prev <-> next
[2016-05-04 10:06:35] - paul: did I have any bets w/ you about Trump, or was the bet just with Clinton? - mig
[2016-05-02 15:04:22] - a: also, that is a very short haircut! - aaron
[2016-05-02 15:03:46] - a: i didn't honestly know what i was looking at either, that picture is confusing as heck! no fair using illusions! - aaron
[2016-05-02 12:26:54] - ok, i think i understand the ðŸ˜ðŸ˜. it sees two people, and it knows that one of the people is not smiling and the other is. ~a
[2016-05-02 12:21:11] - wall. ~a
[2016-05-02 12:21:07] - aaron: i picked a hard one. hard for humans to pick out even i think. this is me (right after a short haircut, my hair is all back btw), *with* a paper-cutout of me, and i'm obscured by a half-
[2016-05-02 12:16:34] - usually it was kind of weirdly close, but not 100% there. like instead of people on a bridge, it would see people on a grill. i showed it a scene from bill and ted, and it thought keanu reeves was a woman
- aaron[2016-05-02 12:11:28] - xpovos: very cool, microsoft recently put out captionbot, a web site which tries to automatically identify different elements of a photo. i had fun playing with it - aaron
[2016-05-02 09:31:12] - More AI news. https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601339/will-artificial-intelligence-win-the-caption-contest/ This is a long way from the pig putting the foot in the ketchup. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-29 12:26:21] - http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-gays-for-trump-crowd-gathers-at-costa-mesa-rally-20160428-story.html i don't have any real comment on this, just thought it was interesting there was a small blurb about a man holding a "gays for trump" sign that was a very small part of the article, yet that tidbit makes it into the url of the article. - mig
[2016-04-29 03:02:10] - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/ejaculation-frequency-could-have-serious-consequences-for-mens-health_us_571e557de4b0d0042da9e154 insert snarky comment. ~a
[2016-04-28 16:27:00] - xpovos: on top of that, the proposed policy prescriptions aren't coherent either. - mig
[2016-04-28 15:51:33] - Xpovos: Reminds me of some commentator who was talking about how everything that happens appears to validate climate change while nothing seems to disprove it. More hurricanes? Climate change. Less hurricanes? Climate change. Warmer winters? Climate change. Colder winters? Weather != Climate. -Paul
[2016-04-28 15:42:36] - https://imgur.com/8Ze4YCK I'm not as opposed to the concept of anthropogenic climate change as I once was, but it does seem like that despite "consensus" people generally have no clue what's going to happen. Just that it probably will be bad. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-28 10:42:46] - My 401(k) allows us to make traditional contributions or roth contributions and I haven't maxed my contribution out yet, so I don't think I have to worry about backdoor roths yet.
-Paul[2016-04-28 09:37:11] - certainty what is right to do. Generally the pro of having both in both buckets is that it offers another form of diversification. Where in the future once you are in retirement and have more info you can choose to pull money out of one bucket or the other based on what the current tax situation is. Things like that. -Daniel
[2016-04-28 09:36:09] - a: Yeah I understood it as a way to get into a Roth IRA even if your income limits are supposed to be to high for one. Whether or not you are missing out is hard to say. Roth vs Traditional is a bit of a crapshoot because it depends on your tax brackets now vs tax brackets later which partially depends on what tax brackets exist later so its hard to say with...
[2016-04-27 16:20:40] - paul: yes, you misunderstand: backdoor roth means you can get money into a roth even if you make too much money. you still *do* have to pay taxes on one side or the other. ~a
[2016-04-27 15:45:48] - a: I don't know? I thought that the backdoor Roth allowed people to (somehow? magically? legally?) contribute pre-tax dollars to an IRA and then convert that IRA to a Roth so that it wouldn't be taxed upon withdrawal either. That obviously seemed way too good to be true (basically the money is never taxed) so I always assumed I misunderstood it. -Paul
[2016-04-27 15:42:09] - paul: i guess i don't care about the backdoor roth since i have a roth-401k. right? ~a
[2016-04-27 15:41:00] - daniel/paul: yeah, how about i ask this question: if i ignore the existence of both the backdoor-roth and the mega-backdoor-roth, will i lose out? what situations will these help me out? ~a
[2016-04-27 15:37:06] - a: That's what I searched for after reading through that. I've heard of the backdoor Roth (which I still don't understand well) but not the mega version. -Paul
[2016-04-27 15:30:23] - daniel: i've read about the "mega backdoor roth ira" but don't think i understand it well. ~a
[2016-04-27 15:21:56] - a: thanks! - aaron
[2016-04-27 15:21:42] - https://play.google.com/music/preview/Txl7vhhxq37pe3jasd2e5jbbf5y?lyrics=1&utm_source=google&utm_medium=search&utm_campaign=lyrics&pcampaignid=kp-lyrics pandora provided me lyrics to a dubstep song i was listening to. thank you pandora - aaron
[2016-04-27 15:17:43] - Apparently Ted Cruz is going to announce Carly Fiorina as his running mate today? I have to wonder how he expects that to help him against Trump. -Paul
[2016-04-27 15:09:57] - From reddit.com/r/personalfinance - http://i.imgur.com/1rPEkGQ.jpg - Daniel
[2016-04-26 18:00:16] - aaron: ok, search is fixed. ~a
[2016-04-26 17:56:58] - aaron: yeah, sorry. i'll fix it, i promise. i broke a ton of stuff when i upgraded php. ~a
[2016-04-26 13:09:51] - paul: those ghostbusters clips were funnier than the trailer i saw. i liked the random phone in the fishtank, and how they completely brush past it without a pause. i like when humor has an unpredictable rhythm like that - aaron
[2016-04-26 13:01:18] - Aaron: I guess the boycott approach also has the added benefit of reaching a national audience and not just NC. We've been focusing most of changing hearts and minds in NC, but I imagine there are a few other states where the message is needed as well. -Paul
[2016-04-26 12:59:54] - http://www.cnet.com/news/ghostbusters-celebrates-administrative-professionals-day-with-chris-hemsworth/ Random aside, this has me a little more hopeful for the new Ghostbusters movie. I loved the scene where they asked if there was sugar in the coffee. -Paul
[2016-04-26 12:53:37] - in case it doesn't come across, that smiley is very tongue in cheek. i agree with paul (hopefully i've made that clear) that it's wrong to hold every foreign state and country to your personal standards of morality, even if you're right and they're wrong it's a little rude - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:51:41] - ideally, you want change to come from within because people want to change. but practically speaking, it's faster and easier just to bully people into changing by taking away their money and passing laws and writing news articles and calling them names. maybe the correct approach is a combination of both
