prev <-> next
[2017-02-17 12:58:26] - the last workday of the month is on a 26th only twice before i'm retired. (2021 and 2027. maybe i'll retire by 2038?) ~a
[2017-02-17 12:23:52] - a: Haha, no problem at all! I was perfectly willing to believe that I was wrong on that (and frankly, I still haven't found any definitive proof that I am right). I was surprised to learn she had had a bad experience with the same bus driver 12(!) years earlier. -Paul
[2017-02-17 11:49:12] - paul, did you know that the word bed looks like a bed? ~a
[2017-02-17 11:48:04] - and to think . . . i already knew that other people had been arrested for the same offense before parks, and that many believe that the bus-thing was an inevitability, and i still made fun of you. sorry, paul! ~a
[2017-02-17 11:45:30] - ah right. then i made fun of you. i probably shouldn't have done that esp since i've now seen the error of my ways.
~a[2017-02-17 11:30:04] - mig: Because I made the mistake of claiming, "Centrists likely aren't going to get annoyed at Rosa Parks sitting where she wants or lunch counter protesters sitting where they want, because it doesn't inconvenience them much."
-Paul[2017-02-17 11:28:12] - no idea. ~a
[2017-02-17 11:27:57] - Why are we on this weird tangent? - mig
[2017-02-17 11:26:44] - yeah, i noticed that. ok, whatever, so i agree then that a majority of americans in 1955 approved-or-no-opinion on "moderate enforcement" of a new civil rights law were it to already exist. not really a ringing endorsement, though. ~a
[2017-02-17 11:24:14] - a: In fact, those were specifically the people I was talking about. -Paul
[2017-02-17 11:23:44] - a: Except it's not 8%. I'm basically saying that the majority of the country in 1955 was in that 69% that didn't "disapprove" because I was counting the "don't know" as the centrists. -Paul
[2017-02-17 11:16:18] - it's hard to believe that 8% of the nation changed their mind about civil rights in the late 50s and early 60s? actually, i'd say it's hard to believe not-that. ~a
[2017-02-17 11:10:43] - a: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/integration-moved-fast-many-americans-according-1965-poll/ I know it's 9 years later and that makes a big difference, but one public opinion poll I could find showed that approval for the Civil Rights Law of 1964 was pretty strong. It's hard to believe THAT much changed in 9 years. -Paul
[2017-02-17 11:08:17] - a: How about this? I have a theory that the majority of Americans in 1955 (the time of Rosa Parks) either opposed segregation or were at worst ambivalent about it and could have their minds changed. -Paul
[2017-02-17 11:05:28] - yeah i guess depending entirely on your definition of "sizeable number" i couldn't refute that. ~a
[2017-02-17 10:05:05] - a: People who didn't really care where Rosa Parks sat and were willing to support overturning segregation laws when presented with compelling evidence supporting overturning them. -Paul
[2017-02-17 10:03:34] - a: In case it isn't obvious, that was sarcasm. My thesis was that there were a sizeable number of "swing" people during the time of Rosa Parks who weren't hardcore racists who thought that blacks were inferior and who could be convinced that segregation was wrong. -Paul
[2017-02-17 10:01:30] - a: Also, the Holocaust was an amusement park for Jews. -Paul
[2017-02-17 10:01:19] - a: Yes. It was a paradise and anybody who says otherwise is lying. That's pretty much exactly what I said.
-Paul[2017-02-16 23:24:55] - paul: what's your thesis? that things weren't really all that bad for black people in the 50s? ~a
[2017-02-16 16:02:23] - a: I think the "I don't know" part is pretty important, though. If this was somebody who cared that she wasn't sitting in the right place on the bus, wouldn't he have been happy to have said so? It's ultimately tell, but I took it as somebody just doing his job. -Paul
[2017-02-16 15:30:37] - "the law's the law, and you're under arrest" is something i would expect some asshole who's happily upholding a bullshit law to say. ~a
[2017-02-16 15:29:57] - "There were apparently white passengers of the bus that were okay standing while blacks sat" imo, this indicative of nothing. people often stand when they know it's going to be a short trip. or when it looks like there aren't many seats. "the law's the law, and you're under arrest" != "he was only enforcing the law". especially depending on how it was said. ~a
[2017-02-16 13:20:27] - a: I just wasted too much time trying to find public polling of segregation or the civil rights movement at that time to no avail, but I did find that around 2/3rds of Americans supported the Civil Rights act in 1964. Jackie Robinson had broken the "color barrier" in 1947. I don't think the America of 1955 was as uniformly racist as it sounds like you think. -Paul
[2017-02-16 13:07:30] - a: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosa_Parks#Her_refusal_to_move Not proof at all, but I found this section interesting. There were apparently white passengers of the bus that were okay standing while blacks sat. Also, the police officer made a statement indicating he was only enforcing the law... -Paul
[2017-02-16 13:03:34] - a: Really? Why? -Paul
[2017-02-16 12:55:12] - paul: "Centrists likely aren't going to get annoyed at Rosa Parks sitting where she wants". most incorrect statement of the month.
seriously, i couldn't disagree with this more. but i agree with your overall thesis. ~a[2017-02-16 12:41:26] - a: Blocking roads and shutting down restaurants, on the other hand, DOES inconvenience a fair amount of people. -Paul
[2017-02-16 12:40:53] - a: Right, but I think a good indication is if the protest is going to rub the "centrists" (for lack of a better term) the wrong way. Centrists likely aren't going to get annoyed at Rosa Parks sitting where she wants or lunch counter protesters sitting where they want, because it doesn't inconvenience them much. -Paul
[2017-02-16 12:35:11] - paul: the point of a protest is creating an enlightening experience. some argue that this doesn't work well: and i tend to agree in many situations. but either way, some people will be annoyed as a side effect of any protest. ~a
[2017-02-16 11:55:03] - Aaron: Maybe. But I support immigration and if I had plans to go to a restaurant and when I arrived, it was closed to support immigrants... I would still be annoyed.
