prev <-> next
[2013-10-01 13:45:52] - mig: I'll play devil's advocate and say that the federal government might normally have more resources available, but those darn obstructionist Republicans on their ideological crusade have tried to screw up funding for Obamacare at every turn. -Paul
[2013-10-01 13:36:43] - paul: 2 problems with the d3, simcity, gtav comparison - the fed gov has vastly more resources at its disposal than those companies too. And again, for some, participation in the health exchanges is not voluntary. - mig
[2013-10-01 13:29:55] - mig: wait are you guys trying to sign onto GTA online too? yeah what the hell is up with their servers. get your shit together rockstar
[2013-10-01 13:28:14] - regarding the duration of the shutdown... i just got back from the pentagon, and an employee was carrying her plant to her car so that it wouldn't die. so, there's that. - aaron
[2013-10-01 13:28:09] - mig: It's not really an excuse, but I think it's understandable. Besides, as I mentioned before, these glitches represent a tiny fraction of what's wrong with the law, so I'm not going to get too worked up about it. -Paul
[2013-10-01 13:26:32] - mig: I'll grant you the point about the opportunity to delay. That's definitely a strike against. I'll also agree that it SHOULD be working without many glitches, but so should've Diablo 3, Sim City, GTA V, etc. -Paul
[2013-10-01 13:23:02] - actually a third reason. The opportunity was there to perhaps delay this launch to maybe work out more kinks (precedent had already been set by delaying the business insurance mandates), but the administration was stubbornly wanted to hold to this schedule. - mig
[2013-10-01 13:21:36] - be damn sure the thing would at least be somewhat usable on day 1. - mig
[2013-10-01 13:21:25] - paul: 2 reasons I don't think this should they cut any slack. First off, I don't know how much budget the exhcnages have been allotted per se, but we're talking about an entity that spends around $3.5-$3.7 trillion a year. Secondly, the fact that for a not insignficant amount of people that going through these exchanges is required by law, I would think they would
[2013-10-01 12:36:55] - Xpovos: Fair enough. I'm not saying they're doing a bang-up job... just that I personally wouldn't really fault them unless they're still having problems a week from now. Besides, I think the system being unavailable is one of the lesser problems with Obamacare.
-Paul[2013-10-01 12:35:34] - Xpovos
[2013-10-01 12:35:05] - mig: Curiosity, mostly. I don't think I'm eligible, but the writing is also on the wall; I fully expect to be without employer-sponsored health insurance by August of next year unless the law changes or I change jobs. -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 12:17:10] - xpovos: are you actually trying to get insurance through the excahnge or are you doing this for your curioisity? - mig
[2013-10-01 11:42:33] - But, what's the point of this error message, "We have a lot of visitors on our site right now and we're working to make your experience here better. Please wait here until we send you to the login page. Thanks for your patience!" if even after waiting the system still breaks? -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 11:41:36] - Paul: I'm far more willing to cut them slack on the "please wait here until the system is ready" (reasonable delay: ~10 min) and even the "system unavailable" error. I'm upset that they can't even get their basic language skills done right. After testing, pure alphanumeric works; still fails due to system unavailable, but it's not an AND. It's just erroneous. -- X
[2013-10-01 11:12:15] - Xpovos: I actually would cut the government some slack regarding glitches for the first day, because as we've seen MANY times, online access for popular things have a lot of issues in the first few days. -Paul
[2013-10-01 11:06:08] - In the first week, first month, first three months, I would suspect that there will be glitches.
[2013-10-01 11:05:39] - But, yeah, as far as I can tell it's AND, so the OR is blatantly wrong. I should test without an extra symbol, just alphanumeric and see if it works; but testing is actually a pain because of all the broken steps BEFORE this point in the account creation.
-- Xpovos[2013-10-01 11:04:36] - Paul: I honestly have no idea. My best guess right now is that's what the specification said and the programmer botched the OR to an AND and it didn't get caught because of lack of testing, or all testing data having numbers too. Or maybe they tested it and knew it was wrong and couldn't fix it for some reason? Seems easy, but easy stuff often gets left for last.