- aaron[2016-04-26 12:50:40] - mig: that's a good point, i stand corrected. there are some musicians for which paul's approach might have worked a little OK, delivering a more powerful message to a smaller audience. but, i still think they certainly reached a broader audience with their current approach - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:45:26] - I think Springsteen was the most notable. How popular is Bryan Adams? - mig
[2016-04-26 12:42:48] - aaron: Hmmm, okay. I honestly wasn't following the news on this one too much, so it's hard for me to remember when I heard what. So when Paypal/Pearl Jam/whoever threw their hat into the ring, I just mentally noted it as another group boycotting NC. I can't remember which ones made the biggest news. -Paul
[2016-04-26 12:39:47] - aaron: maybe for a band like Pearl Jam. I think Springsteen has a pretty wide and diverse fanbase though. - mig
[2016-04-26 12:39:41] - there's a reason "publicity stunt" includes the pejorative word "stunt" tacked on, but there's also a reason it has the word "publicity" too - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:38:19] - paul: no, i don't think that would have been more productive. i don't think that would have made the news, and the type of band which would boycott NC would have a socially progressive fanbase anyways. - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:34:17] - Aaron: Hypothetical for you, though. Instead of musicians boycotting NC, do you think it would've been more productive for them to show up but give a speech about the issue during the concert and announce they are contributing the proceeds of the concert to some LGBTA fund? -Paul
[2016-04-26 12:32:59] - Aaron: allowed transgender people to use whichever bathroom they wanted in a few years. Heck, it might even be a constitutionally settled issue by then. -Paul
[2016-04-26 12:32:13] - aaron: A long bet is tough, because like you said, things have been moving fast lately. Wasn't it just 7 years ago that California (one of the most liberal states in the country) democratically voted gay marriage ILLEGAL? It wouldn't at all surprised me if even the most conservative states (of which I don't usually think of NC as one of them)... -Paul
[2016-04-26 12:26:59] - aaron: how about the "next state elections in NC, the bums won't be thrown out"? I have no idea when that will be though. - mig
[2016-04-26 12:24:40] - a: the search isn't working
- aaron[2016-04-26 12:23:18] - mig: would you be interested in some kind of long bet? like "in 2018 will transgendered residents of north carolina still be prohibited from using the bathroom for the gender with which they identify?" i don't think that kind of long bet would be entirely fair to your side though, since the change might have come about naturally without protests - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:20:13] - i don't think either opinion is necessarily wrong, it's just a glass half empty/half full thing - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:20:03] - paul: part of it for me also is I don't think this will effect any real change (part of aaron's argument). Like you said, I'll reiterate that I don't think this is the way you win over hearts and minds on a controversial issue. - mig
[2016-04-26 12:20:00] - paul: right. i think miguel interprets these artists as only taking a stand when it's convenient, or when it gets them brownie points with the public. i interpret these artists as only taking a stand when there's chance that it will provoke a positive change. - aaron
[2016-04-26 12:14:12] - Whereas the appeal of Aaron's side (again, without trying to speak for him), is that it's practical. I would like to be principled in all things, but I was just making the "practical" argument to Adrian regarding how it's not quite practical to hate everybody in the world for being intolerant about something you disagree with them about.
-Paul[2016-04-26 12:12:08] - I can kind of see both sides in Aaron/Mig's debate. Without trying to speak for Miguel, I think the appeal of his stance is that it's principled. If it's wrong for NC to make this law, it's wrong for China to make it. Just because China is bigger doesn't make it right. -Paul
[2016-04-26 11:59:15] - we'll just have to agree to disagree here. - mig
[2016-04-26 11:52:12] - aaron: Musicians have a wide latitude of where they decide to tour. I can sort of understand that it may not be practical for an international company to completely divest from business in China or the middle east or countries like Italy (where SSM is still not legally recognized), but a musician certainly can. - mig
[2016-04-26 11:32:33] - unless i'm misinterpreting you, it sounds like you're saying, "musicians should either boycott literally every country they disagree with, or they should never boycott any countries they disagree with, they should be consistent." what's wrong with picking your battles? is that really hypocritical in itself? - aaron
[2016-04-26 11:28:29] - mig: a musician might be able affect change in North Carolina with a boycott, but they can't affect change in China with a boycott. so they boycott North Carolina, but they don't boycott China -- even though they are morally opposed to policies in both locations. what's the problem with that? - aaron
[2016-04-26 11:13:18] - paul: ok, i can't disagree with that. ~a
[2016-04-26 10:43:08] - I'm not sure why we're zeroing in on PayPal. There's plenty of other companies that have joined this cause who do international business, and moreover several musicians who have boycotted, yet some don't have any issues performing in countries with less than stellar records on LGBT rights. - mig
[2016-04-26 10:02:29] - a: We're all intolerant of different things to different degrees. I'm intolerant of pedophiles and cannibals. I'm also intolerant of overly sensitive people and people who let their kids run wild in restaurants. Whose to say what is a reasonable intolerance and what isn't? -Paul
[2016-04-26 09:59:51] - a: Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying, and I think holding a huge minority (or depending on how you count it, perhaps the majority) of people to (the royal) your special standard of tolerance or else they're a hateful person not even deserving of any understanding is just flatly wrong. -Paul
[2016-04-26 09:53:01] - paul: you're asking us to be more tolerant of intolerant people? i say, no thank you: if they want to be intolerant of other people, they give up the right to ask for tolerance for themselves. ~a
[2016-04-26 09:47:54] - -Paul
[2016-04-26 09:47:53] - aaron: Still thinking gay marriage is wrong and whatever else and it just doesn't seem right to tar them with labels like "bigot" when they've only had a few years (give or take, depending on the issue at hand) for them to come around to the fact that they're not in the majority anymore. I'm not trying to say they're right, just that maybe we should be more tolerant.
