prev <-> next
[2015-07-21 13:00:59] - i see a coinbase app for iOS, I assume that one is trustworthy? - mig
[2015-07-21 12:44:23] - a: Thank you for the software advice. I did so and now have a backed up wallet. Still no proper clue how to use it, but definitely a step in the right direction. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-21 12:18:26] - xpovos: oh that part is not too bad. i'd suggest installing mycelium on and android device if you were looking to spend a few bucks. if you want more than $50, as a speculative investment, i'd honestly probably just give you a piece of paper with the bits on it. ~a
[2015-07-21 12:07:16] - a: Yeah, the whole 'setting up a wallet' business is brutal. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-21 11:39:57] - xpovos: although, if you are serious about acquiring bits, i'm perfectly happy to exchange. then you can avoid having to learn the (still today very complicated) ropes.
~a[2015-07-21 11:38:15] - xpovos: 1. i've been exchanging bits for usd since early 2011. my "cost basis" (in quotes because it's a currency) is very high. Below the current price, but not by much; so i'm not a lucky sunofabitch. recent places i've exchanged are bitwage.co and coinbase.com. 2. i've exchanged online services (software) for bits. 3. i've sold stuff on ebay for bits. ~a
[2015-07-21 11:38:11] - xpovos: no, i do not mine (i do not suggest wasting time investigating mining, it's a completely lopsided money losing opportunity today). i've gotten them in many many many ways. none of them are easy, but all of them are easy enough for me. here are a few of the ways . . . ~a
[2015-07-21 11:26:40] - a: How do you acquire bits, generally? Do you mine? Or is it just the other side of the transaction where you're paying $ for bits? -- Xpovos
[2015-07-21 11:19:05] - seriously, if you or anybody wants to exchange less than, say, 50usd for bits, i'll do that trade any time. ~a
[2015-07-21 11:18:22] - xpovos: i'll always exchange bitcoin for usd. not because i want to exchange though, but because it makes me happy when more people are spending/using/saving it. ~a
[2015-07-21 11:17:10] - paul: dunno. i was exchanging at 3x what it is now, so don't look to me for advice. ~a
[2015-07-21 11:12:27] - a: I currently have no BC and want to have some at least, both for novelty and diversification. The trouble has been with finding a way to get BC. I don't really want to just pay $ to buy BC, which would be easy, but obtain them some other way, which seems harder. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-21 11:10:34] - a: Has bitcoin hit the bottom yet? Is it time to invest?
-Paul[2015-07-21 11:08:54] - mig: Sorry, I've been afmb (away from message board) for the past few days). -Paul
[2015-07-21 11:08:19] - xpovos: i'm guessing here, but you might be able to eventually use it without bits. i'm not 100% sure if it'll work for that, but if the reputation system is solid, you could get your own personal trusted party to deposit USD into your bank account and deal with OB without bitcoins. even if not, though, i could do it. i could transfer USD for your bits. ~a
[2015-07-21 11:03:32] - a: Well, that's an awesome concept. I really hope it succeeds. I'll probably be signing up as soon as it goes live. I'm interested in selling stuff, and less fees than eBay is good. And getting bitcoins is good. Win-win-win. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-21 10:05:52] - OpenBazaar to launch by thanksgiving. i'm guessing they picked thanksgiving because of black-friday. ~a
[2015-07-20 11:40:35] - paul: gawker ended up pulling the article. - mig
[2015-07-20 11:40:00] - Usually, if I'm missing a dependency I'll look at central first. I think in the past we've had to point to some different external repositories since central didn't have everything but I think at this point we'll look at central for anything that we don't already have stored on our local artifactory. - mig
[2015-07-20 11:33:39] - a: Artifactory for storing our local shit. Central for most external things. -Daniel
[2015-07-20 10:44:04] - mig/aaron/daniel/etc: two-ish maven questions: 0. do you use maven? 1. what artifact repository do you guys use to deploy your local shit? 2. what . . . "master"(?) central repository do you use to get your dependencies? (maven central? jcenter?). ~a
[2015-07-20 09:10:53] - a: ha ha ha i didn't really get it either. but in context that's pretty great
- aaron[2015-07-19 18:15:11] - my coworkers don't get it. i love it. (xkcd) ~a
[2015-07-17 12:49:54] - Apparently, the guy DC talked to is a very crazy conspiracy theorist who claims to have knowledge on all sorts of bizarre things. If this is really the guy that's gawker's source, it led me to wonder if all the evidence that was provided to gawker could potentially be fabricated. - mig
[2015-07-17 12:48:17] - paul: there's some interesting wrinkles here. The Daily Caller apparently contacted who they believe is the escort mentioned in the gawker article (they couldn't confirm it was him but strongly suspect it is based on a lot of circumstantial evidence). I'm not linking to the DC article because there's a very NSFW photo there but it can be googled. - mig
[2015-07-17 10:56:53] - mig: Yeah, I don't have a good answer. This particular instance definitely feels sketchy to me for a number of reasons (not a public figure, blackmail was going on, possible gay shaming), but at the same time I feel like reporting on things like Edwards/Clinton/Weiner/Sanford/etc cheating is fairer game. -Paul
[2015-07-17 10:51:10] - In both cases, they know that there's some possibly illegal behavior going on (extortion is a crime, isn't it?), and while they may not have legal liability themselves, I don't know how you can just unhesitatingly publish information under these circumstances. - mig
[2015-07-17 10:49:31] - paul: i think it's somewhat analogous to ESPN publicly displaying JPP's medical records. They may not be doing anything technically illegal per se, but it definitely stretches some ethical boundaries. - mig
[2015-07-17 10:46:35] - mig: And while I don't approve of people cheating on their wives, there's nothing illegal about it. Frankly, I even get a little uncomfortable with news outlets jumping all over the secret sex lives of public figures because I wonder how "nefarious" those acts are. -Paul