[2013-10-01 10:57:48] - Xpovos: So, wait. Is that "or" just blatantly wrong? What is it referring to? -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:57:03] - mig: Yeah, and I saw something on twitter (not sure if it's accurate or not, unfortunately) indicating that even while "shut down", the government would be spending as much money as the non-shut down government did in 2003. -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:55:02] - So... a username that is an e-mail address should be fine, right? Nope. Invalid. Has to have a number in it as well. So, not only are the rules stupid, they're described poorly. -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 10:54:07] - are still on the clock as of now, maybe that'll change), I'm guessing the republican blaming will go away. - mig
[2013-10-01 10:54:04] - This is from the VA site, which is one of the 36 federally run ones, so I assume all of those are identical. Maybe the 14 states running their own are doing better? "The username is case sensitive. Choose a username that is 6-74 characters long and must contain a lowercase or capital letter, a number, or one of these symbols _.@/-" -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 10:53:32] - Well it could end up like the sequester. Remember all the apocalyspe talk that was spreading before the sequester hit that never came to be? While surprisingly there hasn't been as much fire and brimstone talk by Dems (maybe they learned from the sequester not to overexaggerate), if there's really not all that much disruption in daily lives (80% of federal workers
[2013-10-01 10:52:59] - mig: The account creation process is a disaster, even before it fails miserably due to "system unavailable"ility. You can't do anything, even check rates or check your qualified benefits, without first creating an account, which not only requires a lot of personal information, but fails complexity standards. -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 10:49:35] - but not congress did seem to be getting some traction. -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:49:24] - Going back to my point about the public blaming Republicans more, I do wonder if the Democrats are going to over-extend themselves a bit with that. I've seen a lot of articles this morning about how Harry Reid is basically refusing to negotiate while the government is shut down and the Republican charge that Obama would talk to and compromise with Russia/Iran... -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:44:56] - Xpovos: Nope, and I wonder how many people are. Considering how little most people follow the news and politics... how many people even know what health care exchanges are? -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:40:39] - meanwhile it seems nobody can enroll in the healthcare exchanges because the websites keep crashing. Who could have forseen this? - mig
[2013-10-01 10:39:45] - Anyone else been playing with the healthcare exchange website? -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 10:39:17] - My best guess right now is 5-8 business days. But that could change quickly. -- Xpovos
[2013-10-01 10:38:53] - mig: Yeah, my best guess was shorter than a month. Other than that... I have no idea. -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:37:59] - paul: some guy from WaPo was on the radio this morning and he thought it would be more than a few days, but not nearly as along as the last one (which was 21 days). - mig
[2013-10-01 10:34:29] - And I don't see the Democrats budging at all since the public appears to be mostly blaming Republicans more than the Democrats. Heck, this might even be a blessing in disguise since any problems with Obamacare could be blamed on the shutdown. -Paul
[2013-10-01 10:33:25] - I wonder if there are any estimates on how long this "shutdown" goes on. Gurkie asked me for a prediction last night and I told her I had no idea. I expected the Republicans to cave by now, and I'm not sure what exactly would have to happen to change their mind. -Paul
[2013-09-30 17:27:18] - Also depends how long it goes on if it occurs. A week is nbd. Kind of a mild shock to the system, if anything, it could be viewed as a positive. If it drags to say, a month... or longer? That could be very disruptive around here. That would be the most 'fun' option, though, in that it would bleed into the next crisis debate. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-30 16:33:38] - mig: I think it depends on who you work for. I'm sure it's a big deal for non-essential government employees or for companies who primarily rely on the government. For everybody else, I suspect no big deal. -Paul
[2013-09-30 16:31:34] - government shutdown? big deal or overblown like sequestration was? - mig
[2013-09-30 15:22:24] - mig: except it's the opposite... it's real but i could totally see it being the onion - aaron
[2013-09-30 15:18:57] - aaron: it's definitely one of those, I know it's the onion but I could totally see this being actually happening story. - mig
[2013-09-30 11:18:35] - http://www.inquisitr.com/970462/half-of-gop-voters-think-twitter-maybe-gives-obama-extra-characters/ this is garbage journalism but i thought the title was really funny - aaron
[2013-09-30 09:55:12] - paul: specifically this refers to internationl dealings from the looks of it, so essentially this is more foreign policy than economic issue it seems. - mig
[2013-09-30 09:23:41] - a: Wait, so are the laws against boycotting or against buycotting? Or both? -Paul
[2013-09-30 09:21:45] - Our love for the Israeli state knows few bounds. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-28 12:14:44] - wtf is this? how the hell can "Antiboycott Laws" be a real thing? the wikipedia page has some details on this crazy practice too. $250,000 fines? what the fuck. ~a
[2013-09-27 16:34:59] - Xpovos: Hmmmm. Normally I would jump at the opportunity because the replacements couldn't be any worse than the people getting kicked out, but I actually feel like there are 6 or 7 not horrible people in congress right now and I think that number would be smaller if we tried that plan. -Paul
[2013-09-27 16:17:27] - Paul: There'd have to be a rule that they couldn't run for re-election. Depending it might be a 2/10/indefinite period. Otherwise, your right. Incumbents win, period. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 16:15:45] - a: I think they're "buddy" enough that he has them on his show every once in a while, but usually only so it's not a huge agree-fest. There's a video at the bottom of that link of when Nick Gillespie went on the show and got everybody to disagree with him.
-Paul[2013-09-27 16:11:45] - a: he only likes people from reason when there's a republican in the white house. - mig
[2013-09-27 16:09:15] - bill maher doesn't like reason? i thought they were buddies. ~a
[2013-09-27 16:05:55] - http://reason.com/blog/2013/09/27/watch-matt-welch-on-real-time-with-bill For those who watch Bill Maher's show: Matt Welch will be on tonight, so I expect a lot of incredulous yelling at him. -Paul
[2013-09-27 16:05:27] - Xpovos: How exactly does that work? Do we immediately hold another election to replace them all? What's to stop them from all getting re-elected (like incumbents usually are)? -Paul
[2013-09-27 15:57:22] - A vote of no-confidence for the whole clan. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 15:57:02] - One of my favorite Congress questions: If offered this deal, would you take it? You get to vote for the repeal of all Congressmen, with the noted caveat that you MUST also vote for the repeal of your Congressman if you select to take the deal. Think Pelosi is the problem? Or that Boehner is a weeper? Sure, but your guy's on his heels too. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 15:52:03] - Xpovos: Heh, true. Maybe a better way of putting it is that people have selective memory when it comes to crediting (or blaming) congress? -Paul
[2013-09-27 15:36:43] - Paul: Your two points there seem to be contradictory. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 15:20:53] - And I'm sure a lot of people blame our current congress for many perceived failures of Obama too. -Paul
[2013-09-27 15:20:12] - Yeah, although I think we always tend to overrate presidents and underrate congress. I actually credit congress for a lot of the good of Clinton's terms and feel like congress could've done a lot more to reign in GWB. -Paul
[2013-09-27 15:07:19] - haha, nah, probably not
both paul and i like clinton more than obama. everywhere else we disagree. ~a[2013-09-27 15:06:02] - I wonder if you two are measuring in different directions? -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 14:51:18] - a: He's gotta at least be top two for me, and I think probably #1. Considering his predecessor... that's saying something. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:44:11] - obama is the fourth shittiest US president of the past five.