[2016-04-26 09:46:21] - aaron: Like, I find it hard to consider people evil bigots for being against gay marriage or being weirded out by transgender people or whatever other advancements have happened over the past few years. For starters, I don't think hearts and minds are won with that kind of aggressiveness, but also because I could see my grandparents or great aunts/uncles... -Paul
[2016-04-26 09:44:06] - aaron: " the timeline on transgender equality has been surprisingly aggressive" Yeah, that was a point I was going to make before I realized I didn't have time to continue the conversation.
It does make me a little uncomfortable how intolerant we've become of people who are still stuck in the old ways of thinking.... like 3 years ago. -Paul[2016-04-25 19:09:15] - So... hypocrisy is very narrow. It's overused as a term, often for things like "double standards", which may be morally questionable, but aren't quite as offensive. Hypocrisy is such a big deal in the modern world because it's the last remaining genuine argument against some people. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 19:08:05] - executed. That would be pretty blatant hypocrisy. It sounds like it's more just generic "human rights" BS, which is why the China line works better it seems, because China has a terrible human rights record. But again, it might not be "hypocrisy" if we're talking about them not building in NC. Have they built in China? I have no idea. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 19:06:55] - For hypocrisy what you say is very important, because you have to be saying something completely opposite of what you are doing. If PayPal said (and this is not what I think they said) "North Carolina's law is unconscionable in this modern world. We have no interest in building there." And then went a built a PayPal office in Somalia where these people could be ...
[2016-04-25 19:04:48] - aaron: I don't much care about the PayPal incident in specific. They're welcome to do business in NC, or not. Clearly they think this is a winning business move, as mig/Paul pointed out. I don't necessarily see it as hypocritical, either, mostly because I haven't actually read their statements to know what it is they're saying. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 16:40:23] - sorry, i flubbed up a few of my sentences here but hopefully you can read through my mistakes to understand my intent - aaron
[2016-04-25 16:39:06] - isn't their consistent, non-double standard sense just, "we want to do business everywhere in the world, so we will open offices globally. within each country we will locate our offices in the area which maximizes our employees human rights" or something like that? what's the perceived double standard? - aaron
[2016-04-25 16:37:53] - does that really make any sense? paypal has trans-friendly alternative to opening offices in NC, so they're going with that trans-friendly alternative. they have no trans-friendly alternatives to opening offices in china, so they're opening offices in china because there's no alternative if they want to do business there. doesn't that make sense? - aaron
[2016-04-25 16:36:29] - reading a little about it, it sounds like they were going to create a Paypal office in NC, but instead they're going to create these jobs elsewhere in NC. presumably people think this is hypocritical because presumably Paypal has offices in china, even though there are more trans-friendly options than opening offices in china? - aaron
[2016-04-25 16:34:44] - xpovos: i think being a hypocrite and setting double-standards are kind of the same thing, and that paypal's decision shows that they're hypocrites, but i think it's acceptable. - aaron
[2016-04-25 16:30:45] - xpovos: so you think paypal are being hypocrites, and not merely setting a double-standard, and that there's an unambiguous distinction between the two? hmm. that's really fuzzy to me. i guess i don't know enough about the specific decision they made or their offices in china to say one way or the other - aaron
[2016-04-25 15:45:10] - a: Right, those things are probably still bad, but they're not strictly hypocrisy. What is hypocrisy is saying that people shouldn't do business with unsavory types, while still doing business with unsavory types. Maybe hypocrisy is OK. Maybe double-standards are OK. But in a modernist relativistic world, hypocrisy seems like the last remaining sin. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 15:32:48] - without checking the dictionary definition, i think "double-standard" seems to fit your examples better. ~a
[2016-04-25 15:24:38] - xpovos: hmm okay. i was going off google's definition of "the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform; pretense." i think my examples fit that definition OK. i don't think it's about private/public necessarily. - aaron
[2016-04-25 15:19:09] - I think part of the problem here is in the definition of "hypocrisy". The word basically means "pretend", as in play-acting. In order for it to really be hypocrisy, someone has to be affirming one thing privately while doing another publicly. The examples aaron is giving don't seem to fit as well with that definition. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 15:09:46] - It's just really easy to point at those companies and claim it's just a PR stunt (because ... it kind of is) and that doesn't seem to be lost on a lot of people. - mig
[2016-04-25 15:01:26] - Moreover, if you're someone who's more on the fence, I don't think this does a good job to convince them either. And obviously you're not going to convince people who support the law to come around. - mig
[2016-04-25 15:00:14] - engaging in a boycott over the law, yet the company is happily making money in other places that treat gay people horribly, I'm probably going to be more angry at the company than the elected officials (and judging by some social media reaction on this I don't think this viewpoint is unique). - mig
[2016-04-25 14:58:47] - aaron: I see what you're getting at, but I believe the hypocrisy matters in this case. The problem is the point of this boycott is to get people angry at their elected officials to either vote the bums out or "scare" the elected officials into changing the law. If I'm living in NC, and I don't support the law, yet I'm being affected personally by a company ...