[2015-07-17 10:44:59] - mig: Agreed, but just because there is blackmailing going on, does that mean a news outlet should ignore the story? I'm not sure if that should play a significant role in the decision making process. The "badness" of what was done is a bit of an issue to me, though. As a libertarian, I have no problem with a person hiring a gay prostitute... -Paul
[2015-07-17 10:40:59] - and I do sort of buy the opinion that the gawker article might be a form of gay shaming. - mig
[2015-07-17 10:39:45] - paul: and yeah, if the person involved is truly doing something nefarious, then yeah there's less of an issue with it. - mig
[2015-07-17 10:34:20] - paul: well there was never really any blackmailing going on in those. Here it's pretty apparent in that the escort threatens to go to the press unless Geithner provides some legal assistence in his housing dispute, and Gawker seems pretty aware of all these details. - mig
[2015-07-17 10:30:51] - mig: I realize that implies the wrong thing. I think it's a grey area for public figures and more clearly wrong when it's not. -Paul
[2015-07-17 10:30:28] - mig: Well, I think it's a grey(er?) area when it's a politician or other public figure. Was it bad to out Bill Clinton and John Edwards as cheaters? -Paul
[2015-07-17 10:19:38] - especially when there seems to be no purpose to this story other than to destroy Geithner's life. - ig
[2015-07-17 10:16:19] - paul: well going beyond that, is it ethical to publish a story when you know the person providing the story is basically blackmailing the subject of the story? - mig
[2015-07-17 10:10:53] - mig: It does seem a little sketchy, since he doesn't appear to be a public figure. -Paul
[2015-07-17 09:53:01] - http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2015/07/17/gawkers-apparent-outing-cfo-meets-internet-backlash/30280505/ I may be misreading what's going on here, but did gawker just basically help someone commit blackmail? - mig
[2015-07-16 16:49:21] - I was actually doing some reading on it this morning and found an interesting ironic bit about how the Bush tax cuts didn't make similar adjustments to the AMT when they were enacted, so there were people whose tax cuts were essentially nullified by triggering the AMT. - mig
[2015-07-16 16:47:14] - a: i don't understand it either, and it can be a little scary because I think some of us are all close to the income range (I'm pretty sure I am) where it could potentially affect us. - mig
[2015-07-16 16:19:15] - a: it's pretty much what you described earlier, if your deductions drive your taxable income past a certain amount or you take too many of them, you basically lose some deductions. - mig
[2015-07-16 15:19:59] - a: I probably would be happier, but I don't know if that means I would prefer it, if that makes sense.
-Paul[2015-07-16 15:19:22] - a: Maybe. I guess it kind of depends. If I averaged paying $50k a year in taxes for the past 10 years (state and federal, income/sales/capital gains/etc), you're asking if I would write a flat check for $55k a year to the government to not have to deal with filing taxes or worrying about tax deferred accounts (401(k), IRA, 529)? -Paul
[2015-07-16 15:03:56] - mig: honestly i don't know what AMT is: i understand the concept but i don't know if it has ever or will ever apply to me. ~a
[2015-07-16 14:52:28] - paul: would you be happy (happier than you are now) paying more taxes ($/year) if it meant simpler taxes? ~a
[2015-07-16 14:50:15] - all deductions go away at a certain point. personal deductions, interest deductions, they all assume you're making less than $x/year. Personal exemption (United_States)#Phase-out probably doesn't affect us, but some of the limits (i don't remember which) are lower. i used to have a chart that explained it all. i can't seem to find it now. ~a
[2015-07-16 14:46:11] - mig: no. ~a
[2015-07-16 14:13:26] - Let me clarify, I hate taxes, but I really hate our ridiculously complicated tax code. -Paul
[2015-07-16 14:12:55] - a: Ah, that's a good point. God, I hate taxes (and all the complicated regulations around retirement funds). -Paul
[2015-07-16 14:02:30] - a: are you referring to AMT? - mig
[2015-07-16 13:58:34] - paul: another complication that matters (it does matter a lot in dollars, but as daniel suggests, the fact that you're doing things at all is a great start): non-roth lowers your taxable income. once your taxable income gets to a certain point, you start losing deductions. so roth will actually hurt you in here in a major way for these special edge-cases. ~a
[2015-07-16 13:35:40] - when we stress over tiny changes in expense ratios for mutual funds, it seems just as logical to give some serious thought to the Roth/Traditional split. -Paul
[2015-07-16 13:33:26] - But if we assume no drastic changes over the next 30 years (government getting rid of Roth, massive tax changes, etc), it seems like Roth will definitely get you (much?) more money in the end. I somewhat agree with not stressing over it too much, but... -Paul
[2015-07-16 13:31:03] - Right, if we somehow knew what the future was going to hold in terms of tax rates (or government actions), then the choice would be clear. My recent-ish thought was that my income should be lower when I retire (house should be paid off, won't need as much income to maintain same standard of living). -Paul
[2015-07-16 13:14:47] - I also think its a level of optimization that isn't worth stressing to much over. Not saying you are, just that I wouldn't quibble much with someone on pretty much any ratio of roth / traditional. Its a lot of unknowns and if you get your basic stuff squared away you will probably be ok either way. -Daniel
[2015-07-16 13:13:13] - I think 50/50 is fine. The argument I have heard is its another level of diversification. If you have $ in both you can try to guess later when you have more information about whether gov will raise or lower taxes in the near term and take out of your roth or traditional bucket accordingly. -Daniel
[2015-07-16 13:10:33] - non-roth is it gives you more money *now* (with certainty), roth gives you much more money later (probably not not definitely). my final conclusion: go 50/50. if your company doesn't have a roth-401k, ask them to make one. or change companies?