~a[2013-09-27 13:43:38] - a: Anyway, I hate to do this, but I actually have to run out for a meeting. Sorry. ttyl. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:42:29] - a: Right, but I've never heard you refer to them as shitty human beings and my guess is that you don't think of them as such. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:41:48] - a: What have I been saying sarcastically? I've been serious. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:41:32] - yes, all will be forgiven. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:40:57] - i'm neither praising nor being content with the people you think i'm praising or being content with. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:40:25] - a: And if Barilla CEO comes out tomorrow and says he's had an evolution and will now market to gays, will all be forgiven? I recall you not being very willing to reconsider Chick-Fil-A after they stopped donating to those charities. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:40:01] - anyways, yes, all of those things you're saying sarcastically, i agree with non-sarcastically. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:39:10] - a: I know I've brought this up before, but it's just mind boggling to me how people can get so angry at somebody whose worst offense we can think of is that he might've made people sad because he doesn't want to market to them, while at the same time praising (or at least being content with) people who have done things thousands if not millions of times worse. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:37:29] - times they are-a changing. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:37:23] - a: Also, has Barilla had a policy in effect recently where it's employees weren't allowed to mention they were gay, lest they be fired? -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:35:36] - a: Ok, so how shitty of a human being was Obama until recently when he explicitly said he was against gay marriage (which is a step beyond what the Barilla guy ever said). -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:33:54] - 1993 was 20 years ago. i know it seemed like only yesterday, but it was 20 years ago. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:32:49] - a: And how much shittier a human being is somebody like Obama, who is pretty directly responsible for murdering thousands of people via drone. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:31:33] - a: Oh, wow. I didn't really expect that answer. So if he's a shitty human being for (I guess) making a lot of people feel a little bad... I've gotta ask how shitty a human being must somebody like Bill Clinton be? He presumably made those people a lot sadder with his Don't Ask Don't Tell policy. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:28:08] - actions. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:26:39] - a: I wouldn't go so far to call him a shitty human. Is that mostly based on his beliefs or his actions? -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:23:34] - this is a PR disaster. i'm sure we can all agree there. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:22:54] - nah, you're right. let's stick to the facts. he doesn't want to advertise to homosexuals, he doesn't like them adopting kids, and he thinks women should be cooking the food. that's enough of a reason for me to think he's a shitty human. it takes far far less for me to think he's a shitty CEO. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:21:03] - a: Why would he lie and hide his preference for gays not existing? He already dug himself a hole about not marketing to non-traditional families and he seemed to know it at the time. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:19:45] - a: But do you have any evidence of that? I feel like this goes back to the Trayvon Martin case where you seem to be making up these evil racist/anti-gay feelings for people where there isn't any evidence to support it. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:18:30] - a: Yeah, I noticed that myself (one is who somebody is and another is a choice), but there are a limited number of conversation threads I want to try to keep track of.
Also, did you ever mention the hoodie boy as being black? 
-Paul[2013-09-27 13:18:09] - a: I can't argue against that opinion, but I think it unlikely myself, and that's not how I've read it; which may be a portion of the crux of our disagreement. Progress! -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 13:18:06] - paul: see my message to xpovos. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:17:34] - xpovos: nah, i think g. barilla would prefer they didn't exist. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:16:53] - a: I mean, I fully admit that I don't know the guy and you could be right that he secretly wishes all gays would disappear, but the quotes in that article don't seem to support that at all. He seems to be fine with gays and fine with them marrying, he just thinks he should market to a traditional family. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:15:59] - a: It's not disagreeing with them existing. It's disagreeing with how they behave. Similar to the car issue you mentioned. They guy who does that *probably* doesn't hate him for BEING black, but is worried because of stereotypes about what blacks DO. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 13:14:43] - a: I think you're reading way too much into what he said. He specifically said, "who have the right to do whatever they want without disturbing others" and "I respect same-sex marriage because that concerns people who want to contract marriage". -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:14:30] - paul: equating homosexuality with a choice is an interesting turn in the conversation. but i guess i did it first since wearing a hoodie is a choice
~a[2013-09-27 13:13:20] - a: Also, I assume you are saying that locking your door when the hoodie-boy walks by is a bad thing? Would you feel the same way about switching seats at a bar if somebody openly carrying a gun sat next to you? -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:12:31] - "I don’t agree with them" doesn't mean "i don't agree with their opinions" it means "i don't agree with them existing" it means "i don't agree with them living the way they live". the later is meaningful. is it an opinion? yes. but it's a meaningful (hurtful) opinion. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:12:23] - a: Ok, but I feel like we're rapidly expanding the definition of "hurt" to where it's effectively meaningless. I see somebody in the hall this morning and they don't make eye contact with me and it makes me sad because it means they don't like me. -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:11:44] - a: I think adoption is probably even easier to defend, in certain circumstances. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 13:10:45] - ignoring the adoption thing again? ~a
[2013-09-27 13:09:51] - a: Ok, "meaningfully" hurt, then? Also, I know you're paraphrasing, but he never said anything as strong as "lame". In fact, the worst thing I can find him saying is: "I would not do a commercial with a homosexual family [...] because I don’t agree with them". -Paul
[2013-09-27 13:09:40] - if a boy wearing a hoodie walks past my car, and i hit the power-lock-button on my car, he'll hear that, and it'll make him sad. did i get out of my car and yell at him for scaring me? no, but i did something possibly worse: i effectively told him that i don't care for his way of living. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:07:01] - opinions and words matter. ~a
[2013-09-27 13:03:47] - it doesn't seem like anybody is being hurt by his opinion, because you aren't being hurt by his opinion. if somebody said, adrian, your way of living is lame, we don't think you have the right to life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness, it'll make me sad. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:56:43] - a: And I'm fine if that's what people think. Like that article mentioned: He has a right to his opinion and people have a right to boycott them. I just think there are better fights to pick than with somebody who doesn't seem to be directly hurting anybody with his opinion. -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:55:07] - a: I dunno, you seem a lot angrier than sad to me. I think that gets at the core difference between us, though. I see his opinion and think it's a little sad that he thinks that way, but that's it. It seems like a lot of other people get angry and think he's a hateful bigot that needs to be punished. -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:49:24] - paul: i'm not easily offended, but people often do things that make me sad. this makes me sad. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:42:39] - a: Well, yeah, because you're easily upset.
