prev <-> next
[2017-09-01 14:32:10] - a: Not sure exactly what you mean by "how small does it need to be?". I don't have a very solid answer. Obviously a certain percentage of people would have to accept bitcoin, and the value would have to have some sort of stability. -Paul
[2017-09-01 14:24:46] - a: Well, what percentage of people buying bitcoin today (emphasis on today) do you think are buying it to use as a currency (as opposed to an investment)? I think it's probably single digits, and so I don't think "(nearly) 0%" is too far off the mark, even though I'm not sure that's what he was saying. -Paul
[2017-09-01 13:38:10] - gold imo has the problem way worse. almost nobody does (or can) use gold as a currency. ~a
[2017-09-01 13:36:51] - paul: regardless, i don't doubt it's small! so, i'll ask you a follow up question: how small does it need to be? i.e. how many people (% wise) need to be using the currency as a currency before it becomes useful as a currency. because gold and USD obviously have some people holding them . . . saving them . . . hoping they'll be worth something in the future. what does the % of non-savers need there be? ~a
[2017-09-01 13:34:14] - paul: "I do think he's right that a lot of people are buying bitcoin simply as an investment and not to use as a currency" that's not what he's arguing. he's arguing "People buying Bitcoin today are buying it as an investment opportunity, not to use the currency itself." you see the difference? you're arguing it's currency use is small where as he's arguing it's (nearly) 0%. ~a
[2017-09-01 13:29:58] - yeah probably. i didn't read your link but i heard about that story. ~a
[2017-09-01 12:18:01] - a: http://reason.com/blog/2017/09/01/every-cop-involved-in-the-arrest-of-this I actually think this is worse than the police link you shared a few days ago. -Paul
[2017-09-01 12:08:49] - a: Regardless of him not showing any proof, I do think he's right that a lot of people are buying bitcoin simply as an investment and not to use as a currency. I count myself as one of them. I think the crazy rise of GBTC show that a lot of people are interested in that too. -Paul
[2017-09-01 11:51:21] - yeah, i guess not. anyways i really don't like his article. and the funny thing is he doesn't even list the major problems i see with bitcoin. ~a
[2017-09-01 11:40:01] - a: I don't think David is going to reply to our comments on his bitcoin blog post.
-Paul[2017-09-01 10:50:34] - a: I can sympathize. I'm more of a hot head than I would like. It's not easy keeping emotions in check sometimes. -Paul
[2017-09-01 10:47:20] - i do use angry words because i'm a hot-head. it's not just my language: i actually get angry too quickly and have rash thoughts. i sometimes have to be talked down from a viewpoint. it's why i'll often concede stuff: because i take things too far pretty quickly. ~a
[2017-09-01 10:40:48] - a: Except when it comes to free speech, where I'm a staunch defender and you're a big censor proponent (okay, now I'm kidding). -Paul
[2017-09-01 10:39:34] - can't tell if you're kidding or not. but, i think . . . i'm the one often arguing that we're politically similar in a lot of ways. ~a
[2017-09-01 10:38:59] - a: Seriously, though, I think a lot of the disagreement between us is often a matter of language. I think you tend to use stronger language than me (rant, bullshit, idiot, etc) which makes me think you are more extreme than maybe you intend, and I use softer language which makes you think I'm softer on certain people (like Trump supporters?) than maybe I intend. -Paul
[2017-09-01 10:37:42] - a: See!? You make a big deal about how we're so different, but ultimately we're the same.
-Paul[2017-09-01 10:36:58] - lol! i didn't see your answers.
~a[2017-09-01 10:36:45] - depends completely on the context. if the context is just anonymous people on the internet being assholes or whatever: damore=2, storey=4. if we're talking about one of my coworkers who is making hiring decisions and, i dunno, being a fucking professional: damore=8, storey=8. mainly damore is high, though, because these are like fucking dog-whistles and some subtle shit. "god hates fags" is a little more overt, but same bullshit. ~a
[2017-09-01 10:35:03] - a: I look at it this way: This was a disaster where people died, that is/was currently going on, and his comment seemed to have no real worth except to try to make fun of people or make them feel bad. Damore's comments aren't even indirectly tied to anybody dying, wasn't in reference to an ongoing disaster, and I believe was intended to be constructive. -Paul
[2017-09-01 10:32:03] - a: On that scale, I would rank Damore something like 2 and Storey like.... 4? I dunno, I guess that's not a huge difference when phrased like that, but you could also consider it twice as bad.