~a[2015-07-16 13:08:05] - daniel/paul: in the past, i've been very pro-roth, but i talked with my CPA about this recently. he had a new viewpoint that i hadn't considered: we don't know what the government is going to do in the future. in the future, the government could (but probably won't) decide that all that roth business is bullshit and nix it all. tax rates could go up or down. ~a
[2015-07-16 13:01:55] - Paul: Its hard to say for sure since it depends on your tax rate in the future vs tax rate now if you wanted to find the total optimum. -Daniel
[2015-07-16 10:04:21] - So I'm wondering if I should try to re-balance my retirement funds to be 50/50 Roth/Traditional or maybe even slant it more towards Roth... Anybody have any thoughts? -Paul
[2015-07-16 10:02:55] - Because you're paying your taxes before appreciation vs paying taxes after all that appreciation. I've historically tried to keep my Roth/Traditional split pretty even, but lately it's become skewed since I can't contribute to my Roth IRA anymore. I think my 401(k) plan allows me to invest some in a Roth 401(k)... -Paul
[2015-07-16 10:00:14] - I have a new topic, though. I was listening to the Dave Ramsey show on the radio while driving home from the beach recently, and he was answering a question about (basically) a Roth 401(k) or traditional 401(k) and he made a pretty compelling argument for the Roth (the short story is that you'll end up paying less in taxes). -Paul
[2015-07-16 09:46:26] - a: Right, it's less being opposed to nutrition labeling or even nutrition guidelines and more being opposed to the bans and taxation/regulation and lecturing on stuff that clearly isn't settled science. -Paul
[2015-07-15 17:13:22] - yeah, i don't think i'm behind any of those bans. raw milk i don't know much about though. ~a
[2015-07-15 17:07:38] - a: Sure, but my original article was kind of about making foods illegal. Raw milk is illegal and trans fat bans are popping up all over, not to mention Bloomberg's attempted soda ban. -Paul
[2015-07-15 16:58:53] - the gulf is small compared to the huger gulf of requiring nutrition information and declaring GMO foods (or whatever) illegal. i'm usually for education vs bans, i'm just not as confident as you are that companies will educate me because of market forces alone (because, historically, they don't). ~a
[2015-07-15 16:35:19] - a: There's a huge gulf between wanting to government to force companies to provide nutrition information and wanting to eliminate it altogether.
-Paul[2015-07-15 16:33:31] - a: Not at all. I'm largely fine with all voluntary nutritional labeling (although I do think Chipotle's anti-GMO stance is a little harmful). Honestly, I don't even think the mandatory government nutritional labeling is all that harmful. I just wish the government stopped trying to force people into eating a certain way. -Paul
[2015-07-15 16:16:21] - paul/mig: you guys propose we eliminate all nutrition labelling? ~a
[2015-07-15 16:13:12] - paul: part of it also I think it's that the labeling isn't particularly useful. A chipotle burrito can be anywhere from 700-1200 calories. Pizza can be all over the place depending on the # and type of toppings you have. When the ranges vary that much I don't think it's all that helpful. - mig
[2015-07-15 16:01:37] - a: I'm not so sure the market DOES care about calories and carbs (I'm assuming here you mean the majority of people). I think the government cares, and the media pays a lot of attention to it, but studies have shown that putting calorie counts on menus and the like don't appear to positively influence how people eat. -Paul
[2015-07-15 15:54:15] - "the market would accommodate them" hah, what? you have a lot of faith in this market. the market cares about calories and carbs. nutrition facts still aren't on beer. in fact, until they were required, nutrition facts were on hardly anything. ~a
[2015-07-15 15:41:38] - a: Is there any good data on the number of Americans who believe strongly enough about GMOs that they refuse to eat them (similar to hardcore vegetarians/vegans)? I suspect that number is tiny, but if it were to grow big enough, the market would accommodate them similar to organic/vegan/gluten-free/etc. -Paul
[2015-07-15 15:23:19] - a: or you could ask the grocery store? Yeah, they may not know, or they may lie (which can happen for vegetarians as well). And again, there are products that will explicitly label itself as non-gmo. You're not toally in the dark. - mig
[2015-07-15 15:16:30] - a: Sure, those things sound relatively benign (or maybe they don't to you), but it's the idea behind them (trying to dissuade people from having abortions or getting vaccines) that often get people's feathers ruffled. -Paul
[2015-07-15 15:14:54] - a: Sure, it's not an obvious scare tactic (or maybe even a scare tactic at all), but what if there was a law requiring doctors to inform women seeking abortions to "educate" them about the psychological harm of abortions or to require doctors to "educate" people about the risks of vaccines. -Paul
[2015-07-15 15:14:24] - if you don't own a smart-phone, you're basically screwed. ~a
[2015-07-15 15:14:11] - mig: no, i don't like your analogy. if i'm a vegetarian in a grocery store, i can usually / often just read the "ingredients" section to see if there are any meats listed. (there are some exceptions, of course) on the other hand, if i'm in a grocery store and i want to avoid GMO, i have to own a smart-phone and do tons of googling. ~a
[2015-07-15 15:08:12] - Though in a lot of cases the onus is on you to inquire if that's your preference, similar to those who vegetarians and vegans asking about specific content of certain dishes. - mig
[2015-07-15 15:04:24] - a: there are plenty of companies that proudly promote their food products as non-gmo. Chipotle, for example. - mig
[2015-07-15 15:00:50] - ok, well at least we find something we agree on. to push past this, though, let me ask you: if as a consumer, i don't want to eat gmo food, what can i do? ~a
[2015-07-15 14:55:33] - I can see a compelling public interest in having some basic nutrition on food made available (though i question the usefulness of RDA%), for knowing whether something is GMO, not so much. - mig
[2015-07-15 14:50:09] - a: sure, nutrition labeling generally is fairly benign, and I'm not really all that against it. I was referring more to GMO labeling or trying to regulate e-cigarettes as if they were tobacco products. - mig
[2015-07-15 14:41:41] - i'm not sure i agree that there are scare tactics here ~a
[2015-07-15 13:38:34] - a: To add on to Miguel's point, libertarians are against government coercion, even if it's done in the name of education. The problem isn't necessarily the information, but how it's being used (as a scare tactic to persuade people not to eat certain things). -Paul
[2015-07-15 13:01:15] - Daniel: With my stock recommendations, if not quit giving advice at all? -Paul
[2015-07-15 13:00:59] - Daniel: If I recommended you invest in stock ABC (and kept pestering you to do it and even making it illegal for you to invest in other stocks) and then ABC went bankrupt, then I did the same thing with stock BCD and CDE and DEF with the same results... Don't you think at some point maybe I should at LEAST be a little more humble... -Paul
[2015-07-15 12:59:07] - Daniel: I would hope they would be a little more hesitant before trying to force people to eat a certain way. -Paul