-Paul[2013-09-27 12:42:17] - a: Again, I don't know this guy at all, but based on the quotes I've read, it sounds like he would actually be perfectly fine if a company didn't want to market to a "traditional" family and instead just marketed to non-traditional families. -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:41:55] - paul: well you keep wanting to go back to that, but i think if a company said they didn't want to market to me because they disagree with my way of living, i'd be a little upset. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:40:44] - a: But, again, if we're ignoring the adoption thing, there really wasn't much in the way of inequality in his opinion. He implied he had no problem with gay marriage ("who have the right to do whatever they want without disturbing others") but that he just didn't necessarily want to market to them. -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:40:20] - xpovos: paul is conflating the two, i am not. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:39:31] - I missed a close-paren. It should be right after the first... -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 12:38:38] - a: Unless you're arguing that the majority of people are anti-gay, I'm probably going to have a hard time continuing the conversation, because we're now conflating minorities (people who are not in the majority (race, religion, politics, extended to sexuality) with minority opinions--which may or may not be held by actual people-minorities. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 12:38:33] - a: I mean, it kinda seems like people ARE hating on him right now and he doesn't appear to be changing his tune much. -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:38:18] - the two sides of this argument are not symmetrical. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:37:40] - he's not in that position, i disagree. he's almost in the position where people are for equality and he's not for equality. he's not in the position where people are against equality and he's on the receiving side of that inequality. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:37:25] - a: Where his views are the ones that are considered in the minority. I wouldn't be surprised if he's getting dumped on a lot more for his thoughts on "traditional marriage" than if he had come out in support for gay marriage. -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:36:00] - a: Not sure if this is directed at me, but based solely on the quotes I've seen from those two news articles, I'm not convinced he would change his stance on marriages if the tables were turned. I mean, he's already almost in that position... -Paul
[2013-09-27 12:34:08] - what if men were the ones we expected to cook our dinners? ~a
[2013-09-27 12:32:49] - how would g. barilla feel if everybody thought that a marriage shouldn't be between a man and a woman, or men and women shouldn't be allowed to adopt. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:32:34] - when i think of cases like this, i think of stop and frisk. i sometimes wonder how those people would feel if the tables were turned, and people being stopped-and-frisked were all white and old and rich. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:24:10] - if g. barilla lived in a world where people were hating on him and his way of living, he'd probably see the light really quickly. ~a
[2013-09-27 12:18:16] - xpovos: i absolutely love the quote. i appreciate people that see and live gray areas, continuums, pluralism, and moral relativism. i fail to see the gray area with guido barilla. ~a
[2013-09-27 11:54:01] - Is the pasta man a douche? Possibly, perhaps even probably. But he's the kind of douche, then, that appeals to other like-minded douches, as Aaron was noting. An opinion held by a sufficiently large minority of the population as to warrant consideration; unless we're not for minority opinions. Or just not those minority opinions? -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 11:52:35] - a: I don't see a contradiction between disagreeing with somebody's beliefs while still respecting his right to have beliefs that are different than my own. -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:51:56] - a: To me, it's a matter of tolerance of beliefs. He thinks a family should be a man and a woman (and maybe that the woman should be in the kitchen, that was a little unclear to me) and I'm ok with him believing that, even if I disagree with. -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:51:54] - a: That was my point exactly, though. Human beings are filled with lots of good points and bad points, and points we like to disagree over which is good and which are bad. They're all part of each of us. http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/10420.Aleksandr_Solzhenitsyn First quote. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 11:49:40] - a: But as far as I can tell, this guy isn't going out and trying to change laws or discriminate against gays or "convert" them into being straight or anything like that. He has an opinion I disagree with, but he doesn't appear to be hurting anybody, so I feel like getting all worked up and angry at him is an overreaction. -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:47:47] - a: Well, I'm not very sympathetic with him because of the gay adoption stuff. So if I have to choose one, I guess I'll go with "not". -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:46:30] - a: I'm sympathetic because he seems to be getting slammed by a bunch of people just for his personal opinion even when it's seemingly not directly harming anybody. -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:46:08] - brb, lunch. (my breakfast didn't hold up and the soda machine left me high and dry) ~a
[2013-09-27 11:45:19] - paul: so you're sympathetic with him or you're not sympathetic with him? ~a
[2013-09-27 11:44:41] - a: Because even though he has an opinion I disagree with, he appears to be trying to not harm anybody with it (again, I'm excluding the part about gay adoption, because it basically changes my mind about him). -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:44:26] - xpovos: yeah, ok, obama agreed not to bomb syria, and i thought that was awesome. but i'm still focusing on the NSA thing. so this is different. read the message board title i put up