-Paul[2017-09-01 10:30:58] - a: Yeah, I'm not surprised we would have different reactions based on our political biases. I'm already on record as saying I really don't think there's much wrong with what Damore said (and I know you strongly disagree). Let me ask you this: On a scale of 1-10 (1=completely non-offensive and 10=Westboro Baptist Church), how would you rank what he said? -Paul
[2017-09-01 10:26:07] - ... employment discrimination because of some intentionally-misinterpreted neurosis -vs- poking fun at "karma" regarding dying people. a la pat robertson / jerry fallwell. they're both pretty bad. ~a
[2017-09-01 10:25:24] - "I do think his comments are MUCH more insensitive and stupid than Damore's" MUCH? MUCH more? i'm not sure i agree here. but that's probably just my political bias: i'd say at worst, it's arguable. ... ~a
[2017-09-01 10:02:30] - he deletes ~1 tweet every 3 days. ~a
[2017-09-01 09:59:32] - paul: don't worry, there's an app for that. ~a
[2017-09-01 09:52:18] - a: "Sorry, that page doesn’t exist! You can search Twitter using the search box below or return to the homepage." Too slow.
-Paul[2017-09-01 09:51:39] - a: All things considered, I'm probably a little more okay with his firing than Damore's based on the content of what he said, but it still seems like a situation where the best thing would be to let it slide. Like with Google, though, I can see why the PR might make that hard. -Paul
[2017-09-01 09:50:31] - a: Not sure what you mean by "knowing what you know now", but I think his firing is different from Damore's in a few ways (assuming that's what you are getting at). (1) His comments appear to have been made outside of work, so that's a mark in his "favor", if you will. (2) Although I do think his comments are MUCH more insensitive and stupid than Damore's. -Paul
[2017-09-01 08:39:19] - lol at my own title on the message board: djt just misspelled heal again 47 minutes ago. click quickly before he deletes it. ~a
[2017-09-01 08:23:57] - paul: the saddest part of all of this, though, is that i do strongly prefer larger blocks. but, if you don't have the most hashes, you aint shit. ~a
[2017-09-01 08:22:39] - paul: i choose the chain with the highest proof-of-work, per the white paper. you need to follow the chain with the most hashes. "any needed rules and incentives can be enforced with this consensus mechanism". i've seriously considered getting rid of some of my bitcoin cash in the likely event that its proof-of-work never catches up with vanilla-bitcoin. ~a
[2017-09-01 08:15:35] - paul: should storey have been fired? (obligatory, "knowing what you know now"). ~a
[2017-08-31 21:50:44] - a: Do you have any thoughts on bitcoin cash? I imagine you must own a fair bit, because of the split, right? -Paul
[2017-08-31 16:47:57] - a: But at the same time, I've also seen lots of people point to extreme weather events like Sandy and Harvey and be like, "Yup, that's global warming". So, it's a little confusing to me. -Paul
[2017-08-31 16:46:50] - a: To Miguel's point, I know in the past whenever people have tried to be smart-asses and talked about global warming during blizzards and record snowfalls, the response has always been that climate change and weather are two completely different things, and that equating one with the other is stupid. -Paul
[2017-08-31 16:45:32] - a: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/08/29/university-fires-professor-who-suggested-harvey-was-karma-for-texas-republicans/ I've seen others, but this was the most prominent. -Paul
[2017-08-31 14:47:43] - a: sure there's some overlap, but they are in my mind two different functions: one side models long term climate trends/effects, the other a short term/real-time analysis of a coming storm. - mig
[2017-08-31 14:40:50] - "Theyre still using the tools of science and the understanding of the physical laws of the universe to be able to study and make predictions" ~a
[2017-08-31 14:38:27] - wouldn't there be a lot of overlap? what's more, wouldn't they both have a part to play when it comes to massive hurricanes? ~a
[2017-08-31 14:32:04] - err weather forecasting. - mig
[2017-08-31 14:31:30] - but to the main point, I thought it was understood that climate science and weather analysis are kind of 2 different things, and it's kind of stunning NDGT didn't know that. - mig
[2017-08-31 14:20:43] - a: probably not poor taste, but it has an aura of smugness to it. - mig
[2017-08-31 13:59:31] - paul: the only political commentary (joke?) i saw, other than the one miguel sent just now, was this one. this doesn't seem to be in bad taste, does it? ~a
[2017-08-31 13:37:43] - There's been, to me, a surprisingly large number of "jokes" about Harvey and it being karma for Trump or not believing in climate change or this secessionist sentiment or whatever else. -Paul
[2017-08-31 13:21:09] - mig: I don't know that there are that many secessionists but lots of people who probably don't generally believe in the federal govt or it intervening in things. -Daniel
[2017-08-31 12:55:56] - paul: well, there are a lot of big differences in the two situations. 1. having preferences != lack or presence of neurosis. 2. your target audience != your coworkers. ok, i guess just two differences. ~a