And even though logically I would know it shouldn't affect anything, emotionally I would be less supportive of that particular "movement". -Paul[2017-02-16 11:50:46] - paul: i think there's a line somewhere between holding up signs in a park, and BLM standing in the middle of a freeway during rush hour, and for me i think restaurants closing or serving fewer people is OK. people can go to grocery stores if they desparately need food, it's an inconvenience but it raises awareness of an issue in a relevant way - aaron
[2017-02-16 11:48:25] - paul: i understand, but what would an appropriate protest be to represent the current issue where trump is cracking down on legal immigration? it seems it would either be, "having immigrants absent from their jobs and showing how their absence affects people.." or, "having MORE immigrants swoop in and do... extra jobs...? to show how their presence is useful? - aaron
[2017-02-16 11:29:41] - Aaron: the "Changed my Heart" section of that article. THAT is how you change people's minds. You expose them to the thing they hate/fear and show them first, that said thing isn't so bad and then that it's actually good. -Paul
[2017-02-16 11:28:53] - Aaron: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-nebraska-syrian-refugees-find-a-warm-and-welcoming-community/2017/02/05/5615c82a-eb9b-11e6-9973-c5efb7ccfb0d_story.ht I think the key is to show people that the law is wrong by having blacks sit wherever they want and have people realize the world doesn't end. I really loved... -Paul
[2017-02-16 11:26:28] - Aaron: Well, Rosa Parks was protesting by exercising her right to sit wherever she wanted on the bus. Other protesters sat at lunch counters that they weren't supposed to. Protesting by not working seems like a different thing. -Paul
[2017-02-16 11:13:27] - paul: couldn't any act of protest reinforce people's idea that someone's lazy/entitled? couldn't people in 1950s complain that rosa parks seemed lazy/entitled? how is this one worse? - aaron
[2017-02-16 11:03:23] - re: day w/o immigrants. - mig
[2017-02-16 11:03:11] - paul: I don't find much rationality in it, but this is where we are in the era of Trump, where irrationality reigns supreme. - mig
[2017-02-16 10:46:09] - paul: yeah I kind of was thinking the same thing after watching it. I don't know about depressing, but the video's presentation is very baffling for what they're trying to convey. - mig
[2017-02-16 10:26:35] - For those who are neutral non-political or don't care, it'll probably just annoy them, and it doesn't really matter if it makes pro-immigrant people happy because those people are already on your side. -Paul
[2017-02-16 10:25:40] - http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/businesses-across-us-close-for-day-without-immigrants.html Also, serious question, but isn't this kind of stunt more likely to do harm then good? It seems like for those who are anti-immigrant, it's just going to piss them off more (and maybe reinforce their thinking that immigrants are lazy/entitled)... -Paul
[2017-02-16 10:12:36] - https://twitter.com/kmele/status/832105556756279296 (Not sure if people without twitter accounts can see this or not, but I think they should be able to). I thought Kmele had a really fascinating point with this video and I'm wondering what others here think. -Paul
[2017-02-15 16:44:18] - a; YES. Apparently its just a different set of rules but its dumb. I told fidelity it was dumb. I don't think that helped but it made me feel better. -Daniel
[2017-02-15 14:52:52] - Daniel: That's super weird. I guess I've never moved money from an IRA to another before. -Paul
[2017-02-15 14:46:45] - i guess i don't understand that part. if i'm rolling over a 401k, aren't i still moving money from one bank to another? ~a
[2017-02-15 14:36:16] - Whats super dumb is that you don't need one to take money out of a 401k for rollover purposes. Only from an IRA. Bleh... -Daniel
[2017-02-15 14:14:19] - i see a potential bias here: they want to make it hard so you don't withdraw the money. otoh, you are asking to move a large amount of money, so i see why they would want there to be strict scrutiny. ~a
[2017-02-15 13:51:53] - a: Its like a notary public but fancy and for financial institutions. Apparently if I want to withdraw my money from a fidelity IRA to roll over into Vanguard I have to go into a bank or something and get one. Super annoyed. -Daniel
[2017-02-15 13:41:17] - this? never heard of it. what is it? ~a
[2017-02-15 12:02:56] - Anyone else here ever heard of a medallion signature guarantee? I'm super annoyed at its existence currently. -Daniel
[2017-02-15 11:24:56] - Daniel: Agreed on the Rockets being better. I just feel more confident in the Wizards beating the Pacers, Bulls or Hawks (seemingly the most likely first round opponents) than the Rockets beating the Grizzlies, Thunder or Jazz. Those three teams seem more capable of pulling upsets for various reasons. -Paul
[2017-02-14 13:53:39] - Paul: Depends on matchups certainly but in a vacuum I think its probably a pretty close bet cause I think the Rockets are a better team but you are probably right that bottom of East is weaker. -Daniel
[2017-02-14 11:04:13] - Daniel: I'm more confident in the Wizards making the second round, though, because the bottom half of the Eastern conference playoff bracket looks weaker. -Paul
[2017-02-14 10:56:43] - Daniel: I was just wondering to myself who I thought would go deeper into the playoffs. Agreed that they both seem like teams more built toward regular season success than deep playoff runs (assuming that is what you were saying). -Paul
[2017-02-14 10:50:20] - Paul: Yes, but like the Rockets probably not good enough to actually win. Probably good enough for 2nd round and if things go well maybe even the ECF. -Daniel
[2017-02-14 10:43:02] - So, I don't want to get all crazy, but the Wizards are the 3 seed in the East, are 9-1 in their past 10 games, and just demolished the Thunder. Are they actually good? -Paul
[2017-02-14 10:39:54] - a: Because I believe the value of bitcoin will increase over time, as opposed to the value of my dollar. -Paul
[2017-02-14 10:31:24] - paul: that's like saying you don't want to spend your dollars. kinda silly if you're buying it anyways. just stop spending your dollars? ~a
[2017-02-14 10:26:29] - a: I wonder why. It's okay, though, I don't want to spend my bitcoin. I want to save them. -Paul
[2017-02-14 10:26:06] - aaron: Oohh, tempting. Unfortunately, I don't know if I would play any of those other games, and it looks like the ACLU donation limit has been reached, so I would be paying $30 essentially just for the Witness, which I think I can probably find cheaper. Still, it's worth considering. Thanks! -Paul
[2017-02-14 10:25:44] - "Bitcoin payments have been disabled for the Humble Freedom Bundle." sorry, paul.