~a[2013-09-27 11:41:57] - let's read some god-damn subtext here: the pasta douchbag thinks gays are scum and think that a woman's place is in the kitchen making the fucking dinner. my viewpoint of this guy is not much of a stretch from the words that are coming out of his mouth. ~a
[2013-09-27 11:39:07] - a: Kind of like Obama agreeing to not bomb Syria... maybe? -- Xpovos
[2013-09-27 11:33:43] - paul: well so explain why you're sympathetic with him. because i just don't get it. it's like somebody does something horrible and something not-horrible and you're focusing on the not-horrible thing for some reason. ~a
[2013-09-27 11:16:46] - Maybe saying "sympathetic with his views" is wrong. I wasn't sympathetic with his views, but sympathetic with him. -Paul
[2013-09-27 11:16:16] - a: Right, which is why I said that went against it. It's why I was a little sympathetic with his views before reading that. Sure, he has an opinion I disagree with, but he's seemingly not trying to force it on others (again, until the adoption thing). -Paul
[2013-09-27 10:50:36] - he doesn't have a "live-and-let-live philosophy". if he had a live-and-let-live philosophy, he would have been fine with gay adoption. ~a
[2013-09-27 10:49:38] - Aaron: Somehow Starbucks got a reputation as supporting the rights of people to open carry. Recently, I think the CEO asked for people to stop bringing their guns to Starbucks. He said it wasn't a ban, and they would still serve people who brought their guns, but he was asking for them to stop. -Paul
[2013-09-27 10:48:12] - Aaron: Which I think he tried to touch on when he said, "You can’t always please everyone not to displease anyone". It reminds me of the issue with Starbucks and guns. -Paul
[2013-09-27 10:46:34] - Aaron: Yeah, it crosses the line on the live-and-let-live philosophy I referred to earlier. -Paul
[2013-09-27 10:44:26] - paul: any more offensive than mcdonalds having a preference for multi-racial friendships in advertising. although, he could express it in a more politically correct way. i imagine it's tough in the modern world, having to express one message which transcends multiple cultures to be inoffensive to all of them - aaron
[2013-09-27 10:42:44] - paul: i mean i wouldn't be surprised whatsoever if research eventually reveals that kids develop best in a household with both genders represented, just like they probably develop better in a household with multiple races or cultures represented. so i don't find his preference for heterosexuals in advertising, or his belief that "women are crucial" to be - aaron
[2013-09-27 10:39:08] - paul: hmm yeah the "gay adoption" thing is very offensive, that comment wasn't in the original article but to me, it's by far the worst one. saying "i prefer this kind of family", "i want to market to this kind of family" is fine to me, okay, that's your target demo, but to say you have no respect for people in a different situation, that's awful - aaron
[2013-09-27 09:41:50] - Aaron: Oh, and the part about gay adoption too. That one was a little more offensive to me, but I also understand his point there. If he does prefer the traditional family, I can see why he would oppose gay adoption. -Paul
[2013-09-27 09:40:28] - Aaron: I mean, it's fine if that's what he believes and what he wants to target, but I think it's misguided and I disagree with the strategy, I guess. -Paul
[2013-09-27 09:39:26] - Aaron: I'm not entirely sure what a "sacral" family is, but basically the part about "Our family is a traditional family" and "I think we want to talk to traditional families. The women are crucial in this." Although I don't exactly know what he means by women being crucial... he does know about lesbians, right? -Paul
[2013-09-27 09:14:12] - paul: what specifically about his statement do you disagree with? i'm not really trying to start an argument, i just want to see if i disagree with it too - aaron
[2013-09-27 08:38:44] - Aaron: And I also agree about the weird ripple affects. To this day, I wonder if Chick-Fil-A's business was ultimately helped or hurt by the controversy with them. I'll admit I was tempted to go there more often just to spite those mayors who said they were going to ban Chick-Fil-A from their cities. -Paul
[2013-09-27 08:37:31] - Aaron: It's hard to say he's directly hurting gays in any significant way by not showing any gay families in advertisements (for as long as he is the CEO, I guess). -Paul
[2013-09-27 08:36:08] - aaron: He even specifically said, "not for lack of respect toward homosexuals – who have the right to do whatever they want without disturbing others". He has an unfortunate set of beliefs, but other than that I kind of like his live-and-let-live philosophy. -Paul
[2013-09-27 08:33:57] - aaron: I think I see (and agree with) what you are saying. It's weird, but I also didn't necessarily find what he said offensive because he was just offering his opinion (which I definitely disagree with) and was actually trying to put it delicately too. -Paul
[2013-09-26 19:05:01] - finding a niche as a pasta which "pro-family" groups or conservative church groups rally behind - aaron
[2013-09-26 19:04:31] - that said, i specifically shop at jcpenney because they ran an endearing gay father's day ad which drew a lot of negative publicity from conservative groups. these kinds of boycots and public corporate shaming can have weird unintuitive ripple effects. i don't know how big a pasta company barilla is but if they're a smaller company, this could result in them - aaron
[2013-09-26 19:03:28] - i don't actually find the barilla guy's comments that offensive. i think he said exactly what he meant. i think some of our friends agree that the "woman plays a central role in a family" and i think it's totally rational to think that, it doesn't mean it's a nice thing to say or a nice way to put it but that's fine, it doesn't hurt my feelings - aaron
[2013-09-26 17:45:28] - a: It's only slanderous if it's untrue. Right? So you can still tell people how I support anti-gay Italian pasta companies.