[2015-07-15 12:58:26] - Daniel: It would be one thing for the government to regulate something where the science is basically universally agreed upon (seat belt laws, for instance), but nutritional guidelines have been frankly horrible when it comes to rightness and consistency over time. When your record is as checkered as the government's is for nutritional guidelines... -Paul
[2015-07-15 12:55:00] - Daniel: The point is that the government shouldn't be trying to force people to eat one way or the other because, historically, they've often been very wrong AND slow to adapt to new evidence. -Paul
[2015-07-15 12:38:34] - mig: I get that science has been wrong but I'm not sure that means we should ignore it and not make policy based on science. -Daniel
[2015-07-15 12:35:07] - daniel: the point is laws and regulations made not only when the science isn't necessarily settled, but even if there is some sort of scientific consensus, it's often ends up being wrong, especially in the area of public health. So that's really the folly of things like Bloomburg's lower salt mandate and other policies of that ilk. - mig
[2015-07-15 12:29:55] - a: mandatory labeling isn't usually very libertarian. It's not the labelling itself, that may be the problem, but sometimes it's purpose to explicitly scare people, like GMO labeling laws and the recent gruesome photos warnings for tobacco products, and sometimes they just provide no useful purpose, like mandatory calorie counts in menus for a lot of eateries. - mig
[2015-07-15 12:13:28] - paul: I'm not sure I totally buy the point of the article. It seems to be that because science changes we shouldn't have any regulations based on science? -Daniel
[2015-07-15 12:07:13] - "In 1994, food-makers were required to report cholesterol values on the nutrition label." i thought libertarians were for education. don't limit my ability to buy or sell foods with cholesterol, instead educate citizens about cholesterol in their foods. ~a
[2015-07-15 11:18:22] - http://reason.com/archives/2015/07/15/regulators-more-harm-than-good "Say this much for those who think the American people are chronically undermanaged by their betters: They are often wrong, but never in doubt." Particularly hate the dietary guidelines. They haven't just been wrong, but actively harmful in many cases. -Paul
[2015-07-15 09:39:08] - a: Congrats? Sure, I would love to meet up for food and drink sometime after work this week. I'm busy today, but Thursday and Friday should work. -Paul
[2015-07-14 12:46:13] - a: to who specifically is unknown, since the sales haven't happened (currently there's only an agreement that Greece will sell the assets). - mig
[2015-07-14 12:29:09] - ack, would not want. i'm missing my negatives today. - mig
[2015-07-14 12:28:54] - I'm pretty sure the EU itself would want to be responsible for some of these assets. - mig
[2015-07-14 12:28:02] - a: private buesinesses/entities, I'd assume. - mig
[2015-07-14 12:14:09] - mig: who did they sell their assets to? ~a
[2015-07-14 11:57:41] - not surprising i meant to say. - mig
[2015-07-14 11:48:19] - sell off tangible assets for cash to make your creditors happy. - mig
[2015-07-14 11:48:07] - a: well it's also not actually accurate, at least from what I've read. Greece is being forced to sell the assets (or "privatizing" them) but they're not literally being given to the EU, which that headline gives the impression of. And yeah, it's a surprising thing to happen to an entity that's in heavy debt. To pay it off or do a settlement usually you have to...
[2015-07-14 11:16:55] - i'm not sure i agree that it's such a crazy deal, because that's how basically all loans work. the bank takes ownership of a thing for money they (the central bank) printed from thin air. ~a
[2015-07-14 11:16:25] - something i read on my feed yesterday: "The EU just told Greece Give us €50 Billion of real assets, Islands, monuments, etc. And we will give Euros (That they make from thin air at the rate of €60B per month)" ~a
[2015-07-13 21:33:07] - a: well it might have been easier to just compile them all into 1 video. - mig
[2015-07-13 16:35:20] - ha! the github has youtube links to where earch of the lines are from. ~a
[2015-07-13 16:26:35] - https://lhartikk.github.io/ArnoldC/ arnoldc: a programming language based on the one liners of arnold schwarzenegger - aaron
[2015-07-13 11:26:08] - a: confirmed, it's paypal. Also no fee (from yahoo, at least) on withdrawing funds. how nice of them. - mig
[2015-07-13 11:20:39] - a: good question. right now it's sitting in a balance on my yahoo account sort of like how battle.net balance works. Not sure how to extract and what "fees" might arise from that. If I had to guess, probably you get it out through paypal. - mig
[2015-07-13 11:05:44] - how do you collect $2? is it paypal? ~a
[2015-07-13 10:58:16] - But it seems enjoyable to do a $1 buy in pool like once a week or something. - mig
[2015-07-13 10:57:40] - But yes, very easily can be a money pit, especially if you go into the more high stakes pools. - mig
[2015-07-13 10:57:13] - xpovos/paul: I'm finding the daily league format to be a much more fulfilling way of consuming fantasy baseball. It seems to almost be the perfect format for it. Certainly much better than trying to slog through a season long roto league. And I won $2 so far. $2! Their timing is unfortunate though, starting right before the all star break. - mig
[2015-07-12 16:32:55] - paul: pierce and i (for probably only a short time longer) live in like walking distance of your workplace. did you wanna grab drinks/food after work some time this week? ~a
[2015-07-11 14:20:38] - once upon a time (smbc) ~a
[2015-07-10 22:47:26] - daniel: given that there's already a movement afoot to change the free agency rules so this doesn't happen again, I think it's more to do with the "audacity" of a player happening to change their mind then than the way DeAndre went about it. - mig
[2015-07-10 18:22:20] - daniel: Most of the criticism that I've read is about how he "broke his word" and how "it screws the mavs", things that would have been true regardless of whether he was an ass to Cuban about it or not. - mig
[2015-07-10 15:10:18] - I kind of think of it like if I was planning a poker tournament and somebody said they were coming but later changed their mind right before. I would be mildly annoyed about them changing their mind, but I would be super pissed if they had changed their mind without telling me (and wouldn't answer their cell phone). -Paul
[2015-07-10 15:08:23] - I'm not necessarily mad at DeAndre Jordan, but I do think he was wrong in what he did. Like Daniel said, though, it's mostly with how he did it. I would say maybe 30% of his wrongness was changing his mind and the other 70% was from how he did it. -Paul
[2015-07-10 15:03:20] - In general I think fans get mad when someone does something that hurts them. DeAndre changing his mind is bad for Mavs fans so people get mad. Owners relocating team is bad for fans so they get mad. Owners trading a player (in theory ought) is to improve the team so fans not mad. -Daniel
[2015-07-10 15:02:10] - mig: I don't think everyone is mad DeAndre changed his mind they are mad at how he handled it and how he had to hide from the Mavs. Some are mad at him for changing his mind but I think those people have less of a leg to stand on. -Daniel
[2015-07-10 14:04:56] - mig: Well, I'll definitely agree that from a libertarian/free market perspective, the cartelization of professional sports and the labor laws involved are fair deplorable. -Paul
[2015-07-10 14:03:52] - Well, I kinda hate the Patriots, but mostly because they cheat.
