prev <-> next
[2011-08-30 12:09:12] - mig: "tea party" doesn't mean anything to me anymore... do you mean the "fox news party" or the "small government party"? - aaron
[2011-08-30 12:07:04] - aren't being talked about as much anymore. - mig
[2011-08-30 12:06:22] - "Seem" is the key word in that statement, because I don't think they have much solidarity in reality. The TP faction has made it pretty clear that they don't want to be marginalized by the GOP establishment. The GOP establishment has been grubmling about their irritation of the TP faction since it first started. Social issue republicans are irritated that there issues
[2011-08-30 12:05:53] - whereas democrats care more about doing "democrat stuff" - aaron
[2011-08-30 12:05:36] - or another example is like, i think i remember some party's town hall meetings getting broken up by people coming in and yelling and disrupting everything. i can't remeber which party (or maybe it was both). but my intuition (or perhaps my bias) is that republicans do that stuff more. they care more about stopping the democrats from doing stuff, - aaron
[2011-08-30 12:03:47] - a: basically i think republicans play more "partisan games" and are more about hurting the other party, i don't think i can get miguel to admit that outright but i think i can at least get him to admit some pieces of that argument. like, that they "stick to a party line" more (which is imho a bad thing) - aaron
[2011-08-30 12:03:01] - aaron: i won't disagree that they've definitely been more successful, and certainly more vocal about their opposition. - mig
[2011-08-30 12:01:59] - a: well, it seems refutable to me. his premise was basically, "[the republican] congress is being a pain" and "democrats behaved no different" which, i interpreted as, "democrats banded together and fought on party lines to strike down every piece of productive legislation which bush proposed whether it was helpful or not".... - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:59:34] - mig: of course this is all based on the (flawed?) premise that the republican party exhibits more solidarity, which might be flawed from the start. i just think we can both agree that they've been more vehement (or at least more successful) about obstructing the opposing party's legislation. - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:58:58] - "it seems like there's more solidarity in the republican party" i'm kind of surprised miguel is trying to refute this. is this actually a democratic bias? ~a
[2011-08-30 11:58:50] - aaron: margin doesn't matter so much for the house, that place is usually majority rules. and yeah, I think that view is just a wee bit biased. - mig
[2011-08-30 11:58:30] - another possibility is that republicans just have "simpler principals", or that they're "right", and democrats are "stupid and wrong" and disagree because of their dumbness. if you divide a group of 3rd graders in to smart kids and dumb kids and ask them what 6x8 is, the smart kids are just going to agree more. so that's another interpretation - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:56:43] - mig: yeah, so i don't think it's a numbers thing. again it might be my bias, but it seems like there's more solidarity in the republican party. i think there's (at least) two ways to interpret that; one is that republicans are "partisan tools" who just do what they're told and democrats are "smart independent thinkers" who follow their heart, although that's naive - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:55:28] - mig: the greatest republican congressional majority in the last 12 years was the 109th US congress, from January 2005 when the republicans held 55 seats; the greatest democratic congressional majority was the 111th US congress, from January 2009 when the democrats held 59 seats... the senate might be another story - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:50:53] - actually nevermind that's wrong. highest difference was 55-45 it seems. - mig
[2011-08-30 11:50:25] - mig: oh! okay. i'll check too. - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:48:08] - aaron: I'll have to go back and look it up but I believe the republicans had a filibuster proof senate during a least some of that time. - mig
[2011-08-30 11:46:15] - so you think there were like fewer democrats in office from 2002-2006 than there were republicans in office from 2010-2011, and that's why the democrats were worse at blocking legislation? you don't think they were just more receptive to bush's legislation than republicans are to obama's legislation? - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:45:28] - and TARP didn't pass it's first go round in congress. - mig
[2011-08-30 11:45:03] - mig: i know they were united against bush, of course. i just don't remember them groundlessly attacking specific legislation. i'm unsurprised they're against tax cuts for the rich because americans are against tax cuts for the rich, hmm, - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:42:15] - at least until '06. - mig
[2011-08-30 11:41:44] - that republicans have become during this election cycle. - mig
[2011-08-30 11:41:30] - aaron: democrats were pretty united in being against Bush back in those days on a number of issues. The '04 election slogan was essentially "Anybody but Bush". They were all deadset against Bush's partial privitazation plan for Social Security. They have always been against the tax cuts for the rich. The problem was they didn't have the #s to be the obstructionists
[2011-08-30 11:28:44] - because i'm sure it's just my bias, but my impression of the US government is that democrats argue amongst themselves more than republicans; who tend to hold a party line better. (which is arguably a bad thing or a good thing, i'm just saying) - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:27:37] - mig: because i
[2011-08-30 11:26:38] - mig: and it's totally possible i just have a short memory, or that it didn't happen. but like TARP, that was a bushism right? did democrats move to block TARP at all? did dems filibuster it and say, "hey, this is going to improve republican odds at re-election, so screw you guys"? - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:25:46] - mig: and the democrats were like, "no, we're absolutely going to refuse this legislation, and we're going to wait until the last moment, and the government will almost be shut down, all because we don't want to rescind tax breaks for the upper upper class, or because you're including some other small piece of legislation that most americans actually support" - aaron