[2016-04-25 14:43:42] - a company holding countries to different standards, because some should arbitrarily "know better" just seems like that same level of hypocracy to me. i agree it's hypocritical but i guess i don't think it's the worst thing. they're trying to affect small changes to places that are receptive to those changes. that makes sense - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:41:22] - mig: it's pretty common for people to be like, "oh she's racist and homophobic, but she's my grandmother, so that's acceptable." and that's a little hypocritical too. you should probably say, well she's racist and homophobic so we're not going to bring our children to visit grandma anymore - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:40:35] - mig: well, vegans are a little hypocritical if they don't eat meat/cheese for moral reasons but they still eat pizza because it's cheap and convenient. and gay people are a little hypocritical if they expect their friends to be at a certain level of tolerance, but they don't hold their family to those same expectations. - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:29:12] - aaron: I'm not sure any of those situations you laid out make any sense. I guess if you're the type of vegan who rails against people who eat meat/dairy products/etc you would be, but otherwise? And one's sexuality is one's own business. I'm not sure why you'd be obligated to divulge that to anyone you don't want to. - mig
[2016-04-25 14:22:23] - mig: but you're right that strictly speaking you are a hypocrite for doing so, and for not holding all cultures to identical strict moral standards regardless of their background - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:21:49] - mig: sure, i think i changed my mind. it's hypocritical and i think i'm OK with companies/people being a little hypocritical. i know a lot of vegans who eat pizza and gay people who are out to everyone except their grandparents and whatever. i think it makes sense to hold different standards to different circumstances and different cultures, - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:14:49] - paul: that said, the timeline on transgender equality has been surprisingly aggressive. it's something that 50% of americans would literally not be able to define of in 2014, and now it's 2016 and we're expecting everyone and their septuagenarian grandparents from north carolina to be on board. that seems fast... - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:14:14] - aaron: sure it's logical, but that still makes it hypocritical. If you are going to take that high horse moral stand and that forcefully, you should (imo) be willing to divest from places where it hurts your bottom line. It speaks to why these boycotts rarely ever accomplish anything, because they are so transparently symbolic. - mig
[2016-04-25 14:13:32] - Aaron: I think I agree that it wouldn't get the same publicity otherwise. I guess this is one of those situations where I'm a little uncomfortable with the means justifying the ends, but I guess there are no "ideal" solutions. -Paul
[2016-04-25 14:13:00] - paul: for companies to hold countries like saudi arabia to western standards of ethics is a little unfair. it took america like 150 years to get us to our current levels of racial/gender equality. so i don't think it's fair to hold entire foreign countries to our standards. but north carolina? that's a little fair - aaron
[2016-04-25 14:10:57] - paul: they're bringing a lot of publicity to the issue though and i honestly think this approach has a really good chance of bringing about change. i know it's basically just sociopolitical bullying but if your #1 goal is, "i want this company/country to conform to my code of ethics" then boycotts and publicity stunts like this are powerful, and hurt everyone - aaron
[2016-04-25 13:46:48] - Aaron: I get that they're trying to make a point, but it seems like a lot of these points are just hurting "innocents". I know there was a lot of talk on Facebook about musicians cancelling concerts and how that might be good publicity but ultimately not be the best approach. -Paul
[2016-04-25 13:43:30] - Aaron: Yeah, and I don't think it fair to condemn companies for doing business in China just because they might have some bad laws. The way I took that point was not that PayPal should abandon those places, but that maybe they should have a little more understanding for NC. -Paul
[2016-04-25 13:40:47] - paul: shutting down business in north carolina doesn't hurt paypal's bottom line as much as shutting down business in china, so yeah, i don't know. i think it's still a logical position for companies to find themselves in. they want to make a statement as long as it doesn't hurt their bottom line too much - aaron
[2016-04-25 13:38:30] - paul: i've heard that opinion from other people, how it's hypocritical to shut down business in NC but still do business in China or Saudi Arabia. i don't think it's hypocritical though, they're obviously trying to make a statement about current events - aaron
[2016-04-25 13:36:08] - a: Badly, I guess? My hands tend to move a lot, and I just realized (today) that apparently some of it is contextual, too. I use different fingers for different letters of words depending on where it is in a sentence. If I start a sentence with Starcraft, then my right hand jumps over to help, otherwise I use just my left hand. -Paul
[2016-04-25 13:35:19] - paul: i certainly didn't expect it to be a two-handed word to type, that's crazy - aaron
[2016-04-25 13:34:35] - http://reason.com/archives/2016/04/25/fight-against-nc-lgbt-discrimination-law I thought this was a thoughtful examination of some of the hypocrisies that people against the NC law might have. Can you have a hypocrisy? I kind of struggled writing that sentence... -Paul
[2016-04-25 13:29:26] - paul: oh my god, did you say that you typed an "R" with your right hand? do you touchtype? ~a
[2016-04-25 13:20:19] - paul: yes. ~a
[2016-04-25 12:35:20] - Instead of just kicking off a sentence with it, and I typed it all with my left hand, so I have no idea. -Paul
[2016-04-25 12:35:01] - Xpovos: Yeah, so I use my right hand for the first "T" and first "R" but left hand for everything else. Can't explain why. I guess I feel like my right had has nothing to do so might as well jump in for some random letters? Although, oddly enough, I just tried typing Starcraft as an extension of the previous sentence... -Paul
[2016-04-25 12:01:52] - Paul: That's a pretty big extension. I definitely stray the line from time to time, but I think the furthest I ever go is hitting "g" with my right hand or "y" with my left. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 10:57:00] - Uh, is it weird that I use my right hand to hit the "T" in starcraft? -Paul
[2016-04-25 09:55:10] - touch typing svg. ~a
[2016-04-25 09:53:32] - aaron: i do not. i use index finger for "R" most of the time. i think you're asking a bigger question though: do you use different fingers to type certain keys depending on the word it's in. for the most part, i do not (though "starcraft" proves i do it on occasion). ~a
[2016-04-25 09:50:04] - a: oh, maybe you already do - aaron
[2016-04-25 09:49:43] - a: it's an easy word to type if you put your middle finger on the "r" instead, try it - aaron
[2016-04-25 09:49:13] - a: well, i've manually clicked a probe and right-clicked my nexus so it would return the cargo. but do you mean, there's actually a shortcut key for it? - aaron
[2016-04-25 09:47:43] - xpovos/aaron/paul: yeah i think i skipped a few words when reading aaron's question. defininetly index finger though i'm not sure why. it's a super hard word to type. ~a
[2016-04-25 09:42:56] - a: i'm actually asking about typing the word "starcraft", not playing the game. i just realized i type it in a really weird but efficient way in qwerty and wanted to see if anybody else also came up with the same method independently. it sounds like maybe paul did - aaron
[2016-04-25 09:21:16] - a: Sorry, I missed the rest of the letters in aaron, to whom that was supposed to be addressed. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 09:19:59] - a: While typing the word "Starcraft" I hit "c" with my middle finger. I've not played the game in too long in order to tell you which finger I'd use for hitting "c" as a keyboard shortcut during play. I'd guess my index, though, based on the fact that my right hand would be on my mouse, meaning I'm looking for precision over speed. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-25 08:10:05] - http://gas2.org/2016/04/25/elon-musk-hints-fourth-tesla-model-coming-touts-autopilot-safety/ I just liked this line from the article: "it is widely believed that eventually Musk wants the entire range of Tesla vehicles to be S-E-X-Y. He was greatly perturbed when Ford laid claim to the name “Model Eâ€, saying that Ford “wanted to kill sex.â€" -Paul
[2016-04-25 00:20:48] - a: Oh, yeah, and the content is a little different now too. It didn't have any info about Clinton's response before. -Paul
[2016-04-24 21:12:23] - paul: did they change the title of the article since you posted it? i thought it said the same thing as the URL when i clicked on it the first time. ~a
[2016-04-24 14:13:10] - aaron: Index finger. -Paul
[2016-04-24 14:12:32] - http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-04-23/koch-says-it-s-possible-clinton-would-be-better-than-republican -Paul
[2016-04-24 12:40:42] - wtf, did you know you can tell a probe (or scv/drone) to return cargo? i can only come up with very unlikely scenarios where that would be useful. ~a
[2016-04-24 12:38:13] - "C" (chrono boost, colossus, and . . . charge) is something i use pretty often. i'm not sure which finger i use for that, honestly, i'll have to check. "B-C" (terran or protoss) or "V-C" (protoss) is pretty common too, but middle is the only finger that would really work there. ~a
[2016-04-24 11:49:04] - when you guys type "starcraft" in qwerty do you hit the "C" key with your middle or index finger? - aaron
[2016-04-22 17:41:53] - xpovos: yep, of course! (full sordid story: the original mysql extension, which the message board was using, was removed in php7. php7 is the only version that comes with the newest ubuntu. so last night i tried to get php7 and a newer mysql extension to work but i had an early morning meeting all morning. there are still a few features that are broken. sigh) ~a
[2016-04-22 14:35:38] - Also, thank you for fixing the bug. It's nice to have full functionality back.