-paul[2013-09-26 17:40:13] - you're free to buy whatever pasta you want and i'm free to judge you behind your back and spread slanderous lies about you to people you know. ok, maybe not the second thing. ~a
[2013-09-26 17:36:50] - a: Sorry, but I'm probably going to stick with the Barilla Plus pasta that I buy. Took me a while to find a "healthier" pasta that doesn't taste like cardboard. I guess the good thing is that I don't buy a lot of pasta anyway... -Paul
[2013-09-26 17:27:04] - "Funny that he apparently used to buy 'terrible quality' pasta but now has changed brands" i read that too and wondered the same thing. the quote doesn't say when he switched brands though. i'm switching today (i buy lots of brands and before today it included a majority barilla) ~a
[2013-09-26 17:10:48] - Finally: "Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz told anti-gay shareholders of Starbucks stock that they can sell their stock". Thought that was interesting too. -Paul
[2013-09-26 17:10:08] - "I've already changed pasta brands. Barilla is terrible quality." Funny that he apparently used to buy "terrible quality" pasta but now has changed brands.
-Paul[2013-09-26 17:07:57] - a: "Barilla absolutely has the right to say that Barilla pasta is for straight people. And we have the right to tell him to vaffanapoli." There were a few good quotes from your article that I liked. -Paul
[2013-09-26 17:06:30] - a: No, but I think there is some middle ground between "it'll affect his company in no way" and "tons of straight people are going to stop eating their pasta". -Paul
[2013-09-26 17:03:49] - paul: he singlehandedly pissed off women, homosexual people, and people that give two shits about women, and/or homosexual people. do you think it'll affect his company in no way? ~a
[2013-09-26 17:01:04] - vaffanapoli is a funny word
Italian for "fuck off". Literally translated it means "Go to Naples". ~a[2013-09-26 17:00:36] - at least one. ~a
[2013-09-26 16:59:11] - a: Tons? I don't know if I agree with that. How many straight people do you think are going to stop buying Barilla pasta? -Paul
[2013-09-26 16:54:51] - "If gays like our pasta and our advertisings, they will eat our pasta; if they don’t like that, they will eat someone else’s pasta." what this moron doesn't realize is that tons of straight people are going to stop eating their pasta because of his words. ~a
[2013-09-26 16:53:47] - ask and you shall receive. much longer quote in the huffpost article. ~a
[2013-09-26 16:50:59] - a: Not trying to defend his viewpoint, but I feel like it probably makes more sense if we had the entire interview to read (and if we understood Italian, I suppose). -Paul
[2013-09-26 16:50:21] - a: Perhaps, but the only information I have to go on is an article that sprinkles quotes from some interview all throughout. They easily could've been taken out of context. -Paul
[2013-09-26 16:48:15] - aaron: http://reason.com/blog/2013/09/26/scott-shackford-interviews-papers-please Interview with the creator of Papers, Please. -Paul
[2013-09-26 16:48:15] - i don't think that particular CEO did a good job of explaining his point of view. because frankly, his quotes are all over the place. is he homophobic or sexist? if it's both, which is he more of? a homophobe or a sexist? should i be more mad that he sucks at being a CEO, or that he sucks at being a human being? ~a
[2013-09-26 16:44:44] - a: Yeah, I don't think that particular article did a good job of explaining his point of view, because it frankly seemed all over the place. Maybe something was lost in translation? -Paul
[2013-09-26 16:36:24] - "Has anyone asked Barilla if they are OK with pro-pasta lesbian couples?" ha ~a
[2013-09-26 16:33:30] - "The women are crucial in this" iow, women should be cooking the food? sexist too? god what a fucking weirdo. it's like he doesn't realize that this is a PR disaster. ~a
[2013-09-26 16:29:04] - the fact that he apologized i guess is "ok" though he didn't quite take back what he had said. ~a
[2013-09-26 16:28:34] - sounds great. i will eat another pasta. "The women are crucial in this." not quite sure what that means. ~a
[2013-09-26 16:18:20] - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24287108 Still boycotting Chick-Fil-A? Here's another brand to boycott.... -Paul
[2013-09-26 15:11:13] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLuSvXQ7M5w yeah, they also have them in english! a lot easier to follow but, for some reason the russian is funnier to me... - aaron
[2013-09-25 11:25:03] - hah, they've done a bunch of the movies apparently. ~a
[2013-09-25 10:51:25] - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYGaZ6HqNmY animated pulp fiction in 60 seconds - aaron
[2013-09-25 10:51:21] - a: oh huh!! yeah i think you're right - aaron
[2013-09-25 10:26:03] - sounds like the plot to Hugo (film) (oh hmmmm they talk about that in the wp article). ~a
[2013-09-25 10:23:40] - http://www.chonday.com/Videos/the-writer-automaton the writer automaton, a 240-year old doll that can write - aaron
[2013-09-25 08:53:03] - a: i also disagree that it's good for a language to make doing the wrong thing easy. - aaron
[2013-09-25 08:51:08] - a: ordinarily i agree but that's kind of the whole point of a framework like maven; to coerce you into doing things their way. if i want to do something super-weird which goes against their framework, i don't have to use maven, i can use something like ant or make or gradle - aaron
[2013-09-24 16:36:58] - Go 'Stros!