[2011-08-30 11:24:30] - mig: every time you say stuff like "democrats behaved no differently" people like pierce usually chime in and point out, "there is no democratic analogy for this behavior" and i think you usually recant a little bit. i'm having trouble remembering a time where bush was genuinely trying to pass something like TARP, health care bill, deficit reduction, - aaron
[2011-08-30 10:14:31] - and I do feel the need to point out that democrats behaved no different during bush's tenure. They were just less effective at being obstructionists. - mig
[2011-08-30 10:10:52] - as for the patriot act, he never explicitly said "I will repeal the patriot act' but candidate obama was a frequent critic of the powers it gave the executive branch. - mig
[2011-08-30 10:10:07] - aaron: if congress is being a pain to the president, well ... tough shit. it's not a valid excuse to break the law and bypass them to run your wars. - mig
[2011-08-30 09:03:55] - paul: tsk, always running away from arguments. that's our paul. why don't we ever get to hear your side of things! - aaron
[2011-08-30 09:02:58] - i don't know what a "supermajority" and "filibustering" means because i'm dumb, but it's my impression that unless you have like 66% majority (or something like that) you can't just "pass whatever you want" you have to have some cooperation across the aisle right? - aaron
[2011-08-30 09:02:30] - paul: i think democrats fought pretty hard to not get the tax cuts extended, or at least that's what i picked up from sound bytes and internet media. but you're right, he had a shot and i guess he couldn't do it. i disagree, republicans can do a LOT with no majorities anywhere, it's basically how congress works afaik - aaron
[2011-08-30 09:01:14] - in obama's defense regarding the "undeclared wars" thing, i think he would have fought harder for congressional support (is that right?) in the libyan conflict if he was facing a more rational political opposition; but it's my impression that the primary goal of most republicans is to ensure obama doesn't get reelected - aaron
[2011-08-30 09:00:43] - Aaron: Sorry to do this, but I gotta run. Time to pack up to go home! -Paul
[2011-08-30 09:00:24] - Aaron: Sure, they faced some opposition, but I feel like if Obama really made some of those things a priority, he could've gotten it done. No matter how united the Republicans were, they couldn't do much with no majorities anywhere. -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:59:05] - Aaron: Sure, but I guess my point is that Bush had to deal with those tax cuts too for most of his administration, and he "only" increased the debt by around $4.9 trillion (I think), so it affects them both. Besides, Obama had a shot at not getting those tax cuts extended. -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:58:36] - paul: this is the closest promise i can find, i don't think obama ever said he'd repeal the patriot act (or if he did it's hard for me to find it on politifact). - aaron
[2011-08-30 08:57:17] - paul: yeah, i definitely agree about his "undeclared wars" thing. i'm 50/50 on the patriot act, i'll have to check politifact on that one - aaron
[2011-08-30 08:56:36] - paul: you think he was able to get his original vision of the health care bill passed? it was my impression they had to slice it up so much it was barely even worth passing anymore. you really don't think the democrats faced much opposition from 2009-2010? is that honestly your opinion or are you playing devil's advocate? - aaron
[2011-08-30 08:55:26] - Aaron: Although it's not even things like Guantanamo. I'm also talking about things he has unquestionably (in my mind) done an about face on, like the Patriot Act, undeclared wars, etc. -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:53:44] - Aaron: Yeah, we obviously disagree about this, but I find it hard to accept that he had that much trouble getting stuff done when the Democrats had majorities in both chambers of congress for the first half of his presidency and he was able to get an unpopular health care bill passed. -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:50:04] - through coincidence or otherwise, tax revenue steadily increased until bush was elected; then plummeted after he left office; and it hasn't yet reversed its trend since obama took office, although if 2012 is an indicator maybe it will. so maybe it's an indicator that republican president/tax policies = decreased tax revenue - aaron
[2011-08-30 08:47:53] - paul: i think adrian's suggesting that bush's tax cuts were extended beyond bush's term, so he's partially responsible for a decrease in tax revenue which has continued through the current day. it doesn't account for the increased expenditure however, i think that was either a difference in obama's policies, or the onset of the recession - aaron
[2011-08-30 08:41:53] - paul: i don't agree, i think obama's been forced into a lot of compromises but i think he genuinely tried to follow through on a lot of his campaign promises (closing guantanamo, not passing new social/defense programs without a clear payment plan) - aaron
[2011-08-30 08:38:27] - Xpovos: That sucks. I've been getting the occasional LinkedIn message asking about SQL Developers, Data Analysts and Junior Software Engineers. I have no idea if you feel like you would be qualified for any of those (or would be interested), or even if any of them are still available... -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:35:18] - a: I could understand if somebody wanted to make the argument that Obama doesn't deserve blame for stuff like TARP, but I'm not sure how you can blame Bush for the increase in how fast the debt is increasing under Obama. -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:30:51] - a: I'm confused. You're trying to make the point that because Bush cut taxes early in his administration, that somehow he is responsible for the $4 trillion in deb that Obama has piled up? -Paul
[2011-08-30 08:28:35] - aaron: Even if Obama is forced to run on a campaign of fiscal responsibility and smaller government... I see no reason why he would actually govern that way after winning. Compare candidate Obama with how he is actually governing. -Paul
[2011-08-30 01:09:33] - there are two solutions.
[2011-08-29 21:41:21] - Yes, finally a challenging maze! -- Xpovos
[2011-08-29 19:54:59] - solve the maze!
