media these are a lot of companies and brands. Soros. This upcoming next 4 years is going to be veeeeery interesting because these people, did everything they can to stop, him. Yes. him. 

In the US this is something I worry about. I do wonder though when I look at Elon Musk as well, are we just entertaining a battle for power between different oligarch groups? The influence of the billionaire class has never been so transparent.

Well find out soon enough. Right now Trump has the whole oligarchy shaken. As for Elon, you may have noticed, he isn't popular with a lot of groups in the mainstream, and though he voted for Biden, he wasn't popular with him either. 

This guy is now worth 421 Billion dollars right now. It was 1 minute after Trump was shot did Elon turn Maga and swung to the right. Trump isn't about hurting big business, but he also wants them all to bring their production operations home. Or at least, let the products being sold in the US be made in the US. Elon who doesn't work for anyone is now one of Trump's employees, D.O.G.E. = Department of Government Efficiency, was created by Elon to basically shrink the government and cut government spending. There will be some type of benefit for his companies I'm sure, but I don't that being a bad thing.  

I don't know what's in a monopoly these days. It's not video games or apps. No one really cares to make another operating system, and if they do they'll modify Linux like Google did with Android and then it has to be free. Everyone is selling everything like never before in this digital age. 

Hm. I think monopolies are not a problem per se. It's the unfair business practices like buying out competitors because they can afford it that is the problem. I guess Google is a monopoly insofar as any company can be.

Companies are bought out if they are on the open market. It's why Elon was able to acquire Twitter. He offered to buy out all shares and own twitter, and legally Twitter could not refuse his offer because they have a fiscal duty to it's investors and must do what's best in terms of profitability. 

Google I reckon is a monopoly, though they are not the only players in town, just the big one. Alphabet is worth 3.3 trillion dollars. It amazes me how Nvidia was able to surpass them given the nature of what Google is. No one can afford to buy out Google. Might be kinda sad if Google was forced to break itself apart, they kinda are unique with the whole mapping out the globe with imagery and other things they do.  

Pollution can be solved if we used more hemp products, but they don't do it cause hemp is so reusable. Like they don't want us carrying jugs and other ways of packaging to the grocery store, but we should. Basically they want us to purchase disposable goods, like paper towels and such, so we buy more.  

Interesting thought. However, I think the problem is that this requires structure to maintain.

If there was something self propelling like the free market but for the environment, I think we would be solve every environmental problem. Right now, it requires more structure. The answer to patchworking the free market is to introduce more structure, endlessly.

I worry that even if hemp were adopted we would still run into other problems. There will always be economical options that become cheaper when the environment around us is sacrificed.

I recall we discussed hemp before in the past. We concluded it wouldn't be able to meet the demand to make fuel for diesel engines. Not only can we make super high quality plastics and durable anything, but it can be used to make biodegradable plastics and other packaging. 

 Technology is progress. Too much might not be good, but yes, we need to have world trade and the ability to distribute the goods to one another. It's not just quality of life, but something that keeps things running smoother. If all of this stopped we'd suffer greatly then perish. The free and open market makes it all happen, as nothing can be done for free. 

Yes.

One of the freaky things is that I've started to see why in the early 1900s people were advocating for eugenics. However, eugenics too is a structured exercise. What we've seen over billions of years is that setting measurable milestones, ie, survival (as opposed to money) produced the most optimal outcomes. The question now is whether or not evolution can be directed through any mechanism other than survival, and without a structured eugenics program. In China, women marry the richest men. They are hyper accelerating evolution. We are falling behind.

In the west, getting married is a really bad idea now, especially if you're rich. The richest men in the world are all divorced. China has a huge generation gap and will slow in growth before depopulating like crazy. The Earth will most likely see an Indian infestation. I think we'll keep doing what we're doing. They talk about some great reset, good luck trying to pull that off. 

I think it's cool how we managed to exchange currencies on a global scale. 

It might sound crazy, but I think a 1 world government would solve some of our issues. War for example. If Canada became the 51st state then the CAD would combine with the USD and well, cost of living would take a nosedive and we'd prosper quite well. If say the entire world came together and combined currencies, that would have an interesting effect on the affordability of goods on a global scale. 

It might however also drive down competition and ultimately allow us to move away from a free market economy to something else. Maybe I'll finally become a hegemon.

 I'm thinking it'll just make pricing even more competitive since there will be no tariffs between any ports of entry. 