-- Xpovos[2016-04-22 14:34:15] - a: Ah, the title makes sense now. The link I posted may be something people have seen before, Travis posted it over on FB. But I liked it enough to share here for people who hadn't seen it. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-22 14:19:55] - there, fixed maybe? still some bugs, sorry. lots of stuff changed, see the title (tee hee) ~a
[2016-04-22 14:14:53] - the message board is totally broken, yes. sorry. i've been busy today
~a[2016-04-22 12:25:11] - I've been told that posting to the message board seems broken? -Paul
[2016-04-22 11:51:07] - Huh. Posting is broken? -- Xpovos
[2016-04-22 11:50:43] - I found this to be very interesting. But I love hard data on really weird subjects. http://www.theverge.com/2016/4/21/11474470/anchorman-quote-that-escalated-quickly-meme -- Xpovos
[2016-04-21 14:24:47] - sometimes? so, "yes" then. i guess the only ambiguity would be if someone who was not a gun owner at the time they were living in your house (but otherwise were an owner of guns). ~a
[2016-04-21 14:10:24] - 1) no 2) sometimes but mostly no -Daniel
[2016-04-21 14:00:36] - mig: yes. (except vt and a few internships) i've always lived and worked in arlington, annandale, or alexandria. ~a
[2016-04-21 13:54:55] - a: you still work in VA, right? There's a semi-regular gun (quarterly or maybe every 2 months) show about 5 minutes from my house over at the Dulles Expo Center. There's a lot of guns per capita in this state. - mig
[2016-04-21 13:53:30] - a: Although it must be nice working with people that don't understand emotions or know what real rage feels like. -Paul
[2016-04-21 13:52:54] - a: Sounds like you need to working on your recruitment screening.
-Paul[2016-04-21 13:51:39] - like ~80% of my office is a yes to both. ~a
[2016-04-21 13:48:09] - 1) no. 2) probably no. - mig
[2016-04-21 13:45:21] - a: No to both. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-21 13:17:54] - a: Pretty sure it's a no for both for me as well. -Paul
[2016-04-21 13:15:03] - Daniel: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--wizards-offer-head-coaching-job-to-scott-brooks-213807080.html Ready for JVG? I forgot he was available too. There were actually a fair number of intriguing coaching candidates available this year (Thibs, JVG, Karl, Dantoni, Blatt). -Paul
[2016-04-21 13:01:26] - 1. raise your hand if you currently own a gun? 2. raise your hand if you have ever lived in the same house as a gun owner? (like . . . a parent probably for you guys) the reason i ask: i answer no for both, and i thought it interesting that miguel's article was written by a person who would . . . answer yes to #2. ~a
[2016-04-21 12:53:43] - So this feels more like a cultural bias thing to me rather than merely a dispute over political opinions. - mig
[2016-04-21 12:52:51] - mig: Yeah, the emotion thing is really weird. "I also don’t know if she understands emotions, or what real rage feels like." What? That's part of what made me think maybe this was made up. -Paul
[2016-04-21 12:52:18] - mig: that's fine. i meant political generally. what i still said holds true, anti-discrimination-policies are not typically this. ~a
[2016-04-21 12:49:02] - gun (mainly that they are unhinged weirdos who cannot feel real emotions). - mig
[2016-04-21 12:48:24] - a: actually the political beliefs are implied. All the girl publicly stated is: a) she owns a gun. b) she applied for a conceal carry permit. The author even flat out states she does not know what her actual political opinions are. Almost everything she attributes this girl is pretty much her own projections on how she views people who are comfortable owning a
[2016-04-21 12:17:43] - at the very least, non-negative. ~a
[2016-04-21 11:41:24] - Also... am I the only person who thinks that there's a non-zero chance that this is a made-up troll post? -Paul
[2016-04-21 11:35:47] - mig: Of course, this is the same reason why I don't think the Jewish baker should have to make the nazi cake.