[2011-08-29 17:53:15] - aaron: Dog Soldiers is a terrible werewolf movie. It's UK film, which probably explains why it's not as familiar. Katie saw it there and for some reason the schlock appealed to her, so she made me watch it. I haven't let her live that one down. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-29 17:08:46] - xpovos: yeah i hadn't heard of either one of those movies, i thought maybe they were bad translations but i wasn't sure - aaron
[2011-08-29 16:14:02] - "The fierce ghost eats human region"? Looks like Interview with a Vampire meets Blood Rayne. I also got a kick out of Dog Soldiers, but mostly because I hate that movie. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-29 15:05:21] - man cujo looks so cuddly! if i couldn't read english i'd probably assume it was a kids movie - aaron
[2011-08-29 15:03:57] - http://www.awesome-robo.com/2011/05/70-bootleg-movie-posters.html 70 bootleg movie posters - aaron
[2011-08-29 14:58:40] - So... it appears I am once again going to be in active search of a new job. Anyone have any interesting leads? I realize my fields of expertise are kind of outside the norm here, but I'm flexible. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-29 11:18:52] - a: hmm no, not really. we were keeping it pretty simple, and the implication of our bet was that the current president's policies would have an immediate effect on the current economy or something. it's a little naive but also the easiest thing to measure - aaron
[2011-08-29 10:31:37] - i assume that part of the context of your bet was that most of that 4trillion was spent by the previous president? graph graph2 ~a
[2011-08-29 10:26:50] - MAKE HOUSE. ROBOTS COME OUT OF HOUSE. ROBOTS SHOOT LASERS. SOMEONE WINS. DON'T BUILD THE WRONG ROBOTS OR YOU'LL LOSE!!!!!!!1111
[2011-08-29 09:55:18] - 90% chance! - aaron
[2011-08-29 09:53:54] - paul: well we'll see. it's theoretically possible that we'll see ron paul run against obama in 2012, forcing the democratic campaign to run a campaign based on fiscal responsibility and smaller government, and that obama will win re-election by a narrow margin, and newly adopted policies will lower the deficit. i'm going to win my bet! - aaron
[2011-08-29 09:18:07] - paul: sad! my poor bet! - aaron
[2011-08-29 00:24:48] - aaron: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20095704-503544.html Not sure what the exact parameters of our bet was, but it looks like I am in good shape of winning even if Obama is a one term president... -Paul
[2011-08-29 00:18:02] - yeah, for like 12 hours. im glad we had barcraft hehe. ~a
[2011-08-28 21:54:52] - So, we're back? Irene-related power outage hit the server? -- Xpovos
[2011-08-27 21:48:54] - meh, i have a very annoying leak in my window. it's been a pain in the ass. not what i would call exciting or intense. ~a
[2011-08-27 20:07:45] - Irene is very underwhelming so far. Anyone else having a more exciting/intense experience with it? -Daniel
[2011-08-27 16:11:09] - i'm cool with that. does vinnie's dad like to drink, play video/board games, watch cartoons, or play ultimate? ~a
[2011-08-27 15:02:29] - a: we need to make friends with vinnie's dad so that he's on your map - aaron
[2011-08-27 13:03:38] - so now that amy has moved in with aaron, fair lakes is filled with "d&d" as well as "a&a". i think to make this complete, stephen needs to move in with sam. miguel needs to move in with meg. pierce and paul need to live together. uhhh, i guess andrea and aba. katie and katie would work. tim and travis can find a place. dave and daniel. adrian and andrew. is there anybody else we can move around? ~a
[2011-08-27 11:48:09] - http://www.moanmyip.com/ NSFW but very practical! - aaron
[2011-08-27 02:37:49] - god, what a weird graph. i'm surprised i never saw this before since i read that blog on occasion. the red line is no surprise. i'm having huge problems explaining the clear&defined while also super confusing yellow line. ~a
[2011-08-26 22:36:54] - Paul: will you marry me? Gurukirn: let's find out!
[2011-08-26 17:22:32] - happy stephen stephen. ~a
[2011-08-26 12:30:52] - http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/The-best-of-the-white-Michael-Vick-Photoshops?urn=nfl-wp5905#remaining-content well looks like we have a new internet meme, and a good one at that. I would recommend ignoring the comments of the post though. - mig
[2011-08-26 10:55:47] - xpovos: that is quite freaky. - mig
[2011-08-26 10:46:41] - Yikes! https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-GCnlcTplHuM/TlZI7g4A_hI/AAAAAAAABUI/B-aOXFlm6_c/w327/68.gif Ah, well, let's get a photo of it. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 16:55:27] - xpovos: ha ha ha - aaron
[2011-08-25 16:21:28] - I had a good laugh, but it could just be stress after a long day. http://failbook.failblog.org/2011/08/25/funny-facebook-fails-stuck-in-line-at-airport-security/ -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 15:09:34] - wow, those are some polite developers. most developers i know would have started laughing loudly. ~a
[2011-08-25 15:05:03] - someone having a particularly loud teleconference in an office near our agile area just said, rather loudly, "i've never had a three way over the phone", at least 15 developers heard it and started laughing (quietly) - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:55:05] - Back (?) on-topic... Ron Paul is almost certainly not racist. People who think he is pull from writings in his newsletter--though written by other people and exaggerate them; and assume that his economic policies which may in fact be more painful to minorities than other groups are racially motivated. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:54:00] - i'm a little sad inside that "zone" is a mere 3rd place amongst google's recommended search terms to follow "twilight". damn kids!! - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:52:36] - xpovos:
- aaron[2011-08-25 13:49:04] - aaron: I'm offended. I spent a lot of time and effort writing that episode. I'm sure it'll get optioned any time now. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:46:54] - xpovos: the idea of an anarchist who wants to dismantle government so he can enact a complex system of geographically-enforced codified social contracts sounds like a lazily written twilight zone episode - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:45:29] - aaron: Right, I'm saying (or trying to say) that an anarchist is either nuts (thinks the state of nature is better) or wants a social contract, just not one that's codified. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:44:04] - aaron: I'd say maybe try L. Neil Smith? He's the closest to a complete anarchist that I know that can still string thoughts together into some form of coherence. He's a anarcho-capitalist, though, so I'm not sure he's a best fit. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:43:15] - xpovos: and if an anarchist is truly in favor of social contracts which are codified then they need to think about their beliefs for a longer duration than they spend on the toilet - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:41:24] - xpovos: that's not interesting to me because i don't think anybody we know is an all-out anarchist who would be in favor of, for example, legalizing theft. maybe if i ever meet someone like that and they're not completely batshit insane i'll be curious what motivates their train of thought - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:40:32] - It's very Hobbesian. You either get state of nature: nasty, brutish and short; or you get some kind of social contract. Which may be more or less codified. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:39:34] - aaron: The best way I can try to explain the anarchist mind to you then would be to say they percieve themselves as the all-knowing entity in charge of dispensing rules, and if someone violates their rules, they'll take any action they deem necessary as a respose. In a perfectly anarchic society the ultimate peacekeeper is fear of lunatic retribution. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:36:57] - aaron: Change your would to "could in some plausible circumstances" and I'll get on board with that. I think that evil is frequently profitable. Fraud, theft, coersion... but those are all things a libertarian would be against. Maybe not anarcho-capitalists, but they're nuts anyway. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:35:51] - xpovos: and i guess the inevitable compromise of "if there was an imperfect entity who came up with retarded rules but tried really really hard is that at least good enough", and i guess that's the real world. i guess i'm actually OK with that but i can totally understand why other people aren't - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:35:14] - xpovos: so if you're willing to accept that premise (that evil would be profitable) i guess the next baby step would be, if there were a theoretically uncorruptable all-knowing entity who could dispense rules which would impose constraints to inarguably reduce the amount of evil; would that be a good thing. - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:33:01] - xpovos: yeah, you're right, clubs are often admitting people based on gender/race ratios and deciding, "well you look poor so you can't come in", or "you're here with your wife so you won't drink much." so it's already pretty iffy. i'm not saying the free market would be evil; right now i'm just saying that evil practices would be profitable - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:32:20] - aaron: By setting it up so that 98% (or so) of the population is excluded, it's kind of de facto a private thing, not a public one. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:31:53] - xpovos: hmmmmm, i'm not sure either way. i've heard of gay people getting frustrated going to gay bars and finding straight people there, it happened on south park and also maybe in the real world too but probably not. well, i think a gay bar that excluded straight customers (how?!) would be solvent but maybe i'm wrong - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:31:23] - aaron: I suppose if they charged high enough premiums. And here's the thing, most people would be OK with this kind of discrimination. Heck, most people are still OK with Augusta-like discrimination. Private clubs get away with things that 'public' establishments like restaurants and bars do not. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:29:36] - aaron: Well, we're talking about customer discrimination right now. Hiring discrimination is another matter entirely. I think a gay bar that tried to exclude straight customers would probably have a hard time staying afloat long term, but that's more because of the relatively niche market. I'm not sure. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:28:14] - xpovos: i think a business could discriminate against 98% of the population, and if they were popular enough amongst the other 2%, they'd still make a profit. i can't think of a practical example more niche than a theoretically "heterophobic gay bar", but i think they could definitely be fiscally feasible - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:26:48] - And much discrimination, albeit probably unintentional, against individuals with disabilities was legal prior to ADA. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:26:39] - xpovos: i don't know if i agree on the "10% can't", how do you rationalize gay bars? do you think if a gay bar had a restriction saying, "we won't hire straight bartenders/waiting staff", that they would go out of business? - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:25:48] - mig: It's discrimination, but it's not racist. Sometimes discrimination is legal. Frequently it is for youths, e.g. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:25:37] - mig: i guess you're right that there's a difference between discrimination out of malice, like "oh, i don't like black people" and discrimination out of laziness/practicality, like "oh, all of our oil has animal fat in it" or "our bookstore is so small that an elevator or ramp would occupy the store" - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:24:38] - aaron: That sounds like a fair point. I can take a little exception with the sports-bar analogy because that's a business model rather than a customer base decision. The two are related, but it's decidedly different there. But your vegan and handicapped point are good. So perhaps there is some breaking point. 0.5% can be safely ignored, but 10% can't. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 13:22:02] - well maybe it technically is. but not on the same level of the "no blacks allowed" type of thing. - mig
[2011-08-25 13:19:43] - aaron: that's not discrimination though (unless you can read the minds to find the motives of the individuals who make the decision not to have a wheelchair accessible ramp). - mig
[2011-08-25 13:15:39] - from an objective standpoint, if humans were robots, i think that would probably be ideal too. everybody gets fed, everybody gets entertained, at a minimum of a cost. and you don't waste money/effort trying to have certain restaurants cater to everyone. so it makes sense the economically-driven model would be the most efficient; just arguably not the most humane - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:14:23] - which would get lots of business and, i think if the free market had its way, that's probably how things would shake out; a few niche restaurants/etc would cater to everybody, but a majority of businesses would cater to the majority of patrons and just ignore "special needs" people. kind of like how restaurants now treat vegans or people with food allergies - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:13:04] - xpovos: i think the most obvious examples are things like having businesses cater to handicapped, and stuff like that, although maybe that's not what you're describing. but your average business would definitely be more profitable if they just ignored the 0.5% of the population that was incapable of using stairs, and then you could have one "handicapped bar" - aaron
[2011-08-25 13:09:26] - xpovos: that's not true, business can exclude people without putting themselves out of business. i could argue that sports bars are putting themselves out of business because they're alienating potential patrons uninterested in sports. i think in the absence of anti-discrimination laws, there would be more discrimination in commercial businesses - aaron
[2011-08-25 12:53:42] - opposes a national ID, is an outspoken critic of america's actions in the middle east, is some sort of racist ... well I dont' know how seriously to take that person. - mig
[2011-08-25 12:52:12] - aaron: I think even if I assumed the worst about the newsletter (and when I researched it myself some of the supposed racism was stuff taken way out of context), I would think his actions since then would have earned forgiveness from me. Honestly if someone wants to seriously contend that a man who wants to end the war on drugs, repeal the patriot act, ...