-Paul[2015-07-10 14:03:39] - mig: Fair, but I don't consider it hypocrisy in my case. I don't "hate" teams just because they're good. I generally hate teams that try to get good by putting together an all star team of top talent. For example, I hated the Heat and Yankees (they're not good enough to hate right now), but not the Spurs or Patriots. -Paul
[2015-07-10 13:07:15] - Likewise teams trade players who then find out about said trade on twitter or something and thats "just business" but DeAndre Jordan has what possibly be a genuine reconsideration of a decision he might have rashly and now he's suddenly the worst person in the world. - mig
[2015-07-10 13:05:12] - It's just this weird selective moral code that sports punditry and fans place on athletes. The Spurs and Warriors can have (and are praised) for constructing their super teams, but LeBron James has some sort of moral obligation to intentionally handicap himself with less talent because it's "not" fair for him to play with good players. - mig
[2015-07-10 12:59:57] - i mean, i'm looking at all the people bitching and moaning about DeAndre Jordan. Plenty of people go back on an initial agreement to take a job if they do end having second thoughts (and sometimes even after a binding agreement is signed). That actually happens a lot in the real world. Why is it so contemptible for him to do so? - mig
[2015-07-10 12:56:48] - paul: i don't mind the randomness to an extent. It just grates me when the hypocrisy gets a little too abject. - mig
[2015-07-10 12:41:01] - a: So, in short, who I root for in sports is fairly illogical, and I admit that, but I don't think most people have a completely logical reason to support sports teams. -Paul
[2015-07-10 12:32:00] - a: So, I kinda like the Steelers, which means I kinda root for Big Ben. That doesn't mean I approve of his behavior towards women (he had some sexual assault allegations against him which he was cleared of). I "hated" the Heat (and specifically LeBron), but by all accounts both LeBron and Bosh are genuinely nice guys. -Paul
[2015-07-10 12:28:55] - a: It's not a problem. I'm just saying that because of this, I try not to let my moral judgments of players affect how I root for a team. This is a little bit hyperbolic, but if I refused to root for a team that had morally objectionable people on it, I wouldn't be able to root for any sports teams. -Paul
[2015-07-10 12:24:09] - well i guess this has nothing to do with sports . . . sometimes you don't know somebody until something bad about them comes out. i don't see a problem with that though. ~a
[2015-07-10 12:19:12] - a: (off the court at least) until his rape charges. I could keep going on. -Paul
[2015-07-10 12:18:51] - a: I'm saying that it's impossible to try rooting for "good guys" because none of us really know these people. I used to root for Steve McNair because I thought he was a good guy... then he was shot dead by his mistress (he was married). Ray Rice was another guy that everybody thought was a good guy. Kobe Bryant had a pretty good reputation... -Paul
[2015-07-10 12:11:01] - "ray rice was a model citizen until he knocked his wife out..." are you saying this is meaningless, random, or fickle? because i don't know if i agree. ~a
[2015-07-10 11:42:11] - mig: Does that make any more or less sense than rooting for a team just because you live close to them even though they might have criminals or other unsavory characters on their roster? I don't think there is any logical reason to say one is better than the other. -Paul
[2015-07-10 11:40:34] - mig: In short, I basically embrace the randomness. Yes, I want my players to stick with the teams that draft them and try to win titles the way the Spurs do (selflessly taking less money to bring in important free agent cogs while the core remains long-time players who they drafted). No, I don't like the guys who jump teams for greener pastures like LeBron. -Paul
[2015-07-10 11:39:00] - mig: Isn't it weird for a Red Sox fan to love Johnny Damon... until they hate him because now he is on the Yankees? Similarly, how should a Celtics fan feel when Shaq plays on their team? Is Tom Brady the Golden Boy still after deflategate? Ray Rice was a model citizen until he knocked his wife out... -Paul
[2015-07-10 11:37:25] - mig: As for the measure of morality thing... I've long ago resigned myself to the idea that the reasons we root for teams is based on fickle and meaningless emotions anyway. Does it make any sense to root for one team over another just because you live closer to one of them? -Paul
[2015-07-10 11:24:13] - mig: Well, I'll offer you this olive branch: I don't usually tend to root for teams that win a lot (which seems to be your criteria for hating teams
). Never liked the Yankees or the Patriots and while I don't dislike the Spurs, I've never really rooted for them either (unless they were playing the Heat, of course). -Paul[2015-07-10 10:41:26] - paul: you can not be pissy at teams like the sixers, whose goal seems to be to lose as many games as possible. - mig
[2015-07-10 10:14:30] - mig: Wait, why should I get pissy about Golden State? What did they do? Is there any NBA team I shouldn't be pissy at?
-Paul[2015-07-10 10:02:29] - So to these people, the Spurs are the patron saints of the NBA and LeBron James is somehow the Great Satan, though in my eyes they are basically doing the same thing: trying to construct the best team possible (albeit through different methods). - mig
[2015-07-10 10:00:49] - You kind of hit upon what irritates me when people discuss this topic when talking about the "right" and "wrong" way. You're probably talking about in terms of the "smart" way to build a team, but what grates me when people use "right" and "wrong" as some sort of measure of morality. - mig
[2015-07-10 09:55:19] - paul: I think if you get pissy about Lebron James and how the heat (and probably the cavs) were constructed, you should be pissy about Golden State too. - mig
[2015-07-10 09:54:02] - mig: I mean, by that logic, do you think Golden State is some boring super team that needs to be broken up? They won their conference by 11 games this past year and lost only 3 games total in the entire Western Conference playoff run (versus 6 total loses for the Spurs two years ago). -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:52:27] - mig: Maybe, but that's because they're the Spurs, not because they were blowing out teams and sweeping playoff series. I'll concede the NBA Finals that year was smashing, but other than that, they weren't a particularly historic team. -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:51:12] - mig: smashed that third team.