[2017-08-31 12:45:55] - a: Okay, I mean, I agree that this shouldn't be objectionable, and I'm probably being overly paranoid, but I can see how this could be considered objectionable in the same way the Google Memo was. I mean, isn't this kinda implying that women have different preferences when it comes to something? -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:37:55] - paul: they even literally talk about splitting up the results by gender in the wikipedia article for A/B testing. ~a
[2017-08-31 12:37:18] - paul: a/b testing where you have multiple wordings of marketing text? and you pick the one that polls best with your target market? this sounds like marketing 101 to me. ~a
[2017-08-31 12:34:34] - a: And all of that should be pretty non-objectionable? -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:34:25] - a: Hmmm, so let me see... I go to the marketing department and ask if we can come up with a version of our order page which focuses more on securing families financially and whatnot, then I ask if we can run a test where we send this creative to a random sampling of men and women and see how they perform versus the control? -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:31:55] - a: I'm honestly less interested in punishing individual cops (although that's important too) and more interested in institutional changes to help deal with the cops that aren't caught on camera or even prevent bad apples from becoming cops. -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:30:58] - regarding the fool marketing thing: A/B testing. you can easily science the fuck out of this and it doesn't have to get even a little bit political. File:A-B testing example.png the google-memo thing was a much harder situation because you can't do A/B testing on candidates or hirees. ~a
[2017-08-31 12:30:57] - a: I think you have to look at individual departments to make a judgement. Baltimore seems to have a pattern of abuse (they were also involved with the Freddie Gray death). That Baltimore has a problem doesn't mean that cops in Seattle or Dallas are bad, though. And obviously, just because some Baltimore cops are bad doesn't mean all are. -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:27:57] - with the cleveland thing: there is controversy. not everybody will think it's a bad thing. ~a
[2017-08-31 12:27:04] - yeah, planting evidence thing i saw. the robbing civilians thing i didn't. and yes obviously those are objectively worse. but none of the three look good. so, paul, are these just bad apples or is this a pattern of abuse? ~a
[2017-08-31 12:18:37] - a: For the record, I don't think that's nearly as bad as dozens of other things that has happened over the past few years. Heck, even the Baltimore cops alone have two worse stories in the past month or so. Apparently they've been planting evidence and robbing civilians (http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/crime/bs-md-ci-sergeant-resigns-20170728-story.html). -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:16:32] - a: I can tell you right now that I almost certainly won't be talking about that on her facebook feed.
-Paul[2017-08-31 12:16:06] - I've basically come to the conclusion that what would be nice to test is changing the wording on our marketing and order pages from more stereotypically masculine sounding (emphasizing big gains) to something more stereotypically feminine sounding (emphasizing safe returns and being able to secure the family financially). How bad of an idea is that and how bad of a person am I? -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:14:08] - Okay, so I have a question about a situation (and I swear this is real and not something I'm making up). The Fool's membership base skews male, and even before the Google Memo, I was trying to brainstorm ways that we could change how we do things to appeal to more females because there should be a big business opportunity there. -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:14:00] - paul: how many hours until we're talking about this on dee's facebook feed? ~a
[2017-08-31 12:04:48] - a: I (unfortunately) bought my gold a few years later than you, but for similar reasons. Inflation has been low, but I can't imagine that goes on forever considering the fed's actions. -Paul
[2017-08-31 12:00:52] - daniel: http://www.politico.com/gallery/2017/08/01/matt-wuerker-cartoons-august-2017-002463?slide=0 are there really that many secessionists in the Houston area? - mig
[2017-08-31 11:58:49] - paul: i did buy a fair amount of gold in 2006 (pre-bitcoin) and i know i did that because i was dissatisfied with the m2 curve. ~a
[2017-08-31 11:56:37] - paul: loud and proud. i actually looked back at my pre-bitcoin stance on the federal reserve: it looks like i was actually pretty happy with the state of the dollar. on the other hand, in many ways i'm still happy with the state of the dollar today (very low inflation), except i think i'm much less sure of its future. ~a
[2017-08-30 21:45:12] - a: Careful, you're starting to sound like one of those Ron Paul anti-federal reserve loonies.