~a[2017-02-14 09:48:43] - aaron: Wow! I bought that last night. Thats pretty solid. -Daniel
[2017-02-13 16:25:53] - paul: https://www.humblebundle.com/freedom if you haven't bought the witness yet, you can get a whole heap of other games with it for $30 - aaron
[2017-02-13 16:16:58] - a: Yeah I probably wouldn't feel the need to use one either. Its mostly just a tool that you can offer to mollify someone who is annoyed at you for taking away Fund X. -Daniel
[2017-02-13 15:33:44] - daniel/paul: i'll ask vanguard about SDBA. (i'm not sure if they have it or not) SDBA in general is pretty cheap, but is very non-automatic, so also kinda lame. what's more, i don't know if *i'd* even use a SDBA if i had the option. ~a
[2017-02-13 15:31:13] - daniel: we have 100% enrollment. (so changing to an opt-in system is on my list of things to do, but pretty low priority. i'll probably make this change if we move to vanguard though.) ~a
[2017-02-13 14:30:15] - a: Is your 401k opt in or opt out? Just curious! -Daniel
[2017-02-13 14:25:47] - a: We considered those (self directed brokerage accounts) for a bit at Prag but I think they did cost extra through Fidelity and it was deemed not enough demand for the cost but the idea is that those satisfy those people who think they are great at investing and would be rich if only you weren't limiting their options. -Daniel
[2017-02-13 14:24:08] - a: I'm generally pro Vanguard. I think they are a good business model for investing. People might be annoyed that they are losing out on "Best Fund Ever X" but they ought to be able to find something in Vanguard that does what they want. Does Vanguard have the option for self directed brokerage accounts for the 401k? Does that cost extra? -Daniel
[2017-02-13 14:23:26] - a: Although I am sometimes tempted to self direct some of my 401(k) monies. -Paul
[2017-02-13 14:23:04] - a: Ah, well, I have no real background setting up 401(k)s for companies, so I defer to you and Daniel. I'm just a fan of Vanguard. I will say that if it were me, and I was offered all the Vanguard funds (and only Vanguard funds) for my 401(k), I would be pretty pleased. -Paul
[2017-02-13 13:57:28] - paul: i don't know. basically, i'm asking *you* that question.
~a[2017-02-13 13:29:59] - a: Do people really feel that strongly about what funds they have access to? Are there any significant types of funds that Vanguard doesn't have? -Paul
[2017-02-13 13:26:55] - paul / daniel: i'm seriously considering moving our entire 401k to vanguard. the upside is: people can choose vanguard funds. the downside is: people must choose *only* vanguard funds. thoughts on this change? ~a
[2017-02-13 12:05:11] - mig: It was more subtle. Actually, it might have been suffering from being next to the more politically overt ads, because all of the undertones, intentional or not, become more heavily scrutinized when you're in company like that. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-13 10:32:20] - xpovos: The Freemen ad didn't really feel like it was laced with any political overtones. But maybe that could be because I'd be comparing it to the other more overt political ads like the Lumber 84 and Audi. - mig
[2017-02-13 10:11:12] - aaron: i saw that. give me another 24 hours to figure out my answer, please. ~a
[2017-02-13 09:39:07] - a: did you send your soldiers? i sent mine to adrian-friends@aporter.org last thursday. it's got a password-encrypted zip - aaron
[2017-02-12 20:44:22] - a: As for the Turkish Airlines ad, you're right. It was "just meant to be funny," and it was, actually, pretty good and reasonably funny. But it's a lot like how we've had some other discussion about how things that are jokes, or are intended to be funny, when laced with political overtones can fall flat. That's how this was for me. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-12 20:43:00] - a: I tried to grab ads from the official posts on YT, I must've grabbed a bad one for Buick. I'll get it replaced soon, it's worth watching, IMO. I think I linked the TV version of the 84 lumber ad. That was my intent. I'll check and make sure. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-11 10:44:14] - xpovos: while i'm spamming you, i wanted to ask. what was the original 84 lumber ad? i only saw the one online (and it's the only ad i had seen before reading your post). ~a
[2017-02-11 10:43:17] - xpovos: although i agree with most of your points, i disagree with the freeman one. i think it was just meant to be funny. also i skipped your buick section, because the buick ad was removed. ~a
[2017-02-11 10:41:13] - xpovos: read your most recent article. as someone who didn't watch the superbowl (we lost internet, and i listened to it on the radio: true story. bad year to lose internet for sure) i'm very happy to have been able to see the commercials, and i enjoyed your commentary. and! you got an actual picture! congrats. ~a
[2017-02-10 16:19:34] - daniel: i can also opt to drop paychex as a provider. i'm considering that in parallel. ~a
[2017-02-10 16:18:49] - daniel: i can completely customize funds, but to do that i need to pay 3.5x as much as a company fee. which completely defeats the point of decreasing costs. i think with "guided" i get to have *some* customization, but i'm not sure on the company-costs yet. ~a
[2017-02-10 16:15:10] - daniel: i got the fee column from yahoo, and they don't seem to have any of the transamerica funds there. which is . . . disappointing. ~a
[2017-02-10 16:13:31] - a: No fee info for the transamerica ones? -Daniel
[2017-02-10 16:13:07] - a: Those are the options you have for 401 offerings? You can't customize the sets of funds? -Daniel
[2017-02-10 16:08:58] - daniel / paul: the craziness i've been going through with my payroll processor is that it seems like i can choose to pay high expense ratios (1%) or high company-fees (.6%). i'm having trouble finding something that has neither. ~a
[2017-02-10 16:01:40] - paul: yes, they're there. the second tab has the individual funds. ~a
[2017-02-10 15:59:55] - a: No Vanguard funds? -Paul
[2017-02-10 15:58:45] - a: Activision/Blizzard (ATVI) and Sierra Wireless (SWIR). Are you only promising that because the market is closed tomorrow?