-Paul[2016-04-21 11:34:57] - mig: I don't think it SHOULD be illegal (and I have no idea if it is, but my guess is that it's not). I hesitate to say it's appropriate, but I also don't necessarily think it's inappropriate. She's obviously free to give her recommendation to anybody for whatever reason she wants, but this does seem to be a completely wrong reason to deny a recommendation. -Paul
[2016-04-21 11:30:03] - anti-discriminatory policies are often specific and i've never heard of one that includes publicly held political beliefs. if you want to refuse to write a recomendation because somebody is a democrat, you might piss some people off, and get some nice retaliation, but i doubt somebody will cite anti-descrimination. ~a
[2016-04-21 10:17:55] - /s/isn't/is
[2016-04-21 10:17:44] - xpovos: maybe illegal isn't the wrong word. Maybe the question really is whether this would run afoul of any anti-discriminatory policies a university might have. - mig
[2016-04-21 10:14:16] - xpovos/a: if the reason for refusal is because she was gay/trans or of a particular non-white ethnicity (or both!)? - mig
[2016-04-21 09:29:20] - Anyway, IMO, both legal and appropriate. It may suck, but then so likely does the professor, and anyone putting weight in his words of recommendation knowing that he sucks is likely going to suck too. Social networks are self-reinforcing. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-21 09:28:28] - mig: A letter of recommendation is pretty narrow. I had professors refuse to write letters for me for a variety of reasons. It didn't even upset me, let alone make me consider the legal issues. But then again, I'm a privileged white cis-gendered hetero man, so what would I know? -- Xpovos
[2016-04-21 06:33:30] - no. why the hell would that be illegal. ~a
[2016-04-20 17:50:35] - http://chronicle.com/article/Guns-PancakesAmbiguity/236154 fun question: if this prof declines to write a letter of recommendation for this student solely because she's a gun enthusiast, is that a form of illegal discrimination? - mig
[2016-04-20 09:49:45] - Paul: Interesting, I wonder if it will have actual ramifications though. If the execs at Alphabet don't do anything I wonder if it starts to erode some of the enthusiasm those people have for working for google. -Daniel
[2016-04-19 15:58:24] - http://recode.net/2016/04/19/google-memegen-nest/ I stumbled across this today and thought that the Revolv thing looked familiar... This adds some flavor to that article that Xpovos posted a week or so ago about Google being a jerk and not supporting something. Apparently it was Nest, and not all of Alphabet was happy about it. -Paul
[2016-04-18 16:03:08] - I think Yahoo!'s biggest problem was trying to be something they weren't. People saw a web site and search engine and mail and wanted an infinite growth engine, when in actuality Yahoo!'s best product lines were very static, slow growth, but high revenue/profit. The quest for growth killed the golden goose of profit. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-18 15:47:28] - a: So, yeah, I don't think their long term prognosis is good, but isn't that what the sale is supposed to solve? They'll be some other company's problem then. -Paul
[2016-04-18 15:38:52] - a: I've continued to hold onto it (although I've sold some of my shares) because I've read that the value of their Asian holdings (Yahoo Japan and their Alibaba stake) is about equal to their current market cap, which means the rest of the company (what most people think of as Yahoo) is being valued at close to nothing. -Paul
[2016-04-18 15:37:25] - a: Well, I bought under the thinking Marissa Mayer could turn them around because I felt like there was a lot of value there that was being mismanaged in the past. Then, I held onto it as their Alibaba stake drove the share price higher. -Paul
[2016-04-18 14:48:34] - paul: i sold my yhoo at 28. honestly, i'm not sure why i ever owned them at all. (despite the fact i love their finance.yahoo.com stuff) they don't seem relevant in todays internet. their sale will no doubt change their short term stock price, but in the end, yahoo will die a slow and painful death. disagree? ~a
[2016-04-18 14:21:48] - Anybody have any predictions on what kind of Yahoo bids will be announced after today? I'm hoping there are at least a few competing bids and not just Verizon, but the flat stock price has me worried. -Paul
[2016-04-18 13:49:16] - Xpovos: I've heard about that before. I'm mostly surprised by it, especially the scale of it (like Miguel mentioned). A small part of me isn't surprised, considering how often studies seem to come out debunking previously held beliefs, but it's still pretty concerning to anybody who believes that science is important to understanding the world around us. -Paul
[2016-04-18 13:44:50] - "since our understanding of nutrition science is always changing, why should we codify today’s understandings in law?" -Paul
[2016-04-18 13:44:43] - http://www.cato.org/blog/skim-milk-problem-official-science First, beating the dead horse of "government might be wrong about nutritional science", but this also makes the point I often struggle to articulate about what I think should be done about it: -Paul
[2016-04-18 13:43:00] - mig: I was never a frequent watcher of Red Eye (in fact, I've only seen snippets of some episodes), but I'm loving the podcast so far. -Paul
[2016-04-18 10:25:40] - xpovos: the problem doesn't surprise me honestly, but the scale of it is a little shocking. - mig
[2016-04-18 09:47:50] - http://theweek.com/articles/618141/big-science-broken Thoughts? -- Xpovos
[2016-04-18 09:40:35] - paul: the Fifth Column is pretty good. Reminds me of Red Eye (all 3 of them were semi-frequent guests on it) in its heyday. - mig
[2016-04-15 12:59:34] - also because i believe it would be prohibitively expensive to build custom bikes like that for an art project. ~a
[2016-04-15 12:58:40] - well either way it's quality stuff. i assumed they were rendered because the lighting is too good? ~a
[2016-04-15 11:35:47] - a: oh, i was impressed by the painstaking time someone took to build those bikes... are they rendered? i've lost my eye for that stuff! - aaron
[2016-04-15 10:33:10] - those also seem to be real and recent parts. those wheels on that brown bike are a very new development and actually used on 2014 and newer fat-tire bikes. ~a
[2016-04-15 10:27:23] - no way! i'd ride most of those bikes! i'm so impressed by the painstaking time somebody took to render all of those drawings. ~a
[2016-04-15 09:25:20] - http://imgur.com/a/VZQXk most people cannot draw a bike - aaron
[2016-04-14 19:12:02] - i'm not totally sure how this bill text would even begin to "ban encryption" as some have suggested online. on the other hand, i do very much see how this hurts encryption and data security in general. people will be required to back-door their own software when they get a court order. ~a