[2011-08-25 12:44:45] - Other libertarians take a more 'modern' view and agree that a law prohibiting discrimination could be reasonable, because it prevents an individual from causing physical or economical harm to another. One of the golden rules of libertarianism, right? -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 12:43:02] - because, by doing so, he's effectively putting himself out of business. In a competitive market businesses can't afford to exclude any potential customer because their profit margins are just large enough to succeed. The economic theory of 'normal' profits in a saturated market. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 12:41:58] - aaron: That's the big one. Another is that he's against affirmative action laws and probably wouldn't vote for most of the pro-racial legal framework of the 60s. His son got clobbered with that one too. Basically it is reasonable for some libertarians to say, "Even if it is distasteful, a restaurant owner should be able to exclude a person because he is black," -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 12:37:27] - every time i hear Paul mentioned, i hear a lot of people say things like, "it's cool he sticks by his values, even if i don't agree with those values" and vague murmurs about stuff like that, i'm always casually curious what they're talking about but i usually dismiss it as some kind of "red scare" kind of tactic - aaron
[2011-08-25 12:37:03] - Being able to throw all of the money at one race this time is helping. And the moneybombs have been successful so far. So, those ads will keep running. As much as I love Ron Paul, I really wish Harry Browne were still here to take advantage of this machine. He was much more articulate and charismatic than Paul. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 12:35:59] - does anybody know what people might be referring to, when they're ambiguously alleging stuff like racism in ron paul's political history? all i could dig up was some newsletter controversy which seemed like it wasn't even attributable to Paul anyways - aaron
[2011-08-25 12:35:22] - mig: Dig deeper, though. Paul didn't actually improve his standing any, the other players just moved around the board a little. It's not a bad position to be in, but his change is statistically insignificant. He'll have to gain some more traction first. But his team is putting together some impressive ads this year. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 12:29:43] - http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/gallup-perry-leading-nationally-romney-second-paul-third-212542697.html interesting stuff ... if this keeps up the media blackout on Paul won't be sustainable. - mig
[2011-08-25 12:20:46] - Honestly, any good feelings about Qaddafi will be washed away if his successor turns out to be worse or if the country descends into another civil war to fill in the power vacuum. Either scenario will not surprise me. - mig
[2011-08-25 12:17:31] - and I still find the whole thing grounds for impeachment for Obama. - mig
[2011-08-25 12:16:44] - While it is good that Qaddafi is no longer the ruler of a nation, we have no idea what he'll be replaced with. Honestly, we know next to nothing about the rebels are, other than they don't like Qaddafi. And I will shudder if we take an active role in "rebuilding". Iraq and Afghanistan are not shining examplse in that regard. - mig
[2011-08-25 12:06:31] - But I do have to say I am genuinely pleased Qaddafi is no longer in power. (Sentence rewritten three times to remove double and triple negatives). I still don't think the effort was justified, but I'll take the benefits anyway and, if I have to, I'll give some props to Obama for winning the conflict. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 12:04:22] - At the risk of sound like I think the ends justify the means, I personally am impressed by the situation in Libya right now. It's definitely not what I expected months ago. E.J. Dionne thinks I should be praising Obama for it now. That's hardly news. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 11:35:30] - think it's more a case of TMBG fans getting drawn to an application that does that. it suggested TMBG songs for everything I tried. for me, it got one song right, one song wrong, and one it didn't know. good idea for a program - vinnie
[2011-08-25 10:23:43] - xpovos: that's very very strange.... clearly it recognized the band
- aaron[2011-08-25 09:54:56] - I dunno why buy I tried "Hall of Heads" and it suggested "Istanbul (not Constantinople)". -- Xpovos
[2011-08-25 09:10:57] - ahhaha it got "do you want to" by franz ferdinand too. it couldn't get "evacuate the dancefloor" but i guess that's kind of a tough rhythm to get. - aaron
[2011-08-25 09:09:23] - http://www.bored.com/songtapper/ tap the space bar on your keyboard and it tries to guess your song. it did OK on "seven nation army", what a weird program - aaron
[2011-08-25 00:16:03] - daniel: we hadn't planned ultimate yet; i would assume if we're doing this thing that it would take the place of ultimate - aaron
[2011-08-24 22:41:19] - aaron/a: Is there ultimate on Sunday? Would barcraft be before/after/instead? It sounds interesting. -Daniel
[2011-08-24 19:38:46] - is it sunday yet ? tilda day
[2011-08-24 16:06:55] - a: i'll send out an invite. - aaron
[2011-08-24 15:52:29] - IN. ~a
[2011-08-24 13:04:53] - http://www.reddit.com/r/BarCraftDC/comments/jblbe/barcraft_mlg_raleigh_aug_28_times_and_finals/ apparently they're showing the MLGs this Sunday. anybody interested in going to DC to watch starcraft?
- aaron[2011-08-24 13:03:03] - http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=214434868868944444968.0004aac4e2e49b9b215c7&msa=0 barcraft location map. still nothing close, except for Tenley Public in DC - aaron
[2011-08-24 12:47:41] - aaron: you suck. - mig
[2011-08-24 12:47:20] - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904070604576516462736084234.html some interesting stuff, but I like the random picture in the middle with the simple caption: A DARK TEMPLAR. - mig
[2011-08-24 12:41:10] - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904070604576516462736084234.html apparently some bars in washington D.C have started broadcasting starcraft 2 - aaron
[2011-08-24 10:42:57] - The music is subtle, but it's rattling around in my brain and now it's linked inextricably with Alanis Morisette's Univited. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-24 10:24:35] - a: Very cool vid. I think it does a good job of showing off the drama that exists, but is rarely allowed to shine through in Portal. It's a puzzle game, but it makes for a heck of a thriller. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-24 09:52:34] - a: I've seen a few of those fake trailers with high production values. that's probably the best one I've seen so far. I think they exist just because people want to make them.