-Paul[2017-02-10 15:55:12] - daniel / paul: i went through all the possible 401k lineups that paychex, my payroll processor, provides and sorted them by expense ratios. here is what i found. ~a
[2017-02-10 15:47:29] - seriously though, what are they? my stuff is mostly flat today. ~a
[2017-02-10 15:46:40] - paul: i promise you they won't go up 15% tomorrow. ~a
[2017-02-10 14:50:56] - Daniel: I dunno, those guys might go up another 15%+ tomorrow. I better hold onto them and find out.
-Paul[2017-02-10 14:47:49] - nice! Now sell them and buy index funds!
-Daniel[2017-02-10 14:36:59] - Two of my individual holdings up 15%+ each today. Nice.
-Paul[2017-02-10 10:47:18] - I would also agree that home schooling could be done very poorly. -Daniel
[2017-02-10 10:47:01] - I'm not against the concept of home schooling. I think the idea of threatening to home school as some sort of response to DeVos is dumb. -Daniel
[2017-02-10 10:45:41] - anybody interested in seeing john wick chapter 2 this weekend? - aaron
[2017-02-10 10:43:10] - "Obviously it's not for everybody, and it can be done poorly" we agree on this then.
~a[2017-02-10 10:39:18] - a: Heh, well, we'll have to disagree on the homeschooling thing. I know Gurkie disagrees, but I really wish we had the time, ability and resources to home school our girls. Obviously it's not for everybody, and it can be done poorly, but I think in many cases for people who can do it, it's just a good an option as public school, if not better. -Paul
[2017-02-10 10:35:41] - paul: ok, that's fiair. i'll say it. they're both dumb. sadly, dumb people exist on both sides. ~a
[2017-02-10 10:32:14] - a: Maybe, but I think he might mean home-schooling kids is dumb. Wanted to make sure I knew exactly what he meant before I responded. -Paul
[2017-02-10 10:10:32] - paul: not putting words in his mouth, but he probably means that the "threatening to home-school kids, which she supports" is dumb. ~a
[2017-02-10 10:01:13] - Daniel: Which is dumb? The homeschooling thing? -Paul
[2017-02-10 09:59:08] - Paul: Yeah thats pretty dumb. Sadly dumb people exist on both sides. -Daniel
[2017-02-09 17:36:58] - Paul: I see it as pretty much the same as the return to the appeal of federalism. Everyone should have the same thing, until the thing is something we disagree with, then I need my own thing. I'm smiling too, but it's a little forced. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-09 16:40:25] - http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/devos-backlash-sees-left-threatening-homeschool-kids-which-she-supports-n718041 Can't help but smile reading this. -Paul
[2017-02-09 14:13:44] - which probably means it's up to law enforcement's discretion, which is generally bad. - mig
[2017-02-09 14:13:11] - a: probably bad. I think the root of the problem isn't the changes, but the fact that "unlawful assembly" and "riot" and "non-rioting" are very undefined terms. - mig
[2017-02-09 13:05:30] - a: I am not a lawyer, and am woefully uneducated on the specifics, but yes, this definitely sounds like something unnecessary and just another way to pile on extra charges during protests. -Paul
[2017-02-09 08:17:12] - what do you guys think? looks like we've made it (more?) illegal to peacefully protest. good or bad? ~a
[2017-02-08 12:16:37] - Maybe I need to amend my article to include more references to potatoes? -- Xpovos
[2017-02-08 12:16:19] - Paul: reading through the link and doing some research... yes. They actually made an ad and put it in the Super Bowl timeslot, though it showed prior to the game and only in certain regional markets. That's why we didn't see it. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-08 12:08:26] - Aaron: Did they actually purchase an ad? I don't recall seeing it. -Paul
[2017-02-08 11:54:02] - https://medium.com/@CardsAgainstHumanity/why-our-super-bowl-ad-failed-2af66e6a976c#.gkdtpkur2 why the cards against humanity superbowl ad failed - aaron
[2017-02-08 11:53:58] - mig: yeah that's a good guess, probably the same way he got his jacket back - aaron
[2017-02-08 10:05:43] - aaron: I'm pretty sure Happy would send the wrestler guy after Shooter if he didn't hold up his end. - mig
[2017-02-08 10:00:02] - the climax of happy gilmore relies on shooter holding up his end of his gentleman's wager with happy, giving happy the house because he said he would. what do you think would motivate shooter to actually hold up his end of the deal? also, if happy had missed the final putt, do you think happy would have held up his end of the deal and quit professional golf? - aaron
[2017-02-07 16:49:02] - I thought it was often perfectly reasonable (although also often misguided) when the Republicans did it to Obama, and I find most of what the Democrats are doing now similarly reasonable but sometimes misguided as well. There's nothing notable dishonorable in my mind for wanting to oppose a president that you don't agree with. -Paul
[2017-02-07 16:47:16] - And you might think I'm saying all of this to cast blame on the Democrats.... I am not. This is, largely, how I expect the opposition party to act. If you don't agree with a policy or a nomination or whatever, then you don't vote for it. -Paul
[2017-02-07 16:45:37] - Now, we have President Trump, and Democrats have taken that Republican obstructionist sentiment and magnified it, even questioning his legitimacy (#notmypresident) and throwing up as many barriers as they can to virtually everything he's doing, despite being the minority party. -Paul
[2017-02-07 16:44:04] - And why would Republicans want to work with Obama on things that they are opposed to? -Paul