-Paul[2017-08-30 17:06:13] - paul: yeah i don't like that paypal isn't decentralized. there's lots of (illegal) shenanigans they can get into: they can "print" their own money, they don't have to hold the dollars you have in your account (fractional reserve), they can walk-off with your balance. i have to use their service, i can't send paypal dollars to venmo. plus the big one: it's still usd, so it has all of the problems that usd does: the US M2 is at $14t! ~a
[2017-08-30 17:03:36] - a: Well, one game is 2 players or more. Another is 4 players or more. The last one probably works best with 3-5 players, but it's also the one that has the least defined rules (it got play-tested before by some people and is likely going to undergo some big changes). I'll talk to Gurkie (once she gets back) about having a lot of people over at some point. -Paul
[2017-08-30 17:00:10] - sure, i like games. are these play-test games all 2-player games? you should invite more people over: aren't the vietnamese people back from their trip soon? ~a
[2017-08-30 16:59:01] - a: I like carrying around a little cash, but I agree that I would prefer something like a direct bank transfer to settling things in cash. Paypal works okay for that now, but I dislike having to keep a balance in Paypal (withdrawing it is too much trouble). -Paul
[2017-08-30 16:57:51] - a: Super off-topic, but are you interested in play-testing some games I have been designing? Maybe we can kill a few birds with one stone and you can show me how to put my bits into cold storage (or buy some off of me if btc goes to $10k before then) and in exchange I... uh... make you play my game?
-Paul[2017-08-30 16:57:06] - paul: haha there's only an adrian step because you aren't used to it. once you get in the habit of using them it doesn't seem so daunting. there really is no reason for an "adrian step": most of my coworkers would prefer we settle debts in bits than cash. who the hell wants to carry around cash? ~a
[2017-08-30 16:52:10] - a: Right, so if I'm going to overstock (they accept bitcoin, right?) and I want to buy a bag of dog food, I can either just use my CC (relatively easy) or buy some bits (which I honestly don't know how to do without asking you for some) and then use those bits to pay for my dog food, which even if it's as easy as a CC, there's still the Adrian step. -Paul
[2017-08-30 16:52:02] - there does need to be a bootstrap period though: when not everybody has bits and not everybody wants bits. credit cards had that bootstrap period and their solution to that problem was kinda sneaky. ~a
[2017-08-30 16:50:18] - paul: well that all depends. i think some places charge less for cash. i wish more places did that. it would begin to help people see that credit cards aren't free. but even in places that don't charge less for cash (or bits), they still pay much less in CCfees when you don't use a CC, and can charge less for everybody. i definitely have seen people give discounts for bitcoin only, but it's pretty uncommon these days. ~a
[2017-08-30 16:44:01] - a: Yeah, but you're not getting cheaper prices when you buy with bitcoin, are you? -Paul
[2017-08-30 16:42:12] - paul: "The way you're proposing to spend bitcoin just seems like it adds an extra layer of difficulty" worth it. especially, hopefully, once more of my income stream is in bits. regardless it's not as "difficult" as you think: i get small stuff paid to me in bits a few times per week. ~a
[2017-08-30 16:40:40] - paul: "there isn't any protection like there is with banks and credit cards" that protection comes at *huge* cost. when somebody (illegally) takes your money, then you get that money back, it's not because they went and found the guy with your money (that money is gone), it's because your CCfees, that you indirectly pay for, funded that repayment. ~a
[2017-08-30 16:38:48] - paul: "why wouldn't you just spend USD?" it's easier to spend bits. in many ways, spending bits is cheaper/safer (i don't have to worry about someone abusing my CCnumber. i don't have to worry about "recurring" charges. i don't have to worry about CC fraud. chargeback fraud makes items *much* cheaper. also cc fees are always passed down to me). ~a
[2017-08-30 16:36:23] - "you've received a few transactions in bitcoin, was it too hard?" Too hard? I suppose not. But I had you to guide me through it and it still seems like something my parents or somebody less technically inclined would have trouble with. Also, it's kinda scary that there isn't any protection like there is with banks and credit cards. -Paul
[2017-08-30 16:35:21] - a: "i'll just buy (or earn) the amount i want to spend plus some more." But why wouldn't you just spend USD? The way you're proposing to spend bitcoin just seems like it adds an extra layer of difficulty. -Paul
[2017-08-30 16:27:51] - paul: example: you have your retirement savings and you have your spending-money. just because your retirement savings is going to be worth more in the future doesn't mean that you aren't going to spend your spending-money. you spend money because there are things you want to buy. it works exactly the same with bits. ~a
[2017-08-30 16:25:43] - paul: "nobody wants to spend btc while the price keeps skyrocketing" i completely disagree with this. if you think the price will be higher tomorrow than today, you'll just spend your USD instead: i say fallacy. if i think the price will be higher tomorrow than today, i'll just buy (or earn) the amount i want to spend plus some more. then i'll spend freely and still be a happy camper. ~a
[2017-08-30 16:09:06] - paul: short version i'm always happy to transact: if you want to ditch your bits, i'll be a buyer. just tell me how much.