Another thing about marketing. The more a tech company does things, the cheaper it is to produce and then they can sell the product for even cheaper. 

When I was in college for digital animation, we started off using 2 kinds of SGI machines. That being the SGI 02, and the SGI Octane. The 02 was valued at $10,000 while the Octane was valued at $30,000.

Some of my colleagues raised a stink about how the PC's were smoking the SGI machines we were using, and how the college started how we'd be using the cutting edge hardware. 

Naturally, the school complied and we got 2 test machines. One of them was the new SGI Fuel. The other was.... Get this.... A build from Compaq. 

One morning I walked in and there was the Dean and some guys in suits in the lab. The dean asked me to open a project on the SGI fuel, so I opened a Harrier I was modeling, while one guy babbled how great the SGI fuel is. He was ready to sell a fleet of them to the school. He leaned over to me with a smirk and asked hows that Compaq over there. I told him, it's lightning fast, and is much faster and smoother than the SGI. The look on his face was as though I ruined his life. 

The point I'm making is. The SGI machines weren't really mass produced for the home, while the PC was, so it was able to be far more advanced for much cheaper. At the time the Compaq build was valued at $6,000 while the SGI fuel was something retarded. More than the 30K Octanes we were replacing.  Long story short, after the March break we returned to our lab running a fleet of brand new PC's running on Windows NT. Like damn, we were using Unix the whole time so the jump to windows was a huge turn on. At the time everyone was running Windows XP at home, but Windows NT ? Oh we'll take it. 

Another thing I just saw. 

So if you know, RTX 4090 is probably the most badass gaming/Ai GPU on the market right now. 

Nvidia just introduced their new 5000 series GPU's and this RTX 5070 will grant it's owner 4090 performance, for less than $600 bucks. This is the new mid range GPU for this year, seriously. From $1,500 to $550.

So again, we're talking marketing. They made enough money, and they've become so advanced, they can do this for even cheaper. There are also things about that 5070 I'm not mentioning, things I don't fully understand, it's doing some Ai shit with frame generation that's alien to me, and it has a new type of display port. A GPU like this will probably be good for 20 years, and I mean changing the thermal pads on the PCB's every 7 years and letting it rip. 

Think I'll upgrade this year. Probably getting the higher end 5090. All the buzz is the 5070 though, cause it's so cheap and won't be obsolete anytime soon either. 

Spatial Mind said: 

Turncoat said: 

Spatial Mind said: 

Would I ? Oh you have me all figured better than anyone including myself now eh ? HA HA, okay man.

There's more than enough rhetoric that you've typed out in topics sprawling across this website, and past trials quoting them at you have just resulted in you acting unstably. 

So that's your excuse to not to prove yourself ?

I never acted unstable over someone quoting me. I'm quite consistent, and how does one pull that off you wonder ? Simply sticking to the truth. 

I'm going to try to handle this responsibly and step back from here; once you get like this it becomes entirely unproductive.

Says you of course. As if your goal is to repair me while it's all slander without evidence. I do think you'll manage to fool the foolish though. And of course I have no choice but to think they're foolish for going on your word. Literally no choice. 

Through a mix of ramping up hyperactivity through a defensive lens, you seem to drop a remarkable amount of details out of what you've read from an opposing debater. It starts easier but then you start taking it all too personally which demonstrates in the writing, and then once oversensitive you both become less empathetic to help with defending yourself during a short-circuit. 

If you want to see how this keeps happening, check old topics between us. I'll meanwhile keep trying to figure out your patterns enough to allow discussions to continue without becoming defensive political mantras parroted. Believe it or not this is me trying to handle this matter maturely so that you don't start spiraling again. 

I do want these discussions to work, but I understand how and why you may need breaks. It's on me to recognize, as the one more lucid between us during these specific instances, when it is that you cross that line so I can better help us both be that much more productive. While I do see you as one who struggles to see how points in a timeline can add up to causal reactions decades if not centuries later in both direct and subtle ways, I also need to myself be more patient in helping those topics be that much more spelled out for you when, from the start, the issue here is trying to even get you to temporarily adopt another point of view long enough to understand where someone unlike yourself may be coming from. 

Without my sympathy these talks won't usually work, so this is me trying to do the nice thing and give you some breathing room, even though you tend to display like this by being insulting and completely ignoring their message. I want to keep this as transparent as possible so that, rather than it be taken as me trying to be elitist or otherwise taking advantage of your mental problems, that we can get past this and continue our banter over opposing talking points.