[2017-02-07 16:43:28] - I'm reminded of all the time Democrats complained about how all the Republicans wanted to do was obstruct poor President Obama and how it wasn't fair and they never wanted to work with him. I always thought it was weird, because during that time the Republicans had a majority in Congress and Congress is supposed to be the ones making the laws. -Paul
[2017-02-07 16:41:31] - http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/betsy-devos-foes-what-next-234755 “There will be no relationship with Betsy DeVos,†Eskelsen Garcia said. -Paul
[2017-02-07 15:51:03] - Also, on the margin, every thing that does happen in the DoE now, will be completely different than it was for the past 30 years, perhaps longer. That's a pretty big deal too. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-07 15:47:36] - Generally, your earlier point is spot on. Even in as elevated a position as she'll have, she can't effect much real change. But she serves as a lightning rod, drawing all of the attention and sucking up all in the air in the room while others moves the pieces on the stage unnoticed behind her. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-07 15:46:42] - mig: DeVos is a pro-charter, union-buster. She's the most anti-establishment education administrator we've ever seen at this level; that's why she got all of the vitriol. The unions are terrified she'll gut them. Others are terrified she'll ruin public schools to benefit private and charter schools. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-07 15:41:03] - xpoovs: we deserve at least a TL:DR on here. - mig
[2017-02-07 15:00:18] - Daniel: Closer to "Ross," though. Expanding... probably need to write a blog post. @RD FTW!
-- Xpovos[2017-02-07 14:37:31] - Neither! DeVos rhymes with something... Huevos Rancheros? -Daniel
[2017-02-07 14:02:04] - xpovos: In the political symbolism of a school choice advocate heading the Ed Dept, yeah probably a really huge deal. Functionally though, people overstate the significance of the Ed Dept in regards to local schooling. - mig
[2017-02-07 13:34:28] - Also is it DeVos that rhymes with Ross or DeVos that rhymes with toe? -Daniel
[2017-02-07 13:11:07] - Xpovos: Care to expand on that? -Daniel
[2017-02-07 13:06:04] - DeVos's confirmation is a huge deal. -- Xpovos
[2017-02-07 12:38:14] - paul: I don't believe they are officially supported, at least in the sense of using it for gameplay. The Playstation has allowed keyboard inputs since the PS2, but that's mostly to aid in text prompt inputs. - mig
[2017-02-07 12:32:52] - mig: the closest precedent i can think of is tournament-level console FPS players would use crazy modified controllers with stuff like trigger stops and long plastic bits which extended certain buttons and triggers to make them easier to press. and people being frustrated that it gave certain players an advantage - aaron
[2017-02-07 12:31:39] - paul: it is done now. It was still going on when i posted. - img
[2017-02-07 12:30:58] - mig: I'm confused. Is the vote done? It looks like the 51 votes are in... -Paul
[2017-02-07 12:27:43] - mig: overwatch is the first game i've ever heard of receiving console-specific balance patches to account for the fact that certain characters are easier/harder to play with a controller. it makes sense it would also be the first game to rally against people using mouse and keyboard on a console - aaron
[2017-02-07 12:26:22] - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/02/07/us/politics/betsy-devos-confirmation-vote.html NYT has a live tallying thing of the senate vote for DeVos, pretty neat to watch in real time. - mig
[2017-02-07 12:19:45] - mig: Seems awfully strong to call this cheating, although I guess it does start to get into an interesting grey area if these peripherals aren't officially supported by the consoles. -Paul
[2017-02-07 11:54:22] - https://www.yahoo.com/news/overwatch-players-urged-not-mouse-070636428.html curious controversy. Has this been an issue in other console FPS games? - mig
[2017-02-06 15:22:00] - aaron: the time limit is sunday. ~a
[2017-02-06 14:43:40] - there might be a time limit though because they'll probably post the answer on friday - aaron
[2017-02-06 14:43:17] - a: you know, we could have a competition. we both come up with a text file with 1,000 comma-delimited rows, and those files fight and we see whose file wins. you can try your weighted-pick algorithm, and i can use my smarter algorithm, and we'll see how much i win by
- aaron[2017-02-06 14:39:15] - a: said another way; if your algorithm is nash-equilibrium, i should be able to come up with any answer like {11,0,0,0,0,0,0,25,28,36} and it shouldn't beat your proportional weighting algorithm more than 50% of the time. i think your proposed "weighted pick" algorithm would consistently lose to a strategic weighting which scores exactly 28 points - aaron
[2017-02-06 14:19:06] - a: i don't agree, think a nash-equilibrium strategy would omit {0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,100} from its possible choices. should there also be a (small but) real chance that it could come up with {0,100,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0}? i think those are both inferior strategies which should be omitted, even if you're trying to outguess an opponent - aaron
[2017-02-06 13:26:17] - aaron: i do see now that it's not about winning more often. you're just playing once. ~a
[2017-02-06 13:24:59] - aaron: awww, submission has ended? ~a
[2017-02-06 13:22:05] - there should always be a (small but) real chance that i could come up with {0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,100}. ~a