[2016-04-14 18:55:30] - welp, we got an encryption bill ~a
[2016-04-14 17:42:00] - Daniel: That was actually my first thought too. I figured whatever coaching hire would be made with an eye toward attracting KD. When I saw it was Brooks, I thought: "Oh, KD's former coach! Wait, FORMER coach, that's probably not a selling point. But KD was a big backer for a long time... Still, probably not helping make the case...". -Paul
[2016-04-14 16:03:56] - Paul: Yeah I don't know that I would count on him to turn the Wiz around or something. Honestly it might lower the chances of KD going to DC as well... THE WIZARDS SHOULD DEFINITELY HIRE SCOTT BROOKS. -Daniel
[2016-04-14 15:49:23] - Daniel: Yeah, it's hard to tell how much coaching can make a difference without the players, but I tend to agree with you. The NBA seems to have a small handful of elite coaches, with the rest being mediocre to bad. At least Scott Brooks had sustained periods of winning at high levels (even if he did have elite players). -Paul
[2016-04-14 15:47:18] - Daniel: I don't disagree, especially since it sounds like there are actually a fair number of guys out there who might be exciting. Thibs, Karl, Dantoni all would be interesting for various reasons. -Paul
[2016-04-14 15:46:04] - That said I think most coaches are generally not a large factor. I think there are only a handful of actually good coaches in the NBA. The rest just do their thing and float along. -Daniel
[2016-04-14 15:45:17] - I don't think Scott Brooks is the answer to any coaching question. -Daniel
[2016-04-14 15:37:42] - http://sports.yahoo.com/news/sources--wizards-to-pursue-scott-brooks-after-firing-randy-wittman-041028035.html Any Wizards fans here have thoughts on them hiring Scott Brooks? I'm relatively cool to the idea, although I think he might be an upgrade over Wittman. Still surprised Ernie is around. -Paul
[2016-04-14 13:34:25] - I'd heard about this New Balance deal before, but it was in the context of "the enlisted don't care for the fit of New Balance as compared to the other brands." Now I happen to really like New Balance for my running shoes, but this whole thing is fascinating in the trainwreck sense. http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/2001953 -- Xpovos
[2016-04-13 11:40:20] - a: Yeah, Katherine Mangu Ward is a little hit-or-miss in her humor for me, but she throws so many jokes in her articles that at least a few are destined to hit.
-Paul[2016-04-13 10:59:53] - paul: uberXX, lol. excellent jokes. ~a
[2016-04-13 10:07:02] - Daniel: Yeah, I think we mostly agree (maybe disagree on degree). I would be shocked if the courts held up something like this for men, I would've been surprised if they didn't hold up the female version (until I read the reason article). -Paul
[2016-04-13 10:05:34] - http://reason.com/blog/2016/04/12/when-gender-discrimination-is-good-the-c And apparently I am wrong. "To limit employees to one gender, you have to have what the law calls a bona fide occupational qualification. And that's a really strict standard". -Paul
[2016-04-13 08:55:42] - Paul: I think its possible to make a case for that a women only uber might be safer for women. I think that case would be harder to prove in court for men. I'm not totally sure that the women one holds up but maybe. -Daniel
[2016-04-12 16:50:35] - Daniel: Because I think the government accepts the argument that a women-only Uber might be necessary, but it does not accept that a male-only Uber might be. -Paul
[2016-04-12 16:49:43] - Daniel: Right, but I'm saying if somebody wanted to create the same (or, I suppose, opposite) business where it was Uber but with male drivers/passengers only to "protect" men from women, I think that business would be laughed out of court even though gender is required for the business. -Paul
[2016-04-12 16:38:23] - Paul: Naw, I think a's right in that if a gender is required for your business I think its ok. You have to be able to make the case its essential so I guess it could be challenged that a same sex driver is safer and that could break it but its not just hiring only one gender is illegal. -Daniel
[2016-04-12 16:29:26] - mig: Basically, a double standard.
-Paul[2016-04-12 16:29:07] - mig: If you're looking for my explanation, it's simply because I think the government would accept a scenario where a business would want to cater to women in this way but would not accept a scenario where a business would want to cater to men in a similar way. -Paul
[2016-04-12 16:09:16] - well i assume you're also asking paul since he said the same thing. my response: the last 12 words of this page: "and is not job-related or necessary to the operation of the business". ie, a strip-club operator isn't required to hire men. ~a
[2016-04-12 16:06:03] - a: explain why. - mig
[2016-04-12 16:04:22] - mig: it's probably legal. ~a
[2016-04-12 15:41:57] - mig: My completely uninformed opinion? I'll bet it's legal. -Paul
[2016-04-12 15:34:52] - "Chariot for Women will only hire women drivers" that's more than just a little sexist. This is pretty blatant discrimination. Of the illegal kind. - mig
[2016-04-12 15:25:18] - claim to be transgender? -Paul
[2016-04-12 15:25:12] - http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/12/a-new-ride-hailing-service-is-trying-to-improve-womens-safety--by-banning-men.html Two questions: (1) Isn't this more than a little sexist in a number of ways? (2) "transgender women are welcome as both drivers and passengers" Doesn't this basically mean that men (or, I suppose, "men"?) CAN be drivers or passengers if they just... -Paul
[2016-04-12 12:03:17] - mig: I'm sure Gurkie will be interested. I'll email her. -Paul
[2016-04-12 12:00:44] - also, the thinkgeek people just put up tickets for sale for the May 4th star wars trivia night. Is anyone interested in that? - mig
[2016-04-12 12:00:10] - paul: I do like podcasts. And I like all 3 of those guys. - mig
[2016-04-12 11:30:11] - mig: Not sure if you're a podcast guy, but I've started listening to "The Fifth Column" (http://www.wethefifth.com/), which is a weekly podcast hosted by Matt Welch, Kmele Foster and Michael Moynihan. It's been pretty great so far, and I think you might enjoy it. -Paul
[2016-04-11 12:53:05] - http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-04-10/obama-cites-lack-of-day-after-plan-in-libya-as-biggest-mistake a pretty shocking admission. - mig
[2016-04-08 12:34:28] - http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/skokie/news/ct-obama-skokie-trending-20160407-story.html I almost thought this story was onion-ish when i first read the headline, but looks like it's um /r/nottheonion. - mig