~a[2017-08-30 16:05:53] - paul: yeah that's a pretty shitty article. i don't know where to begin. . . . none of those things in bold are substantiated?. ok, so you say nobody is using it as a currency: i say, how do you know that? ok, you say i put Bitcoin in the “too hard†pile: paul, you've received a few transactions in bitcoin, was it too hard? ~a
[2017-08-30 15:02:49] - So while I'm still a long term believer in cryptocurrencies in general, and the blockchain specifically, I'm less certain the the increase in price of bitcoin is sustainable in the short term. I'm not even sure if bitcoin is likely to be the ultimate winner, considering the barriers in terms of transactions if it reaches mass adoption. -Paul
[2017-08-30 15:01:36] - http://www.thevantage.co/57681-2/ Bitcoin article from an analyst at TMF. I think he has a good point about bitcoin not going up because people want to use it as a currency, but because people are making speculative bets on it being worth more in the future. The price might be detached from it's usefulness as a currency now, especially since nobody wants to spend btc while the price keeps skyrocketing. -Paul
[2017-08-30 13:36:40] - Aren't any court proceedings re: Arpaio academic at this point. My understanding of the pardon is that it would wipe the conviction off his record even if he did admit guilt. - mig
[2017-08-30 13:35:56] - paul: I've seen more posts from Reason or Cato about Arpaio than other people I know in my feed. - mig
[2017-08-30 13:01:29] - I suppose Arpaio could run for Senate, but it seems like his career is essentially over and weighed against things like the deportations that are happening, this seems less consequential. -Paul
[2017-08-30 12:46:38] - a: Ah, okay. I guess I'm in a bit of a bubble because my social media feeds are still pretty full of Arpaio stuff even with all the coverage the hurricane is getting. Don't get me wrong, the pardon is horrible, but I guess I'm still surprised it is getting this much coverage because (A) it seems pretty legal and (B) it's not that important in the grand scheme of things. -Paul
[2017-08-30 11:42:21] - paul: i was responding to "we all just get to wait for the next lawsuit". i think we won't have to wait for the next lawsuit. i think we just have to wait until october 4th (maybe). i mean hell, he'll probably admit guilt then later deny guilt, but whatever. it could be very interesting if he doesn't admit guilt. ~a
[2017-08-30 11:30:24] - a: We won't have to wait that long for what? I unfortunately don't really know how things like pardons work with vacating convictions. I don't see any reason why a pardon means the conviction should be vacated, though. I think of a pardon as excusing the wrong-doing, not erasing that it happened. -Paul
[2017-08-30 11:24:27] - xpovos/mig/paul: i have a feeling we won't even have to wait that long. here's my dream: judge asks arpaio to admit guilt. arpaio says no. judge denies the request to commute the sentence. ~a
[2017-08-30 11:22:18] - a: I think it would be neat to expand this and see if we can pull in some more competitors, along with having a history of previously picked stocks to see how things work out in the long run. Can my portfolio continue to beat the Vanguard funds over 3, 5 and more years? -Paul
[2017-08-30 11:21:31] - a: Thanks. I'm sure we'll have people over again sometime soon. When are we kicking off round two of our stock market challenge? December? I'm wondering if we should either (A) Use CAPS on my website to make it simpler to track things or (B) If I should see if I can create a simple website to track things. -Paul
[2017-08-30 09:54:55] - mig: I think the Arpaio situation blew over so quickly because even people vehemently upset by it recognize that the next step in the constitutional crisis is further lawsuits and/or impeachment. Impeachment remains a very unlikely prospect, so we all just get to wait for the next lawsuit. -- Xpovos
[2017-08-30 08:09:42] - paul: yeah i can walk you through that next time we hang out. it's very easy in practice but there are a lot of pitfalls. the tldr, though, will be make sure you test something out before you commit a large amount of money to it. unlike the banking system, you can't ever call someone to get your money back. ~a
[2017-08-29 21:26:18] - a: Yeesh, I really do need to figure out how to get my bitcoin off my phone wallet. That's getting to be a fair amount of money. Also, I should probably figure out if I have bitcoin cash and what to do with it, huh? -Paul
[2017-08-29 14:16:17] - paul:
~a[2017-08-29 14:11:20] - a: Also, I was beating you even if you removed our #1s at one point, but the rest of my portfolio had a bit of a pullback. We're not even halfway over yet, though, so I'm not worried. I think my "exclude our #1 performer" portfolio can still beat yours by the end. -Paul
[2017-08-29 14:09:57] - Ugh, stupid misplaced enter. Anyway, up over 100% for me in my personal portfolio, and I didn't buy it too long ago. -Paul
[2017-08-29 14:09:32] - a: Yeah, Shopify is already up over 100
[2017-08-29 12:53:56] - daniel: yeah, except not really, no. i've been thinking about this a lot: even if gbtc lost money, lots of it, i could still be beating the vtsax/vtiax strategy. what's more if you took away my #1 and paul's #1, i'd still be beating paul. i mean, i wouldn't call it a strategy: i'd call it a fair helping of luck, but it's more than just bits. ~a
[2017-08-29 12:44:56] - a: Bitcoin for the win apparently. -Daniel
[2017-08-29 12:27:24] - paul: 100% on the stock market challenge!