[2017-02-06 13:21:33] - "that would result in a lot of wishy-washy solutions like {1,3,4,5,12,15,15,13,13,19} which would lose to an opponent who picks {25,0,0,0,0,0,0,25,25,25}" are you sure it would lose more than half of the time? to be clear, i don't think "proportionally" is what i meant, but still i think it needs to be weighted in some mathematical way. ~a
[2017-02-06 12:09:56] - Aaron: Okay, cool. Interesting. Thanks. -Paul
[2017-02-06 12:02:44] - paul: like a few weeks back they had baby poker where we both roll a die and ante $1; i can either raise $1 or check, then you can either call or fold. the nash equilibrium strategy for player 1 actually involves bluffing when (and only when) you roll a 1 - aaron
[2017-02-06 11:59:43] - paul: i don't know what that strategy is. for the web site's purpose, if you want to win the contest -- you just have to beat the other people who submit answers, which is more of a question about human psychology. is there an "obvious answer" which usually wins? will people submit the obvious answer or will they submit the answer that defeats it? - aaron
[2017-02-06 11:58:13] - paul: yeah, there's no solution which will always win. no matter what you come up with, i can copy your solution, put 0 soldiers wherever you put the most soldiers, and spread them amongst my other numbers. but, there's a nash equilibrium strategy where you can't do better than 50% chance, even if i tell you my strategy - aaron
[2017-02-06 11:56:52] - a: running a genetic simulation results in a crazy amount of variability, "all-in" solutions like {0,0,0,0,1,1,16,18,29,35} which try to win the 9 and 10 at all costs, "hedging" solutions like {4,14,4,8,6,10,13,15,9,17} which try to win a lot of lower numbered castles, and "mixed" solutions like {0,0,2,0,1,3,22,20,20,32} which fall somewhere in between - aaron
[2017-02-06 11:54:52] - aaron: Sorry if this is a stupid question, but there's not supposed to be a solution which will always win, right? It's all about getting a solution which will win the highest percentage of the time? -Paul
[2017-02-06 11:53:35] - a: yeah, i'm certain there is a nash equilibrium which involves randomness. i don't think it's "place soldiers randomly but proportionally weighted towards the higher point castles", as that would result in a lot of wishy-washy solutions like {1,3,4,5,12,15,15,13,13,19} which would lose to an opponent who picks {25,0,0,0,0,0,0,25,25,25} - aaron
[2017-02-06 10:03:19] - (my random strategy should be able to play against itself to get an average of 5 points out of the 10 point castle. not sure how to correctly weight the randomness yet though.) ~a
[2017-02-06 09:51:15] - "proportional" might not be the word i was looking for there (i'm slowly trying to create a solution that has nash equilibrium involving some weighting of randomness) ~a
[2017-02-06 09:46:45] - aaron: well actually, there might be an optimal strategy using randomness? i.e. place soldiers randomly? or, maybe, place soldiers randomly but proportionally weighted towards the higher point castles? what would your response to that be? ~a
[2017-02-06 09:23:32] - i already submitted my answer but there's not a single optimal answer (any answer can be beaten by alternating between 0 soldiers on whichever castle the opponent valued the most, and n+1 soldiers on the remaining castles). so i'm curious what answer you would submit for a problem like this - aaron
[2017-02-06 09:20:48] - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/can-you-rule-riddler-nation/ this week's riddler classic is interesting; there's ten castles worth 1 point, 2 points, 3 points... all the way to 10 points. you distribute 100 soldiers amongst those 10 castles however you like, and your opponent does the same in secret. then you reveal, and highest point total wins - aaron
[2017-02-03 20:54:30] - I don't think ips work that way
~a[2017-02-03 17:20:18] - mig: Did you review things on Yelp while you were here? Maybe you got given some IP address and haven't let it go yet? -Daniel
[2017-02-03 13:15:09] - daniel: yelp still thinks I'm in San Antonio. - mig
[2017-02-02 23:09:07] - .
[2017-02-02 14:33:31] - And I remember having to pester you a bit to get my first comment approved. - mig
[2017-02-02 14:33:13] - paul: I think people might not know they have the authority to approve comments. - mig
[2017-02-02 14:25:57] - a: I'm still a little iffy on exactly how much notification people get when somebody comments on their article, though. So if Matt doesn't reply it might not be because he's ignoring you.
-Paul[2017-02-02 14:24:55] - a: There, I found it. It got marked as spam for some reason (first time I've seen a comment marked as spam). I marked it as "not spam" and approved it. -Paul
[2017-02-02 14:23:21] - a: Did you just post it? First time commenters often have to have their comments "approved". -Paul
[2017-02-02 14:16:38] - paul: if it matters, i think i was "comment-64". ~a
[2017-02-02 14:14:08] - paul: i haven't. hey, did R/D just eat my comment here? i'm a little sad by that, if so, 'cause it took me a while to draft. ~a
[2017-02-02 14:11:53] - a: It's probably a lot easier to do now in the age of Uber (as long as you haven't deleted your account). -Paul
[2017-02-02 14:09:12] - a: That's better than the Chinese dating sites I kept getting for awhile.
-Paul[2017-02-02 13:58:11] - aw man, maybe i need to talk to herndon about biking. not having a car in a three person family sounds crazy to me. ~a
[2017-02-02 13:42:25] - paul/mig/xpovos/g: ha. "leaving-thermostat-wastes-money" has an advertisement for HVAC services. ~a
[2017-02-02 13:03:27] - yah. ~a
[2017-02-02 12:05:03] - a: I think you know how little I have "invested" in bitcoin right now.