I wonder how much it cost - vinnie[2011-08-24 09:41:37] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4drucg1A6Xk woah! pretty sweet portal video. i wonder why this exists. seems like a pretty high production value (you can watch it in 1080p). ~a
[2011-08-23 16:21:45] - http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/blog/dr_saturday/post/This-season-Tennessee-sees-opportunity-8230-u?urn=ncaaf-wp5307 inspiration fail. - mig
[2011-08-23 15:02:03] - daniel: we had pretty much the exact same experience. we all thought they were doing work on the Fairfax County Parkway at first - vinnie
[2011-08-23 15:01:12] - i'm not too sure how this earthquake stuff is gonna work out, it already doesn't have anything for me to do. ~a
[2011-08-23 14:49:45] - It was a little interesting on the 5th floor I'm currently working on, but only lasted ~8 seconds or so of bad shaking, it vibrated beforehand for a bit but felt like construction nearby. Then we all went and stood outside for awhile. Woo earthquake! -Daniel
[2011-08-23 14:23:33] - http://www.foddy.net/Athletics.html QWOP. i introduced a few people to this game but i realize i never gave it proper mention on the message board - aaron
[2011-08-23 14:09:26] - a: ha ha! i mentioned it on the google pluss. - aaron
[2011-08-23 14:07:52] - mig: yeah noticeable even on the ground floor it felt like my apartment was going to fall down (i'm wfh today). ~a
[2011-08-23 14:07:03] - aaron: yeah as i mentioned on the facebooks: it's like a few miles from our nuclear plant . . .
~a[2011-08-23 14:04:26] - the epicenter, apparently people noticed it in new york and ohio too, it was a big one - aaron
[2011-08-23 14:00:04] - i was out driving while it happened. I didn't notice anything. It was definitely noticeable if you were in a building though. - mig
[2011-08-23 13:58:59] - i hope everybody is ok. ~a
[2011-08-23 13:58:50] - weeeeeee. ~a
[2011-08-23 12:04:45] - http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Having-trouble-deciding-who-to-root-for-in-2010-?urn=nfl-wp5620 - mig
[2011-08-23 09:25:26] - vinnie: Your work is anti-zombie attacks on engaged Asian couples? How tragic. - Stephen
[2011-08-23 09:17:39] - xpovos: are those photos awesome? it's blocked at my work - vinnie
[2011-08-23 01:32:09] - xpovos: those photos are awesome. ~a
[2011-08-22 16:05:38] - xpovos: those photos are awesome! - aaron
[2011-08-22 15:53:33] - xpovos: Those photos are awesome. Good thing I'm not part of the next couple to go down the aisle, because there's no way I could top them. - Stephen
[2011-08-22 15:43:07] - aaron: I'm interested. I'm doing some legwork right now to see if it's even possible I'd be available. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-22 15:37:43] - a: Paul and Gurkie are on their way to get blasted by Hurricane Irene in the Turks & Caicos. I'm sure they'll have some interesting stories to tell! - STephen
[2011-08-22 15:23:36] - For the next couple to go down the aisle: http://www.regretsy.com/2011/08/22/how-to-take-engagement-photos/ -- Xpovos
[2011-08-22 15:19:12] - http://www.clubglow.com/glow-calendar/skrillex-mothership-tour-glow-washington-dc-thurs-106-fur/ anybody interested in seeing skrillex (electro house/dubstep) in DC on october 6? - aaron
[2011-08-22 14:27:15] - so, paul or gurkie, how is the honeymoon so far? ~a
[2011-08-20 10:54:48] - AND THEN THERE WERE EIGHT. Who would have guessed in 2000 that Andrew, Travis, and Paul would be the first three to get married? Not I.
[2011-08-19 11:55:17] - Happy wedding eve, Gurkie and Paul!
[2011-08-19 10:57:37] - yeah, i still buy practically everything on CD! hmm... i'm old... - aaron
[2011-08-19 10:35:55] - http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/aug/18/aliens-destroy-humanity-protect-civilisations so basically, some guys took just about every sci-fi movie scenario and made it into a "scientific" report. - mig
[2011-08-19 09:56:15] - i'm still buying some stuff on cd. flac isn't for sale on the internet in very many places and, more importantly, used-cds have the highest songs/cost i can find. ~a
[2011-08-19 09:49:14] - Most interesting element: how long cassettes remained even a fractional percentage of the market. Wow. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-19 08:39:42] - http://imgur.com/hC3eV 30 years of music sales by support - aaron
[2011-08-18 15:43:45] - "time zone" would be an awesome name for a sci-fi tv series if it didn't already mean something so mundane - aaron
[2011-08-18 10:08:05] - http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Media/Slideshow/2011/08/11/Can-You-Identify-the-Presidential-Candidate.aspx?index=1 Some of these are better than others, but I thought people here could enjoy having Ash, Gandalf and Christopher Pike compared to presidential candidates. -Paul
[2011-08-17 21:43:48] - that's weird, on facebook my coworker/friend just told me i was a boring grown-up
~a[2011-08-17 19:26:07] - You guys are twelve - katie
[2011-08-17 19:22:48] - Sweet. I hit a twofer! Ovarian? Boobical? Boobalicious definitely is out. Boobsy might actually get the point across as a similar construct. Hmm. According to thesaurus.com "Trojan" (also "Spartan") is a synonym for 'courageous'. I'm sure there' something we can do there with condoms. Hah, also "rash". Hehehe. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 18:50:44] - or boob. ~a
[2011-08-17 18:49:19] - haha, i'm surprised dickish was a new word. anyways, i think we can do better. we somehow need to adjectivize ovary. ~a
[2011-08-17 18:43:40] - a: Even for my example, "ballsy" wasn't best. "Dickish" is better, but has the wrong semantics. I think the closest you get for a vulgar courageous feminine might be "lioness" and I have no idea how to adjectivize that. Leonine? -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 18:26:28] - so what's the female version of "ballsy"? yes, basically i'm asking to see if the NewWords class is working or not. ~a
[2011-08-17 15:06:36] - title: Wow, scatological is a new word for the mb? I figured it had to have been used before. But I double-checked. Even my expected mis-spelling "scatalogical" returns zero hits. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 14:17:47] - aaron: Agreed. Though some kind of special mention award to the bottle rocket guy. That's ballsy. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 14:09:18] - xpovos: um yes don't read that thread, just read the hot dog thing was funny but most of it was awful awful stuff and i'm so glad our friends have normal human parties and not crazy frat kid shitting in the butter dish parties - aaron