[2013-09-24 16:00:30] - A Blutarsky! -- Xpovos
[2013-09-24 15:11:27] - aaron: making something hard to do, because it shouldn't be done, isn't good. for example, java doesn't require that you use "private" everywhere, but you'd still look sideways at some huge codebase that never used "private". having the language require that you write good code (or a good build system in this case) shouldn't be the goal. ~a
[2013-09-24 15:06:27] - aaron: i understand that argument, but i disagree with it. (i've never used gradle btw) there are too many times where i've used groovy in maven, or created a damn maven plugin, or worse used ant within maven. i'd prefer to do it in the build language if it were possible. ~a
[2013-09-24 14:05:54] - a: if i want my gradle project to compile all my source code into target-20130927, where 20130927 is today's date, and on even days it deletes everything and compiles twice... it's like... okay, sure you can do that. that's probably 3 lines of code. i don't know if that's a good thing or not - aaron
[2013-09-24 14:04:02] - a: like if i wanted to write a maven project which did something completely insane, it's hard, because the maven lifecycle kind of protects you. if you want to do something insane, you have to use plugins in a weird way. but with gradle, you can just write in whatever groovy code you want - aaron
[2013-09-24 14:00:49] - a: the thing i dislike most about gradle is that it's an actual programming language, like... you write groovy code, and it's actually too flexible, if you know what i mean - aaron
[2013-09-24 13:56:56] - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2096672/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_1 apparently they're doing a new dumb and dumber with jim carrey and jeff daniels? - aaron
[2013-09-24 12:40:18] - a: i don't believe so at least not on the project i'm working on. - mig
[2013-09-24 12:38:19] - mig: sorry, meant to address that to you. ~a
[2013-09-24 12:34:49] - paul: aw man, now i miss vt.
~a[2013-09-24 12:24:14] - second unrelated question: has anybody here used gradle? apparently (according to a cursory look) it's surpassed maven. you can still use maven artifacts, and maven artifact repositories, but they seem to make build scripts much simpler/better. ~a
[2013-09-24 12:22:55] - question: has anybody here used intellij? apparently (according to a cursory look) it's surpassed eclipse by leaps and bounds. ~a
[2013-09-24 10:54:59] - daniel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hokie_Stone - mig
[2013-09-24 10:45:54] - paul: What is hokie stone? -Daniel
[2013-09-24 10:42:50] - paul: not a big fan of the helmet, but it's not awful either. - mig
[2013-09-23 16:52:56] - http://www.hokiesports.com/football/recaps/20130923aac.html I normally hate alternative uniforms, but this alternate helmet isn't that horrible. -Paul
[2013-09-20 13:00:16] - mig: I don't think I disagree with any of the points you made but still somehow sports and politics are more separate in my head than media & politics. It would be odd though if someone was acting CEO of a company and a senator at the same time which is pretty close to being a team owner. -Daniel
[2013-09-20 12:19:02] - and given how much the public and congress both get major freakouts on just the appearance of the possibility of impropriety between business owners influencing policy, it just seems odd that it didn't seem to be much of an issue in Kohl's case. - mig
[2013-09-20 12:16:22] - And I mean, he does employ a ton of people as an NBA owner. Pretty much any labor related law he could have a personal financial stake in. - mig
[2013-09-20 12:12:26] - anyways, for potential conflicts of interest policy-wise. Emiment Domain, public financing of arenas, also the major sports leagues are granted anti-trust exemptions from most labor laws. Also, Milwaukee Bucks are in the NBA, not MLB. - mig
[2013-09-20 12:10:14] - daniel: well it'd be like someone like one of the Waltons or Rupert Murdoch running for congress. Maybe it's not illegal but lots of people would be crying foul. - mig
[2013-09-20 11:16:53] - mig: Is there a lot of legislation or politics that involves baseball? -Daniel
[2013-09-20 10:58:55] - so TIL that the Milwaukee Bucks are owned by Herbert Kohl, who until recently was also a US senator. I'm just curious how this was possible, becuase it seems like there could potentially be major conflicts of interest holding both of those positions at the same time. - mig
[2013-09-20 09:53:39] - Unless you're interviewing at someplace like a bank or somewhere with really uptight dress codes like paul's old company or a place like booz allen i'd say your other options are probably fine. - mig
[2013-09-20 09:51:44] - What is the difference between a suit jacket and a blazer anyway? I'd probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference. - mig
[2013-09-20 09:48:41] - amy: i think the dress guidelines in the workplace in general seem more strict for males than for females. I'd think the expectation for interviews is a suit for males, but not really for females. - mig
[2013-09-19 17:04:34] - a: If it's just as easy to spend USD as bitcoins everywhere, except bitcoins are increasing in value while USD is decreasing... then there's no reason to spend bitcoins, thus increasing deflation. -Paul
[2013-09-19 17:03:32] - a: Yeah, so I guess that's a valid point, but I feel like that's a little different because each competing currency is an official currency somewhere, which it seems like would help keep down deflation. It seems a little different when one of the currencies is, for lack of a better term, completely optional. -Paul
[2013-09-19 16:50:54] - paul: oh nm! i misread your post. i should have just said "yes" ~a
[2013-09-19 16:50:25] - paul: i was referring to the canadian dollar
~a[2013-09-19 16:31:26] - amy: I've seen suit and slacks/button down before. Adrians advice seems good though. -Daniel
[2013-09-19 15:46:23] - a: I haven't, are the competing currencies the Canadian dollar and USD? -Paul
[2013-09-19 15:24:31] - a: thanks for the info. i have a suit that i used to wear for interviews way back when, but it no longer fits me. i could have it tailored, but don't want to pay the expense if i can avoid it. -amy
[2013-09-19 15:19:46] - ALWAYS, i'd ask your POC what the dress expectation is. ~a
[2013-09-19 15:18:24] - (in general) ~25% of the time i see a suit and a tie. ~50% of the time some otherwise nice clothing. ~25% i'm like, uhhh, you don't seem to be very dressed up, are you? ~a
[2013-09-19 15:15:43] - a question for you software engineer types: in general, would you expect a candidate to come to an interview in a suit? or do you think i could get away with nice slacks and a button down, or a dress and a blazer? yes i realize there are differences from company to company, but in general? or how about at your company? -amy
[2013-09-19 14:51:32] - paul: two competing currencies exists in lots of places. have you been to canada before? ~a
[2013-09-19 14:50:38] - xpovos: i'm not sure that 9% in either direction is destabilizing. tons of countries go through double digit inflations for short periods of time and eventually restabilize. ~a
[2013-09-19 14:44:11] - a: Still, owning a lot of bitcoins where the value keeps going up doesn't seem like the worst thing in the world.