-Paul[2017-02-02 12:04:05] - a: Oh, certainly. I wasn't advocating taking a big position or anything. I was more speculating that if I had to guess between [big gain, small gain, small loss, big loss], then I would probably guess big gain for bitcoin over the next four years. -Paul
[2017-02-02 12:02:09] - it's possible. not worth it in my opinion, though. i have more money invested in the traditional markets. ~a
[2017-02-02 11:50:25] - a: Wouldn't at all be surprised if Trump's unpredictability helps bitcoin over the next few years. -Paul
[2017-02-02 11:48:00] - wow, we're back above 1k usd on some exchanges. (there's another reason, if most of the volume is in cny, then psychological "barriers" like 1k usd, doesn't have any effect) ~a
[2017-02-02 11:44:26] - if the real volume was mostly in china, then if-and-when china decides to disallow bitcoin exchanging, that could very much affect my pocket. ~a
[2017-02-02 11:41:52] - a: Why would you fear it being ~90% China? -Paul
[2017-02-02 11:20:02] - exchange "under the radar" is always possible. in every currency, not just the crypto ones. in fact it probably happens inmuch greater volume with the more popular currencies. like usd. so it's hard to know everything that happens. ~a
[2017-02-02 11:16:11] - yes. however, the most popular (my opinion) ones all switched over. there's still btc100 (cny) which still has no fees, but it's not very common. cny isn't far behind, so the exchanges "under the radar" would maybe change the order. regardless, the volume is not ~90% china like i had once feared. ~a
[2017-02-02 11:11:01] - a: You said a bunch, but did all of them? Wouldn't there still be some that are under the radar? -Paul
[2017-02-02 10:41:51] - paul: coincidentally, a bunch of chinese bitcoin exchanges recently changed their fee policies. they had been fee-free for years, so it's weird we had just talked about this. so now we know . . . no, cny is not the currency with the highest bitcoin exchanged volume. usd is the highest. order: usd, cny, eur, jpy, krw, . . . ~a
[2017-02-02 09:50:18] - ok, now 5x5. haha. (my, 2x2 answer is 1, btw
1x1 is 0)~a[2017-02-02 09:48:47] - a: yeah i had a few duplicates, there's 38 - aaron
[2017-02-01 16:02:20] - mig: Yeah, it's really disappointing that between Sessions and DeVos, she is seemingly the controversial one and the one most likely to be rejected. I understand why, but still disappointing. -Paul
[2017-02-01 15:38:30] - paul: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/susan-collins-betsy-devos-confirmation-234497 the baffling situation continues. I'm just having a hard time picturing the fervor over Sessions being mostly over, while DeVos's nomination situation has gotten to this point. - mig
[2017-02-01 14:30:48] - a: re - popularity. Paul posted this on FB today and I think it's rather poigniant. Yes, Trump may be personally very unpopular, but his policies aren't necessarily The latter matters more electorally. - mig
[2017-02-01 12:07:11] - paul: I'd love to see a survey of how many people used Uber to get to the airport protests. - mig
[2017-02-01 12:03:37] - mig: It more seems like people already didn't like Uber (for not having unionized drivers and kinda ignoring government regulations while forcing taxis out of business) and this just gave them another reason to hate them. -Paul
[2017-02-01 12:02:59] - advisors, they didn't support the taxi ban and Lyft beat them to the punch by donating to the ACLU first. -Paul
[2017-02-01 12:02:26] - mig: The only bad things I can see is that their CEO is one of Trump'
[2017-02-01 12:02:12] - mig: What I found is that Uber put out a statement against the ban. They promised to work with drivers affected by the ban. Their CEO promised to talk to Trump about the ban. They suspended surge pricing during the taxi boycott and continued to run, but that seemed to allow more protesters to get there... -Paul
[2017-02-01 12:01:12] - mig: I really don't know. I don't get it at all. I first heard about it when hanging out with Gurkie's family and was baffled (the claim was made that Uber supported the ban, and that didn't make any sense to me) so I did some really quick research. -Paul
[2017-02-01 11:57:29] - It's not like Trump is going to be taking a Taxi, or even an Uber to wherever he was going. - mig
[2017-02-01 11:56:40] - Was Trump even in NY at all this weekend? I recall he was near Philadelphia. I could kind of see the rational of a targeted boycott of JFK, but what would it accomplish. All it does is potentially inconvenience a lot of people not named Donald Trump. How is this "boycott" sticking it to him? - mig
[2017-02-01 11:32:18] - a: Maybe, but I think that's largely irrelevant to his SCOTUS pick. Conservative voters will probably like him no matter how toxic Trump gets, right? -Paul
[2017-02-01 11:14:48] - for the most accepted it. - mig
[2017-02-01 11:14:18] - I didn't have much issue with what the Republicans did for a few reasons. 1) Constitutional, they had the right too. 2) Democrats would have done the same thing with the roles reversed. 3) It wasn't without risk to republicans, they made their argument and voters
[2017-02-01 11:10:53] - his approval rating matters to other people: if americans hate him, he'll become toxic very quickly. remember g w bush during the 2008 campaign? he campaigned for nobody. ~a
[2017-02-01 11:09:23] - Daniel: Right, but didn't the Republicans hold the Senate both before and now? Seems easier to pull when you hold the Senate. -Paul
[2017-02-01 11:08:28] - Daniel: Understandable. I think I'm mostly against what the Republicans did (even though I prefer what appears to be the likely end result), but it is something I had to think about. They definitely should've held hearings, at least, but I don't know if I would think poorly of them for turning him down after holding hearings. -Paul
[2017-02-01 11:05:44] - Paul: Also for the SC nominee both houses don't matter its just 60 senate votes or no D filibusters. -Daniel
[2017-02-01 11:05:03] - Paul: Yeah I don't think they'll be able to hold out for four years, though I didn't really think at the start the R's would hold out for a year either. But should they hold out for a year too? Six months? I don't know what I want them to do I just know I'm angry at how the R's did it and that it worked. Blah -Daniel
[2017-02-01 11:03:11] - Paul: Yeah I thought it was the second there. That they didn't get mad enough to join the strike so people got mad at them. I don't know, seems silly to me. However we did use Lyft all weekend for PAX so apparently we were part of the movement! Woo I guess? Thanks for that sign up credit Lyft! -Daniel
[2017-02-01 11:01:08] - a: How does easier to bait help them? Also, if there's one thing I'm pretty sure about with regards to Donald Trump, is that he doesn't care about his approval rating because he already knows everybody loves him.