-Paul[2015-07-10 09:51:00] - mig: I guess agree to disagree about the Spurs steam-rolling in the playoffs. Sure, they rolled the Heat in the finals, but I think it's a little biased to take their 3 series Western conference bracket and throw out the series they struggled the most and downplay the series they struggled with second and just flatly state they steam rolled because they... -Pa
[2015-07-10 09:50:38] - And most people did consider the Spurs to be hands down the best team throughout that entire year, and they certainly played like it. - mig
[2015-07-10 09:48:57] - mig: Looking back over the past few years, I don't see the Spurs ever really having a dominant regular season where they steam rolled their conference. The most I see is a 3 game lead over the #2 seed. The Heat, however, had a 12 game lead over the #2 seed in the East (6 games over the West #1 seed and 8 games over the Spurs) 3 years ago. -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:48:40] - paul: no, i consider the spurs to have steamrolled the western conf. playoffs. The Mavs series was an abberation, and they weren't in any serious danger after that. They smashed the Blazers, and the Thunder didn't really endager the Spurs even though it did go to 6. - mig
[2015-07-10 09:46:53] - mig: Maybe you're thinking of the Heat? They sweeped their first round series, had a 5 game second round series and a 6 game third round series, which is a more dominant showing that the Spurs. -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:45:23] - mig: And they hardly steam rolled or coasted to the finals 2 years ago. They were the top seed in the West by 3 games (the Pacers were the top seed in the East by 2 and nobody thought of them as dominant) and their road to the finals included a 7 game series (in the first round!) and a 6 game series. -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:43:49] - mig: I certainly don't agree the Western conference is going to be a joke next year. The Spurs lost in the first round of the playoffs this year and the West is absolutely loaded. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised at all if the Spurs aren't even the top seed, let alone steam rolling in the regular season. -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:42:11] - mig: The Heat are a great example of (in my opinion), the "wrong" way of winning, where you basically just assemble an all star team of the most talented players you can (even if they don't mesh particularly well together) to overpower other teams with talent. -Paul
[2015-07-10 09:41:16] - mig: Super disagree. I think the "right" way to win at sports is the way the Spurs do it, by smartly assembling a team where the pieces all work well together and the team is greater than the sum of it's parts. The Spurs might be a super team next year, but I'm not sure I would even rank them in the top three in terms of overall talent. -Paul
[2015-07-09 22:24:55] - http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/458469-ben-affleck-to-direct-and-co-write-solo-batman-movie#/slide/1 so we totally need another batman reset, i guess? - mig
[2015-07-09 16:49:25] - that's not going to be fun to watch, right? - mig
[2015-07-09 16:49:12] - After all, isn't the Western conference going to be a joke when the Spurs just steam roll it on their way to a 60+ win season and coasting to the finals (and keep in mind that actually happened 2 years ago). - mig
[2015-07-09 16:48:08] - paul: a lot of the objections you brought up earlier when decrying the heat's collusion are similar, so whether it's consolidating top 3 talent, or just creating the best all round team is something I find irrelevant. - mig
[2015-07-09 16:43:19] - mig: Well, worse in your mind, better in mine.
Like I said, the collusion to take less money doesn't bother me. The collusion to consolidate the top talent on one team bothers me. -Paul[2015-07-09 16:36:41] - rather than just 3 players in the heat's case. - mig
[2015-07-09 16:35:21] - paul: And you're right, it's not like what the Heat did; it's arguably worse. They have hands down what everyone's regarded as a super team, because a good portion their players colluded to take below market deals. - mig
[2015-07-09 16:33:36] - mig: For the record, I never really had much of a problem with the players taking less money to team up on the Heat. I just didn't like how three superstars decided to all play together. -Paul
[2015-07-09 16:32:41] - mig: Hard to describe very many players on the Spurs as "in their prime" and you could make an argument they have no top 5 players and only two players even in the top 20 or so. -Paul
[2015-07-09 16:31:37] - mig: They're a super team, but I think the comparisons to the Heat (which is what I'm assuming you're trying to make) doesn't work. The Heat at the time were bringing together possibly three of the top 10 players in the NBA in their prime... -Paul
[2015-07-09 16:24:23] - http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--tim-duncan-signs-two-year---10-million-plus-deal-to-return-to-spurs-200424172.html the spurs are ruining the NBA with their players colluding to take less money so they can make their lemarcus aldrige led super team! right guys? - mig
[2015-07-09 13:17:51] - I did play around on one of those sites (Fan Duel, I think) a few years ago. I'll check Yahoo!'s offerings for comparison's sake, but I won't be playing. They aren't sketchy, per se, but they're well designed to be money pits. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-09 10:53:02] - mig: I can't really speak to other sites either. I haven't made an entry anywhere.
-Paul[2015-07-09 10:41:22] - paul: i can't speak for other sites, but yahoo has made it pretty easy to use. I set up an entry in like 5 minutes. - mig
[2015-07-09 10:33:30] - mig: As a Yahoo shareholder, though, I hope they aren't too late to the party. -Paul
[2015-07-09 10:33:16] - mig: I thought they were sketchy too, but then I think I heard that those sites are actually backed by some deep pockets. I think one is backed by Disney/ABC/ESPN and the other is backed by Comcast? -Paul
[2015-07-09 10:12:32] - yahoo just launched daily leagues a la fanduel draft kings. I always thought the latter sites were kind of sketchy so I never bothered but I might try it now that yahoo is in on the action. - mig
[2015-07-08 11:58:19] - Xpovos: It'll probably be between than and the Sienna. We haven't even test driven either yet, so we're still a little bit away from buying. -Paul
[2015-07-08 11:20:21] - Paul: Just get an Odyssey. Make and Model almost matter here more than age. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-08 11:08:54] - Sounds like it's settled. A new minivan it is for us.