i'm also happy with shop and bofi since i bought them IRL. ~a[2017-08-29 10:46:56] - paul: does the "ni" count for both nithin and nina? that's excellent. ~a
[2017-08-29 10:27:58] - VINNIE! Congrats on the nuptials. Sorry the girls and I couldn't make it. Hope you and GurPiNiVinRon (or whatever it was you guys are calling yourself) are having fun. -Paul
[2017-08-29 10:12:12] - Congratulations Vinnie
-Daniel[2017-08-29 08:54:36] - it's vinnie. so, how's the married life? does anything feel different? and jk. congratulations on the wedding. the pictures i've seen so far look pretty amazing. ~a
[2017-08-29 05:23:51] - Hi - vinnie
[2017-08-28 15:01:07] - And sure, this stuff with Russia *could* have some fire behind it, but I've been promised the goods on this for nearly a year and literally nothing substantive has come out of it and I have no reason to believe anything ever will. - mig
[2017-08-28 14:59:51] - paul: sure it's not illegal or unconstitutional for him to pardon Arpaio. But because the power here is absolute, I think it should be an impeachable offense to abuse the presidents power to pardon individual. - mig
[2017-08-28 14:30:00] - mig: Brazen, perhaps. A terrible idea, definitely. I just don't know if it's illegal or unconstitutional enough to be impeachable. Say what you will about the Russia stuff, but if any of those end up having fire behind it, it seems more impeachable to me. -Paul
[2017-08-28 14:13:52] - paul: I mean, sure there have been some pretty questionable abuses of the clemency power, but I think the brazenness of this one does it for me. - mig
[2017-08-28 14:04:37] - mig: i'd be hard-pressed to think he could be impeached for pardoning someone regardless of how ludicrous the pardon is. of all the things to impeach him for. ~a
[2017-08-28 13:56:02] - mig: You think the Arpaio pardon rises to impeachable offense? Why? -Paul
[2017-08-28 13:55:03] - Instead, people are now gaggling over yet another Russia story that probably isn't going to go anywhere. - mig
[2017-08-28 13:54:47] - daniel: I think for me that this is frustration that there is something I think that rises to the level of impeachable offense and the story just came and went. - mig
[2017-08-28 13:50:38] - paul: I don't think much will come out of that. As popular as he is with Trumpists, he's very loathed amongst Arizona republicans, especially those residing in Maricopa County. - mig
[2017-08-28 13:37:42] - a: Hmmm, okay. Thanks! -Paul
[2017-08-28 13:24:47] - paul: "block chain analysis" is a giant network analysis problem (sometimes called link analysis). the less useful information you give out, the harder the link analysis problem becomes. ~a
[2017-08-28 13:21:52] - "if I grab the address now, it might be different tomorrow?" yes. "Can I use that first address forever and over and over?" yes, assuming again that you don't care about the privacy aspect (anybody who knows that address belongs to you will also know that other people also sent money to that address, and potentially who sent them money). ~a
[2017-08-28 13:20:15] - a: Hmmm, so I shouldn't have posted that on silk road?