-Paul[2017-02-01 10:58:34] - paul: on the other hand, trump is much easier to bait and has a lower approval rating. he's his own worst enemy. it could be Ds position isn't as bad as you think. ~a
[2017-02-01 10:48:43] - Daniel: Without excusing what the Republicans did at all, from a purely practicality standpoint, I don't know if the Democrats can do the same thing. 4 years is a lot longer than 10 months, and when the Republicans did it, they controlled both branches of Congress (right?). The Democrats don't have either right now. -Paul
[2017-02-01 10:45:45] - mig: I can't quite figure it out either. As far as I can tell, people are mad because (A) Their CEO is one of Trump's economic advisors (along with people like Elon Musk) and (B) They continued to transport people to and from JFK airport despite a one hour taxi strike that was in support of people affected by the ban. -Paul
[2017-02-01 09:50:52] - it functions their way. -Daniel
[2017-02-01 09:50:43] - I keep going back and forth on what I want D's in the senate to do with Gorsuch. I hate rewarding R's for stalling for a year. It seems a terrible precedent to set but the only way to not reward them is to do the same thing. Makes me angry more than anything else. Seems to lay bare the R philosophy that they aren't interested in the country functioning unless...
[2017-01-31 17:42:31] - aaron: you found more than me. my 4x4 answer is 38. they're here: aaron squares. (code is on github) ~a
[2017-01-31 17:06:29] - mig: They didn't get mad at Trump for the immigration executive order. I think. -Daniel
[2017-01-31 16:18:55] - so i guess i missed this being away over the weekend but what is up with this furious anger over uber? - mig
[2017-01-31 16:00:46] - a: but yeah basically you're looking for the number of different ways you can wind a 16-square corridor around 4x4 grid. my meeting was very boring today and i counted 41 ways, but i wasn't running a script -- and i didn't find the 41st until a few hours after i thought i had found them all. so i wouldn't be surprised to find i missed another one - aaron
[2017-01-31 15:58:53] - a: yeah there are some silly and intuitive rules i didn't add, but they were implied by the fact that there's only three solutions for the 3x3 case. for example, a 3x3 grid with a total of two walls, one next to each corner would technically qualify. so, there's a lot of implied rules - aaron
[2017-01-31 14:24:12] - It's not fair at all, but when I am going through my Twitter feed and it's post after post about Muslim bans and protests and AG firings and other stuff, and then I see an ad for say.... The Great Wall movie, I have an unfortunate knee-jerk thought of "how tone deaf".
-Paul[2017-01-31 14:15:21] - a: I was more thinking mig or aaron didn't think your wife would want you both to share... ~g
[2017-01-31 11:59:17] - aaron: i also have my answer for 4 x 4.
~a[2017-01-31 09:53:06] - aaron: i think you need to add a rule. python found some more that you probably aren't counting because they're ridiculous. (i think you need to add like "required to walk" or something like that). ~a
[2017-01-31 09:21:06] - mig: your candidate won ~a
[2017-01-31 09:19:13] - g: hmmm, probably not. i do have a mostly open basement, but i like my space. ~a
[2017-01-30 14:20:05] - anyone want a renter? there is someone on TJ alumni underground asking about renting a room or basement for a single adult male. ~g
[2017-01-30 11:24:11] - how many distinct labyrinths are there for a 4 x 4 grid of squares? again, ignoring labyrinths which are rotations of other labyrinths (i don't know the answer yet but i have some very long meetings tomorrow) - aaron
[2017-01-30 11:23:05] - (i was bored in a meeting again) if you imagine a 3 x 3 grid of squares, you can draw walls to make a spiral-shaped labyrinth with exactly two dead-ends so that a person could walk from one dead end to the other visiting every square. you can also make a labyrinth shaped like a capital N, and there's a third one. ignoring rotations, these are the only three - aaron
[2017-01-27 10:47:21] - paul: yeah. which is usually manifested in higher dividends; not sure why. do funds usually take their fees out of dividends or the price? or some of both? would it matter if people were buying more of one fund than the other? ~a
[2017-01-27 10:07:20] - a: That way it should count my dividends if they are sitting there in cash OR re-invested using their dividend re=investment program. -Paul
[2017-01-27 10:06:47] - a: Yeah, unfortunately I have yet to find any system (google, yahoo, etc) that has properly handled all things like dividends, splits, acquisitions or even just ticker changes. I have to do a lot of manual work myself. For tracking my individual stock picking versus Vanguard, I just total the funds in my scottrade account. -Paul
[2017-01-27 10:05:25] - a: Got it. What's the benefit? Lower expense ratios? -Paul
[2017-01-27 09:35:07] - title:
pop cans, pop cans; money, money.prev <-> next