-Paul[2015-07-08 10:43:50] - I like to buy new or very close to new cars. I think the cost savings of buying a used vehicle diminishes the longer you keep your new car. I think it will always be cheaper to buy used over the same time but I like knowing the history of the car better. Also +1 on the reliability and fact that I can afford it points. -Daniel
[2015-07-08 09:54:01] - very nice post, I certainly love this web site, keep on it -Daniel
[2015-07-08 09:17:50] - very nice post, i certainly love this web site, keep on it
[2015-07-08 09:17:41] - very nice post, i certainly love this web site, keep on it
[2015-07-08 09:17:31] - very nice post, i certainly love this web site, keep on it
[2015-07-08 09:17:22] - very nice post, i certainly love this web site, keep on it
[2015-07-07 14:14:03] - I mean, the piece places her jokes as the same moral equivalent of Donald Trump's dipshit remarks about Mexicans, and then goes further to accuse Schumer's jokes of inspiring Dylan Roof to murder black people. It's almost comical to read until you realize the writers are actually being serious. - mig
[2015-07-07 14:11:21] - or I guess authors in this case. - mig
[2015-07-07 14:11:05] - a: i was referring more to the author of this article. - mig
[2015-07-07 14:09:50] - god, i have a problem spelling her name, don't i? ~a
[2015-07-07 14:09:18] - shumer is pretty funny in my opinion. would these (blue) jokes be less funny if she was a male? maybe. ~a
[2015-07-07 14:08:32] - is schemer supposed to be the sjw? ~a
[2015-07-07 13:54:24] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/07/06/dont-believe-her-defenders-amy-schumers-jokes-are-racist/ have we reach peak SJW yet? - mig
[2015-07-06 15:04:27] - mig: Sorry, or the target is Asian. -Paul
[2015-07-06 15:04:16] - mig: "as the target is a non-progressive minority or woman" Or if you are Asian. -Paul
[2015-07-06 14:43:16] - If you have a mechanic or other type of car person that you trust, you'll probably end up saving a lot by going used car. Obviously getting used is not without risk. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to lease a car unless you were in specific circumstance. It feels like a bad deal money-wise almost like an ARM. - mig
[2015-07-06 14:28:30] - The minivan has had one issue and it was covered by a warranty. We bought the vehicle used from the same dealership that sold it orginally and all service had been done on time and with the dealer, so all of the data was in one place. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-06 14:27:56] - paul: what grates me was Takei actually thought that rationale for explaining himself was somewhat acceptable. It just further cements the sentiment in my mind that you can say all kind of racist and misogynistic things and it's A-OK as long as the target is a non-progressive minority or woman. - mig
[2015-07-06 14:27:23] - Paul: I've been in the buy new camp for a long time, but I bought a used minivan for cost savings when we needed to expand. There were strong factors to assuage concerns about reliability from the used vehicle, and while the cost savings probably wasn't enough to make up for the potentially lost reliability, the practical has been fine. -- Xpovos
[2015-07-06 12:59:52] - paul: i buy new cars (new motorcycles, new bicycles) because the cost savings for a used car is typically small and the chance a previous owner fucked something up is non-zero. also, because i can afford it. not everybody can afford to buy a new car. . . . my current car is 12 years old. ~a
[2015-07-06 12:53:26] - At the same time, I've also heard people argue for (and also heard others argue strongly against) leasing cars, and I've heard a lot of good arguments for buying used cars. What do people on the message board think? I get the feeling most people here buy cars new as well, but I could be surprised. -Paul
[2015-07-06 12:52:05] - And, rightly or wrongly, I believe a new car is going to be most reliable, since there were no owners before me to screw anything up. -Paul
[2015-07-06 12:51:38] - I was listening to a podcast this morning that got me thinking. I've always pretty much been the type of person to buy new cars when I buy a new car. Not because I need to have the fancy, newest model or anything (I also typically like to hold onto cars for 8+ years if possible), but because I prize reliability in my cars above most else. -Paul
[2015-07-06 10:43:54] - well based on miguel's link, i agree with you. the recent decisions have been homogeneous for the "liberal" justices and heterogeneous for the "conservative" justices. ~a
[2015-07-06 09:49:12] - a: if the conservative justices voted more in lock-step), but I think there's this thinking that the conservatives all vote as a bloc and are predictable and everything when I don't know if that's necessarily the case. -Paul
[2015-07-06 09:48:06] - a: Regarding the liberal justices, I don't think they feel compelled to vote as a bloc, I think it's more just that they are more rigid and homogeneous in their thinking (relative to the "conservative" justices). To be clear, I don't think it's a bad thing necessarily (I think SCOTUS would have more decisions I approved of over the past few years... -Paul
[2015-07-06 09:45:32] - a: I feel pretty confident those things are related to the slow recovery for European economies in general after the '08 recession, in addition to being related to their dangerous levels of debt to GDP (which is a big sticking point for the Greece situation). I don't really think those things caused the '08 recession, though. -Paul
[2015-07-06 09:39:59] - caused/contributed-to. ~a
[2015-07-06 09:39:40] - paul: are you sure they're related? i.e. single payer health care systems caused the '08 european recession? ~a
[2015-07-06 09:16:13] - but lots of other European countries are in trouble too. -Paul
[2015-07-06 09:15:59] - a: When people argue for certain programs by pointing out European countries that have generous minimum wages and forced paid maternity leave and single payer health care systems... I always want to point out that Europe's economy largely sucks compared to ours. I think lots of people think Greece is the exception (and it is an outlier)... -Paul
[2015-07-06 09:10:28] - mig: Takei ended up apologizing, and maybe it's because I like him, but it felt genuine to me. He might still think Thomas is a clown in blackface, but I do believe he's sorry he said it publicly. -Paul