[2011-08-17 13:29:29] - aaron: Also, your reddit thread's OP and subsequent comments are a hive of seriously unhealthy behavior. Most of it scatological. Yikes. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 13:28:50] - aaron: I read Tycho's posts at least any way because he rambles and hits other interesting points for me. They got hooked before I did, but I understood it to be a DotA style game so you really don't need much more than that for the humor. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 13:11:20] - xpovos: http://penny-arcade.com/2011/08/15/lol ha ha!! this was a weird coincidence, but gabe addressed that on monday's blog. i guess they had some people asking about it - aaron
[2011-08-17 12:57:49] - xpovos: there's been like 5 LoL penny arcades over the past couple months, i don't know if they're getting paid to do that? or if one of them is just hooked. either way, it's cool. having comics highly relevant to my interests doesn't often make them funnier to me, but in PA's case, at least it means there's one day where i don't have to read the blog - aaron
[2011-08-17 12:56:21] - http://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/jkna5/what_is_the_bestworst_party_foul_moment_you_have/c2d073w this is the thing i can't stop laughing at work today. ahhh. i have such a problem surpressing laughter when something funny is in my brain. also hot dogs definitely make my top 5 funniest food list to start with, so i'm just in shambles - aaron
[2011-08-17 12:44:57] - I still think Obama will be re-elected regardless of who the Republican nominee is, but my 100% faith is somewhat lessened after reading these two articles. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 12:17:18] - There are valid reasons to discount Paul's performance and focus more on other candidates. Paul needs to continue his success--certainly easier with some media attention, but he can do it himself. If he does and they continue to ignore him, that's bad journalism then, because at that point something has clearly changed. And it won't have been Paul. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 12:14:44] - mig: The pitfalls of a news site like huff-po where most everything is user generated. I mean, there are typos and grammatical errors in the story I linked! Not a huge deal, since I'm offering what is actually a reasonable counterpoint, if poorly presented.
[2011-08-17 12:09:17] - xpovos: actually i shouldn't rip on huffpo as much as the author, there's actually a related article at the bottom that makes the same exact point you just did. - mig
[2011-08-17 11:59:31] - mig: Also, "Go-go-gadget censorship." Because if it's something we don't like, it shouldn't even be acknowledged. An ostrich with its head in the sand doesn't like it when the danger presents itself anyway. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 11:55:42] - xpovos: so basically huffpo's argument is "HURRAH FOR THE STATUS-QUO!" - mig
[2011-08-17 11:46:02] - Counterpoint: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/asher-smith/ron-paul-media_b_928592.html -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 10:43:11] - aaron: http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2011/8/10/fed-astaire/ -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 10:24:13] - granted they have the ssl "certified" box next to the url but I find the color coding more helpful. - mig
[2011-08-17 10:23:04] - a: it doesn't have a distinguishing color for ssl sites though. - mig
[2011-08-17 10:12:43] - a: That'll help combat some phishing things as well, at least against moderately well educated end users. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-17 10:07:46] - i don't use it. i figured it was faster for me to hit control-t, type in "fb", and hit enter, than it was for me to click on the facebook app tab. but i'm giving it a try again. i did just notice that firefox 6 recently added something from chrome: the domain name in the url bar is in black and everything else is in gray so it's easier to see the domain name. ~a
[2011-08-17 09:39:31] - http://support.mozilla.com/en-US/kb/what-are-app-tabs anybody using the new app tabs feature in firefox? seems like it might be practical, at work i'm not sure if i visit the same web sites often enough to keep them in the background? but it seems really practical for home use, stuff like facebook, google+, gmail, stuff like that - aaron
[2011-08-17 08:53:13] - And there was no contest in their mind: go after Palin. I actually don't blame them much, since I'm sure Palin gives them a lot higher ratings than Paul, but it's just a little sad. -Paul
[2011-08-17 08:50:12] - Aaron: Heh, yeah. It was just a little surreal, since they made it sound like they were joking, but they were basically saying that they could show stuff from an actual candidate for the GOP nomination, or they could try to chase down somebody who probably only has a 50/50 shot of entering the race. -Paul
[2011-08-17 08:13:20] - paul: ahhaha i watched the clip when i got home last night, man that was painful. especially the bit when they're talking about how ron paul is giving a speech, and they talk about (on the air) how sarah palin is much more interesting, and how they can "hold back on the ron paul stuff" - aaron
[2011-08-16 14:35:51] - Aaron: You're probably right. I was just surprised because he seems like he would be an easy target. -Paul
[2011-08-16 13:58:32] - but, i think stewart (or TDS writers) are just genuinely impressed with ron paul for standing up to his party and portraying something other than partisan politics in what's become a very predictable congress - aaron
[2011-08-16 13:57:17] - paul: although, i can also see your point of view - like if your teacher gives two other students a hard time about not getting straight A's, but then doesn't care about your C average. it's like - hey, you're hard on everybody else, where's my punishment? did you give up on me or something? - aaron
[2011-08-16 13:50:22] - don lemon for being a shining example of what journalism should be, so i guess i'm not at all surprised that he portrayed ron paul in a very positive light. - aaron
[2011-08-16 13:49:25] - paul: oh - to rephrase, i think stewart is good at calling out specific people on both sides of the aisle, he is good at recognizing "this specific member of this party is crazy" or "this specific coverage on this network was insane". but yeah he'll do things like skewer CNN repeatedly over "soft journalism" and then call out...
[2011-08-16 12:46:00] - TJ&Friends league people: http://cdn.someecards.com/someecards/filestorage/reminder-many-fantasies-not-sports-ecard-someecards.jpg -- Xpovos
[2011-08-16 12:34:55] - well, yes, ron paul is completely nuts, i see what you both are saying. so, i'm very interested in watching TDS tonight. ~a
[2011-08-16 12:21:32] - paul: ah yes, that too. - mig
[2011-08-16 12:20:35] - mig: Pretty much, although some are (rightfully) aimed at Republicans as well. -Paul
[2011-08-16 12:14:50] - paul: I haven't seen the segment yet, but I would have figured the main point of his barbs would be directed at the MSM. - mig
[2011-08-16 12:09:41] - Aaron: Hell, he had a stretch of about 10 seconds where it almost sounded like a commercial for Ron Paul.