More seriously, if I grab the address now, it might be different tomorrow? Can I use that first address forever and over and over? -Paul[2017-08-28 13:18:23] - paul: you can use a block explorer, to see that no money has ever been sent to that address. but that'll change if i ever receive money at that address. ~a
[2017-08-28 13:16:32] - paul: so you don't get confused in the future, "account 1" actually has infinity bitcoin addresses. what you see in the app is just the first "unused" address. worded differently, the privacy aspect is pretty minimal assuming you aren't doing anything illegal. ~a
[2017-08-28 13:14:43] - paul: there's no danger to sending your bitcoin address with anybody you want. you can send bits to me at 1GK2R2FDTZ14VxM4Caduc3WHW1HJ3Rr4ft if you want. (the only "danger" is the privacy aspect: that any money sent to that address is public knowledge, so you've told people that paul=that pseudonym) ~a
[2017-08-28 13:01:42] - http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/joe-arpaio-may-challenge-jeff-flake-for-arizona-senate-seat-exclusive/article/2632732 Just when you thought things couldn't get worse with Arpaio.
-Paul[2017-08-28 12:59:33] - It's very interesting to me that the single stock in my portfolio for the stock market challenge that is under-performing the market (versus Daniel's picks) is Amazon (the stock that Gurkie, Adrian and I all picked). -Paul
[2017-08-28 12:58:39] - Daniel: Oh, for sure, I would expect 90%+ of the awkwardness to be on my end. I'm just wondering if it's something I should just "get over it" or not. -Paul
[2017-08-28 12:26:18] - Paul: I think I've only ever had males do the turn your head and cough part but I don't think it was because I sought it out. I imagine the awkwardness is more for you than them. They see all kinds of weird crazy shit day in and day out. Dude's junk isn't that big a deal anymore I imagine. -Daniel
[2017-08-28 11:53:25] - Do any of you have any opinions on you (not you specifically, but you as a male) having a female primary care physician? No, not because they are "inferior" or "neurotic" or whatever comments I'm sure Adrian is dying to make, but because of certain medical exams/check-ups that might be... awkward? -Paul
[2017-08-28 11:51:13] - Because I just love opening myself up to the snarky comments I am sure will result based on the conversation from the past few days, but I have a question for the male members of the message board (are there any females left?)... -Paul
[2017-08-28 11:18:07] - a: Can I just share the bitcoin address for "Account 1" in myCelium? -Paul
[2017-08-28 11:11:40] - a: So, if I want to tell somebody how to send me bitcoin.... how do I do that? And is there any danger in me blasting it out in an email? -Paul
[2017-08-28 10:52:40] - mig: I think it was the news coverage being busy elsewhere. Its not surprising per se but I think its pretty terrible. -Daniel
[2017-08-28 10:41:23] - mig: I'm more surprised it was as big a deal as it was. I doubt most people knew who Arpaio was before Trump pardoned him. Also, Trump pardoning Arpaio is actually the most Trump like thing I can imagine. They seem like two peas in a pod. -Paul
[2017-08-28 10:40:25] - a: Ugh, making me do my own work? Fine...
-Paul[2017-08-28 10:34:41] - and I realize there was other major news consuming time over the weekend, but still ... - mig
[2017-08-28 10:34:17] - Depressing thought of the day: I was kind of amazed the potential shitstorm of Trump pardoning Joe Arpaio has kind of dissipated already. Either the whole friday news dump was actually effective, or people just don't really care about it much. Either one is pretty frightening. - mig
[2017-08-26 00:33:16] - paul: click on the cell you're interested in. you can see how it works your own damn self. (but, yes, your hypothesis is correct: google docs compares the "last" price with the first price . . . but also it folds in the dividends) ~a
[2017-08-25 16:48:47] - a: Completely off-topic question, but for the Stock Market challenge, are you just pulling the current stock price from some google finance tie-in with google sheets and comparing it to the hard coded price of the shares on the day the contest started? -Paul
[2017-08-25 16:01:02] - And so far they frankly don't seem to have very many good results to show for it. They still have gender imbalances that are pretty stark. Assuming that a more equitable gender balance is something to be striven for, at what point do we consider that maybe these traditional methods aren't working and it is time to try something else? -Paul
[2017-08-25 15:59:51] - https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/24/us/affirmative-action.html Not to really bring us back to this topic, but I saw this headline (haven't read the article) in the print NYT at Starbucks this afternoon and thought it seemed relevant to the Google memo in this way: Google has had all of these traditional diversity programs in place for a decent amount of time... -Paul
[2017-08-25 15:31:56] - I mean, that's roughly my salary levels, and doubt very much that I could personally afford to live in NYC (or even some parts of DC). - mig
[2017-08-25 15:30:49] - If you live in NYC and are only making slightly above $100k/year, I think it's actually very possible to feel like you are living paycheck to paycheck. - mig
[2017-08-25 15:30:41] - a: However, I don't think RD's audience is large enough to solve this problem yet. -Paul
[2017-08-25 15:30:29] - a: Didn't think TMF counted as mine.
