Skip to content

How To Live Successfully Alongside Stupid People

Chimera readability score 59 out of 100, Graduate reading level.

Member-only story
How To Live Successfully Alongside Stupid People
Surviving the stupidity pandemic.
October 27th, 2025. Van Holloway, one of Donald Trump’s African Americans, offers a reality check to anyone stupid enough to think Trump’s $250 million ballroom is just another ego-stroking, money-wasting vanity project:
Y’all really mad at a ballroom that’s gonna cost $250 million, that Trump is paying for himself, and y’all wasn’t mad at a basketball court that cost $376 million? And we paid for that sh*t? […]
Do your research!
And sure, even before doing your research, you might wonder how anyone could believe that a basketball court cost $376 million, you might note that Trump’s gold-encrusted ballroom will now cost over $600 million, more than twice the original quote, and that taxpayers will foot at least half that bill, you might even have done the twenty seconds of Googling required to learn that Obama’s basketball court cost $76,000, over 3,000 times less than Van claimed.
But hey, Van has a right to his opinion.
March 16th, 2026. “A.I. accelerationist,” Marc Andreessen, takes time out of his busy schedule to correct anyone stupid enough to think that self-examination is a well-established, psychologically healthy practice:
…if you go back like…

Sentinel — Human

Confidence

The text exhibits strong human stylistic fingerprints through its aggressive tone, erratic rhythm, and idiosyncratic use of informal language, suggesting it is authentic opinion commentary.

Signals Detected
low severity: High sentence length variance and erratic rhythm; use of colloquialisms ('sh*t', 'stupid'); lacks the uniform metronomic middle of typical AI text.
low severity: Passionate, highly biased tone that prioritizes rhetorical impact over neutral synthesis; features idiosyncratic emphasis and aggressive framing typical of opinion writing.
low severity: Arguments are chained rhetorically rather than presenting coordinated talking points; specific numerical data is used to launch rhetorical attacks, suggesting human-driven argumentation.
low severity: Specific financial figures ($250M, $376M, $600M, $76,000) are used in a highly argumentative context, consistent with research or memory-based personal commentary rather than LLM confabulation.
Human Indicators
The aggressive use of informal, emotionally charged language and rhetorical questions.
The blending of highly specific, contradictory financial figures designed to provoke an argumentative reaction.
The overall structure functions as a deliberately confrontational opinion piece rather than neutral reporting.