-Paul[2011-08-16 12:03:24] - Aaron: I don't know if I am explaining myself well, but I basically am agreeing with you that he does generally skewer both sides, I just felt like it would've been fair for him to throw in some digs at Ron Paul at the end, but he didn't. -Paul
[2011-08-16 12:00:18] - Aaron: I guess I was thinking he was more than fair. I feel like he usually skewers both sides (like you said), and kept waiting for the slight dig at the end about gold bugs or something, but it never came. It almost sounded like he didn't think Ron Paul was crazy and even appreciated some of his positions. -Paul
[2011-08-16 11:56:51] - Stephen: I think you're probably right. I can't even think of another reason even if I indulge my cynical or paranoid sides.
-Paul[2011-08-16 11:51:37] - paul: oh wow you don't think jon stewart was fair with ron paul? i guess i'll have to check out the segment, it sounds like it might break some of my expectations on jon's handling of political figures - aaron
[2011-08-16 11:42:38] - Paul: I think it's because compared to Syria, the stakes in Libya were lower and the chances of success higher. Overly pragmatic, perhaps, but that's my hunch. - Stephen
[2011-08-16 11:27:15] - Stephen: Yeah, I'm certainly not advocating getting involved in Syria, but it seems strange that we undertook a "humanitarian" mission to help out armed rebels in Libya, but ignore the unarmed civilians in Syria. -Paul
[2011-08-16 11:25:52] - aaron: I guess I'm surprised because most people think Ron Paul has crazy ideas, and Stewart makes a living off calling out politicians for crazy ideas. It didn't seem like he was being fair with Ron Paul, it seemed like it went further and he kinda gave him a pass. -Paul
[2011-08-16 11:14:58] - Paul: I do think that we've been strangely complacent regarding Syria. Syria's opposition has yet to crystallize into an armed force, even a ragtag one, though, so I'm not sure what bombing Syria would do. Oh, except for make all hell break loose in Lebanon and Israel. - Stephen
[2011-08-16 10:31:07] - paul: i'm not too surprised, but i guess we might have varying opinions of jon stewart. i think he does an OK job of calling out people on both sides of the aisle, and recognizing genuine people like paul with regardless of their party affiliation - aaron
[2011-08-16 09:48:31] - http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/08/16/syria.unrest/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 CNN article about all the unrest in Syria. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but I wonder how the people who were in favor of the Libya bombing feel now. Do they still support the bombing campaign? Do they think Obama should've gotten Congressional approval? Should we intervene in Syria? -Paul
[2011-08-16 09:40:03] - a: I have started recorded the Colbert Report again, but I hardly ever watch the Daily Show. Jon Stewart was surprisingly complimentary of Ron Paul last night, I thought. -Paul
[2011-08-16 09:38:41] - aaron: Yeah, he got second in the straw poll by about 9/10ths of a percentage point. It's just funny because the top tier is considered Bachmann (who won) and Romney and Perry (who got 6th and 7th, although neither competed in the straw poll). -Paul
[2011-08-16 09:28:30] - mmph. i watch the daily show on hulu, so i'm usually about a day behind (they post the episode after i go to bed at night). anyways, this means i haven't seen the paul episode. they (him and colbert) actually talk about ron paul a lot. ~a
[2011-08-16 09:19:57] - paul: he lost the straw... poll? by like 9 tenths of a percentage point, and yet somehow he's being totally ignored by the media - aaron
[2011-08-16 09:19:21] - paul: yeah, i heard about that! i was going to post a link about it but the link was from gawker and i couldn't read it without enabling javascript, and i didn't really feel like doing that - aaron
[2011-08-16 09:17:44] - Does anybody here watch the Daily Show anymore? I don't, but randomly happened to catch the opening segment of last night's episode, and they had a great section on how Ron Paul is being ignored by the media.
-Paul[2011-08-16 08:45:07] - a:
- aaron[2011-08-16 02:13:08] - "Most people assume this video was made digitally. But actually, it was actually created with facepaint and a complex system of mirrors. It took HOURS -poobslag" tee hee!
[2011-08-15 23:00:34] - NICE. i wonder how he made that? like . . . did he use notepad? hexedit? hehehe.
~a[2011-08-15 20:31:40] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nS7QvOX8LVk data mosh music video - aaron
[2011-08-15 15:45:18] - Daniel: Ah, I see. Well, actually I'd picked the raise cap to cover 90% of income item as well, but I thought the 2% surtax was stupid so I didn't even try to click it.
-- Xpovos[2011-08-15 15:04:34] - Xpovos: The tool only lets me pick one of the two options under the Raise Social Security Payroll Tax Cap. I went with the option that roughly eliminates the cap instead of the 2%. -Daniel
[2011-08-15 14:50:43] - Daniel: I see some oddities in yours, as I'm sure you do in mine. I'll comment on this one. You checked off on a (?%) surtax on any income over $1M, but not on the additional 2% payroll surtax on income over (roughly) $106K. Both are projected to bring in $190B in revenues. I selected neither, but of the two, I prefer the 2% payroll surtax. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-15 14:48:43] - mig: Heh, I'm finally eligible. A few more years and I can run for President too. -- Xpovos
[2011-08-15 14:41:30] - xpovos and daniel for senate 2012. - mig
[2011-08-15 14:20:04] - Here's my go at balancing. We don't have the same graphs (didn't compare option by option) but it looks like our biggest difference is healthcare vs revenues. Probably we could work something out if we had to. -Daniel
[2011-08-15 14:09:26] - mig: Point taken. I think it might at first--if for example it is used to replace Medicaid, but then the unweildy hands of bureaucracy get involved and it goes downhill fast. -- Xpovos
prev <-> next