I understand it would be a knock against it as a currency, though. -Paul[2013-09-19 14:43:28] - a: Yeah, the whole idea of deflationary spirals and whatnot is an area I just can't figure out how likely it is. I'll definitely admit that it seems a lot MORE likely in a scenario with two competing currencies (bitcoin and USD). -Paul
[2013-09-19 14:40:47] - a: 9% deflation (or inflation) is very destabilizing to an economy. As I've gotten older my opinions on deflation in general have changed as well, while I still think a zero % is better than a +2% (inflation), -2% (deflation) could actually be pretty damaging. But that's less of a currency concern than a credit and markets concern. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-19 14:32:27] - paul: exactly. let's say there is deflation of (say) 9% every year. since, unlike current cash, you can easily spend milli-bitcoin and micro-bitcoin, there isn't a problem spending small denominations. so deflation might be ok in the long run, i still am not 100% sure. ~a
[2013-09-19 14:29:11] - a: You're saying instead of holding it's value, the value keeps going up due to an deflationary spiral? -Paul
[2013-09-19 14:25:44] - paul: "it would probably hold it's value better than USD" what worries me is that if it holds it's value "too well" then people will never want to spend it. predictable and long-term deflation could harm the economy? ~a
[2013-09-19 14:23:28] - daniel: "Getting outside of the gov's domain (being USD) isn't something of value to me" yeah me neither. here's where the value to me is: i want to send my friend money without a cash/check transaction. do that without huge (1%-10%) fees. add the concept of escrow and it gets even harder with USD. ~a
[2013-09-19 14:22:55] - daniel: i didn't understand smart-phones 10 years ago. people learn quickly. ~a
[2013-09-19 14:22:21] - Daniel: very inflationary. -Paul
[2013-09-19 14:22:06] - Daniel: A reason I am interested in bitcoin is the lack of any central control over the money supply. As I understand it, the inflation of the money supply is relatively predictable and fixed, meaning if/when bitcoin matures as an actual currency, it would probably hold it's value better than USD, which has a central bank which has traditionally been... -Paul
[2013-09-19 14:20:26] - xpovos: credit cards are not much better for merchants. merchants have to worry about what's called charge-backs (a specific kind of fraud). it really hurts their bottom line. it turns certain profitable ventures into unprofitable ventures. ~a
[2013-09-19 13:29:08] - Daniel: I like bitcoins because they appeal to my inner economist. I also love the crypto. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-19 13:28:23] - a: You're absolutely right in PayPal. It's a pretty terrible product now. Credit cards are much better, but harder for small merchants to set up. That does give bitcoins a niche. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-19 13:00:03] - "if I also accept USD, that's what I'll get, because it's what people have" today, i agree. but that may change. especially if a lot of merchants realize how much better it is for them and how it doesn't preclude usd. ~a
[2013-09-19 12:59:43] - merchants hate, but need paypal. ~a
[2013-09-19 12:59:37] - "Online transactions are equally easy in USD without needing to convert though" false. yeah, i totally disagree. you're assuming that 99% of people who use paypal regularly (more than once per month), don't *hate* paypal. it's kind of a long story as to why people hate paypal, but a lot of it comes down to fraud and how easy fraud is through paypal. ~a
[2013-09-19 12:43:37] - Aside from not understanding them entirely I buy into Andrew's point of why do I care about them. Currently I have no concept of why bitcoin is relevant to me other than a novelty. Getting outside of the gov's domain (being USD) isn't something of value to me. -Daniel
[2013-09-19 12:41:44] - I'm pretty sure that if I only sort of understand bitcoins that means that a HUGE portion of the populace doesn't understand them and I'm not sure that money that people don't understand is going to catch on. -Daniel
[2013-09-19 12:28:51] - Its hard to tell which group is the largest, but I think the third is the one with the most room for growth. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-19 12:28:25] - Paul: I think that's a historic perspective, particularly in VA, but that was probably more of a factor when the state was less blue. I think Sarvis' actual support is a combination genuine libertarians, moderate republicans who feel Cuccinelli is either too socially conservative or otherwise unelectable, and Democrats who think McAullife is a slimeball. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-19 12:13:54] - Xpovos: It's interesting that the article seems to imply that Sarvis' support comes mostly at the expense of Cuccinelli... -Paul
[2013-09-19 12:12:14] - a: Back to bitcoins. Online transactions are equally easy in USD without needing to convert though. Arguably easier because the USD are already there. As a merchant, I could even 'prefer' to be paid online in bitcoins for a number of reasons, but if I also accept USD, that's what I'll get, because it's what people have. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-19 12:09:41] - Hopes for Sarvis fading? (It's at the bottom of the article) http://thefederalist.com/2013/09/19/ken-cuccinellis-window-of-opportunity/ -- Xpovos
[2013-09-18 22:05:21] - So... Diablo 3's Auction House is being shut down. For reals this time. -- Xpovos
[2013-09-18 17:10:23] - maybe we don't care about btc taking over for USD though. forget j6p. really, where does BTC shine: online transactions. some of the escrow services that leverage bitcoin's strength are super amazing: for example, you can hire an escrow service, but cut the service out of the loop if you want to go ahead and resolve the escrow (make the payment). ~a
prev <-> next