[2015-07-06 09:09:15] - a: [2015-06-25 15:52:08] - Roberts (appointed by W. Bush) is also fairly moderate. Honestly, the perception of the 5 "conservative hardliners" is mostly a myth if you actually take a look at how decisions break out. If anything, it's the liberal bloc that is the most rigid. - mig -Paul
[2015-07-06 08:43:28] - gdp, greek recession vs others. besides the main takeaway from this image (greece is fucked), i think it's interesting to note how fucked all of europe seems. ~a
[2015-07-06 08:41:58] - paul: where did miguel discuss this? i think it's an interesting point. supreme court justices don't have to worry about the politics of their decisions. so i don't know why they would feel compelled to vote in a block. ~a
[2015-07-03 18:47:08] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/scotus-key-decisions-2015/ To Miguel's earlier point, I think for every one of the 13 cases listed here, the four liberal justices all voted the same way. -Paul
[2015-07-02 20:59:34] - https://www.facebook.com/georgehtakei/posts/1298698736826243 thoughts? because I'm going to be perfectly honest, I find Takei's arguments that calling Clarence Thomas a "clown in blackface" isn't racially tinged to be woefully unconvincing. - mig
[2015-07-02 18:22:47] - a: well they could always just buy presses if they need .... oh wait... - mig
[2015-07-02 18:20:55] - http://www.mediaite.com/online/montana-man-with-2-wives-you-cant-have-marriage-equality-without-polygamy/ it's happening? - mig
[2015-07-02 16:44:21] - we smashed the printing presses, because we wanted the switch to the euro to be irreversible. so, the plan is to reverse the irreversible. awesome. ~a
[2015-07-01 14:32:25] - aaron:
system of a down is not living up to their name. ~a[2015-07-01 14:28:37] - mig: "an actual svn repo or someone's work copy" either. i'd want to be able to do both. i think aaron's right though, i think there's an svnadmin way to do it: i can't just use "svn merge" i guess. ~a
[2015-07-01 13:56:40] - *"calling for low-level offenders to receive treatment instead of being incarcerated, and abolishing mandatory minimum sentences for some crimes..."* wait a minute that's not rand paul, that's system of a down - aaron
[2015-07-01 11:27:02] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/07/01/rand-paul-raises-money-with-the-marijuana-industry/ well that's interesting... - mig
[2015-07-01 10:28:29] - a: i'm not really sure, i've never done anything like that. svn merge won't do it, but there's some bizarre svnadmin commands people use once every 10 years, like "svnadmin dump" and "svnadmin load". i think that's what they're used for - aaron
[2015-06-30 13:31:26] - and do you mean repo as in an actual svn repo or someone's work copy? - mig
[2015-06-30 13:30:56] - a: are these repos clones of each other or were they created independently? - mig
[2015-06-30 13:13:35] - And it'd have to be a manual process, i don't know of nice svn hook to facilitate that sort of thing. - mig
[2015-06-30 13:12:15] - a: I don't know if it's possible to do so in between two repos. At least, in terms of the complete history. You could construct a diff of each revision and apply it to the second repo, but that's awfully brute-forcish and obviously you wouldn't be merging the complete history. - mig
[2015-06-30 13:11:44] - mig: It's been a while since I looked at the legal issues there, but that will be a fun case next term, for sure. A decision knocking down Abood would play majorly into a Sanders campaign, I should think. That said, it's clear on that where Alito and Roberts will line up, and Thomas and Scalia seem sure votes too; so Kennedy once again. -- Xpovos
[2015-06-30 13:06:55] - aaron/mig/daniel: (i'm seriously not bringing up the subversion debate again, i'm just curious) in subversion, how do i merge history from a remote repo? svn merge, from my recollection, only lets you merge from one repo to another repo on the same server. ~a
[2015-06-30 12:57:42] - xpovos: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/supreme-court-public-sector-unions-fees-119585.html we talked a while ago about the possibility that abood could be overturned eventually. Potential for that happening in the coming months? - mig
[2015-06-29 15:39:44] - http://www.mediaite.com/online/if-each-gop-candidate-were-a-conservative-news-site-which-would-they-be/ this was pretty amusing. - mig
[2015-06-29 15:29:42] - also, he opens with "I’m Jeffrey “Trump†Shih" - mig
[2015-06-29 15:29:11] - a: but it is in the hearthstone subreddit. - mig
[2015-06-29 15:25:57] - mig: why? the original post doesn't say "i'm hearthstone trump". ~a
[2015-06-29 15:13:49] - a: I still wonder. This is really quite the blunder, if (s)he genuinely mistook Hearthstone Trump as Donald Trump. - mig
[2015-06-29 14:20:05] - mig: "Edit 2: well great...gold for being an idiot...."
~a[2015-06-29 14:11:25] - https://www.reddit.com/r/hearthstone/comments/3bfc0f/im_trump_ama_2/cslqc4w not sure if serious or... just ... i dunno. - mig
[2015-06-29 13:37:02] - Does WU allow you to wire money directly from your bank account? - mig
[2015-06-29 13:36:28] - oh wait, WU isn't bank. hmmm. Well I guess it's the same principle though: The greek government doesn't want cash to be leaving the country. - mig
[2015-06-29 13:33:59] - it is widely expected that this news is causing people to panic and make a run on banks, so it's not terribly surprising a bank would voluntarily want to close in such an environment(assuming they could do so legally on a unilaterally). - mig
[2015-06-29 13:20:07] - a: Even if it did, that doesn't mean it wasn't something asked of WU. Businesses do stuff all the time to try to please governments even if they aren't forced to (wasn't the MPAA rating system all voluntary?). -Paul
[2015-06-29 12:55:47] - wait, i lied. it doesn't say that. hmm. ~a
[2015-06-29 12:55:19] - but the article say voluntarily. ~a
[2015-06-29 12:50:47] - a: My guess is because the Greek government asked it to? -Paul
[2015-06-29 12:42:09] - aw poop. link ~a
[2015-06-29 12:41:54] - <a href="www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/2015/06/29/western-union-closes-in-greece-for-a-week.html">western union closes in greece</a> . . . it sounds like WU closed *voluntarily*, but it doesn't say why. for what possible reason would western union do this voluntarily? ~a
[2015-06-29 12:05:47] - http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/fairfax-schools-considers-new-grading-policy-that-would-eliminate-zeros/ looks like it's been in the works for a while. There's some clarification. Students can still get a 0 if they don't put a "good faith effort" on an assignment. - mig
prev <-> next