[2016-04-08 12:30:03] - What has always engaged me about Paglia's stance on abortion is how she's willing to take the hard line of thought about the meaning of human life. I disagree with her reasoning, but the fact that she's considering it like that is outside of the mainstream of pro-choice thought. In my opinion because it's hard. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-08 12:28:43] - I think, largely, Planned Parenthood is a bit of a red herring when it comes to the abortion debate. Obivously, I'm against federal money for it, but then again I'm against federal money funding much of ANYTHING. The fact that abortion is involved is hardly a factor for that decision. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-08 12:09:03] - a: Agreed, but they also don't always go hand-in-hand. -Paul
[2016-04-08 12:03:27] - a: "if you want to fix runaway government spending, you'd best to organize your search." sure that's fair. I wasn't really arguing that we should prioritize cutting PP funding at all costs, just pointing out that "oh it's such a tiny part of the budget" by itself is not a good justification for said spending. - mig
[2016-04-08 11:29:38] - paul: "you can honestly think a fetus is a human life and be against terminating that and it's not just all about controlling women's health choices" they aren't mutually exclusive. ~a
[2016-04-08 11:28:30] - mig: "i'm sure if someone handed you $20 million, you'd feel it's a lavish some of money to receive" you have removed context. ~a
[2016-04-08 11:27:14] - "centered on whether it's a legitimate use of government funds" well i think it's legitimate use of government funds. furthermore, i disagree: if you want to fix runaway government spending, you'd best to organize your search. spending all of your time on a small dollar amount is unlikely to be efficient. ~a
[2016-04-08 10:14:24] - mig: Not to mention the extreme hypocrisy most of those people have, since I'm sure the majority of those very same people support things like Obamacare and the FDA, which involve exerting a lot of control over women's health choices as well. -Paul
[2016-04-08 10:13:10] - mig: Yup, neither side is innocent. I just am more frustrated by the militant "pro-choice" side because I don't understand why THEY don't seem to understand that you can honestly think a fetus is a human life and be against terminating that and it's not just all about controlling women's health choices. -Paul
[2016-04-08 09:34:05] - a: I'm sure if someone handed you $20 million, you'd feel it's a lavish some of money to receive. - mig
[2016-04-08 09:31:27] - "that's pennies." I don't like this form of argument regarding govenrment spending. $20 million is still a lot of fucking money. The argument should be centered on whether it's a legitimate use of government funds. It shouldn't be "oh it's only a tiny fragment of the budget so meh." - mig
[2016-04-08 09:21:27] - paul: to be fair, the anti-abortion side doesn't do itself much favors with some of the onorous legislation that gets proposed/passed by them. - mig
[2016-04-07 15:10:10] - Xpovos: To how if you don't 100% agree with somebody on the topic, you are some crazed radical. I'm super sympathetic to people who think abortion is equivalent to killing babies and I don't think just because you think that it means you're some woman-hating neanderthal who want to control all women's health decisions. -Paul
[2016-04-07 14:57:42] - Xpovos: I only read a bit of your article, and I don't think you were soliciting comments from me, but abortion is one of the areas which annoys me because of how overly politicized it is (by both sides, but I think a little more so by Democrats). Everything from the often inaccurate and misleading names ("pro-life" and "pro-choice")... -Paul
[2016-04-07 13:35:36] - xpovos: if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. nice start. "lavish federal funding" hahaha, what? after you remove screening/contraception, you get 20m from all governmental sources. who knows how much of that is federal, but i wouldn't call that lavish. that's pennies. we spend more tax money than that on hookers and blow. ~a
[2016-04-07 13:21:53] - http://www.salon.com/2016/04/07/camille_paglia_feminists_have_abortion_wrong_trump_and_hillary_miscues_highlight_a_frozen_national_debate/ I'm curious how the more liberal folks here take Paglia's stance on abortion issues. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-06 15:53:57] - -Daniel
[2016-04-06 15:53:54] - I think I would go Toy Story 3, Up, and Inside Out in some order but its tough. WallE and Monsters Inc are very good.
[2016-04-06 14:54:57] - a: It's not that I don't like Toy Story. Very good movie. I own a copy (or two or three). I have the soundtrack. But it doesn't get me in the feels the way those other three do. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-06 14:54:26] - If I had to rank the 4 I've seen... it would probably be: (1) Incredibles (2) Wall-E (3) Finding Nemo, but I hardly remember Bug's Life at all. -Paul
[2016-04-06 14:53:41] - daniel: in no order . . . up, walle, and toy story. (not sure which toy story i like the best, but it's probably #1) ~a
[2016-04-06 14:53:40] - Oh, sorry, Wall-E. I've seen 4. -Paul
[2016-04-06 14:53:16] - xpovos: ah wow. ok, well fair response. ~a
[2016-04-06 14:53:10] - Daniel: I... might have only seen 3 Pixar movies, actually. Not sure if I've seen anything other than Incredibles, Finding Nemo and Bug's Life. -Paul
[2016-04-06 14:51:36] - a: I did not. I like all three of those better than Toy Story. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-06 14:49:39] - xpovos: jesus, did you forget about toy story? ~a
[2016-04-06 14:08:47] - Daniel: Unranked, because I haven't thought enough about which in this trio is best: Up, WALL*E, Monsters Inc. -- Xpovos
[2016-04-06 14:04:10] - Per lunch discussion - top 3 pixar movies? -Daniel
[2016-04-06 11:13:28] - no i'm not counting pixar movies as disney. they're . . . different? i don't know why, they just are. ~a
[2016-04-06 10:32:04] - a: Are you counting Pixar movies as Disney movies? I honestly just haven't seen that many recent Disney movies, despite having two young daughters. It's a shame, because I've heard such good things about Inside Out and Zootopia, that I wish I had an excuse to go see them.
-Paul[2016-04-06 10:15:17] - paul: i'm with you. probably just a bias, but i don't think recent disney movies are any good (frozen included). the reason i think it's probably bias is it seems like kids these days fucking love frozen. ~a
[2016-04-06 09:51:45] - Daniel: I think it's a win for the mission of the Fool because one of the things we like to point out is that your financial advisor is (or was, I guess) not required to put your needs above their own. -Paul
[2016-04-06 09:49:48] - Daniel: For everything I can think of, we charge a flat fee for the service no matter the portfolio size and I can't think of other services that we offer where commissions could come in (except I guess we have agreements with Interactive Brokers for our SMAs). Does that make sense? -Paul
prev <-> next