I have given some consideration to writing some financial literacy stuff for RD, though. -Paul[2017-08-25 15:26:40] - rd and tmf? though this website counts as a close third. ~a
[2017-08-25 15:02:07] - a: (1) 9% actually isn't too many. I thought it might be higher. (2) I feel like this depends on the definition of "paycheck-to-paycheck". (3) I have multiple websites? -Paul
[2017-08-25 14:39:53] - 9% of workers making more than $100,000/year are living paycheck-to-paycheck. wtf, morons. paul why haven't either of your websites fixed this problem yet? ~a
[2017-08-25 14:15:15] - Daniel: "I also agree with Adrian that I think he is an idiot." Same reasons as Adrian? -Paul
[2017-08-25 14:14:41] - Daniel: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/may/27/judicial-confirmation-network/Sotomayor-comment-Latina-women-versus-white-men/ If you want some context to the quote. However, why can't it be a dog whistle?
Seriously, though, if we take her quote in context, shouldn't Damore get credit for the 99.9% of his memo that doesn't mention IQ and the 100% that doesn't mention race? -Paul[2017-08-25 14:10:43] - I would point to her dissent in Horne v. Agriculture if we want to discuss her unfitness as a SC justice. - mig
[2017-08-25 14:09:34] - Also a busy day for me so not much time for reading/posting. Sorry~ -Daniel
[2017-08-25 14:09:12] - Paul: The quote out of context sounds racist. I haven't read the rest of her speech. My guess is she is talking about having a better perspective on some potential issue? I dunno. It sounds bad on its own. -Daniel
[2017-08-25 14:08:12] - Paul: I didn't say he was racist. I said he might be and that dropping IQ into his memo brings in racist ideas/context. I also agree with Adrian that I think he is an idiot. -Daniel
[2017-08-25 14:04:56] - a: Having said that... it's hard not to read that quote and think that she is at least a little racist.
-Paul[2017-08-25 13:52:10] - a: And I think that's the difference between Daniel and I when it comes to whether Damore is racist or not, and you and I when it comes to whether he is an idiot or not. I like to try to give people the benefit of the doubt. I like to think that Sotomayor isn't really super racist and that one statement probably shouldn't disqualify her for being a Justice. -Paul
[2017-08-25 13:37:31] - paul: yeah it sucks that she said that. i'd argue for her firing but i don't think that's a thing you can do to a supreme court justice. ~a
[2017-08-25 12:24:41] - And it's not like this was some secret thought of hers. It was in a speech. -Paul
[2017-08-25 12:22:29] - She's basically flat out saying that Latina women would more often reach better conclusions than white males and she is a JUDGE. Not some software engineer. -Paul
[2017-08-25 12:21:30] - "I would hope that a wise Latina woman, with the richness of her experiences, would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn't lived that life". I know there is some context around that comment, but that still seems like a much stronger statement than any that Damore made. -Paul
[2017-08-25 12:20:44] - a: http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/28/sotomayor.latina.remark.reax/ If we're firing people for raising ideas that maybe possibly might show a predisposition for or against certain groups of people, shouldn't Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor be ahead of Damore in line? -Paul
[2017-08-25 12:17:04] - a: I would've explained why his memo was making people upset and how it put the company in a bad position and maybe it's not a great idea for him to share these ideas publicly at work. -Paul
[2017-08-25 12:15:43] - a: Okay, lunch break at work. From what I know, if I was the Google CEO, I wouldn't have fired him just for sharing his memo. As a first step, I would've sat down and talked with him and explained how his memo was upsetting people and maybe consult with some biologists to see how legitimate his scientific claims were. -Paul
[2017-08-25 11:08:37] - yeah i crossed his path a bunch of times at the system lab: he taught classes on perl a few times and i probably wouldn't have learned perl if it wasn't for him. hell, it's weird that i still accidentally write perl scripts every now an then when i'm too lazy to look up how to do something in python. then, i bumped into him again at vt on the programming team. ~a
[2017-08-25 11:06:40] - paul: 9% of 1.1b . . . jesus, that's $100m. ~a
[2017-08-25 11:05:10] - a: I don't think I really knew him in TJ. -Paul
[2017-08-25 11:03:11] - i liked brent at tj and vt. he was a pretty cool guy. he flaked out of the programming team a time or two, but made up for it by being a really friendly personable dude. he's a capable teacher too. ~a
[2017-08-25 11:00:03] - oh cool. i just saw the s1 linked from wikipedia. ~a
[2017-08-25 10:53:26] - a: Which company? Yext (the company I believe MacIsaac works at now) went public a few months ago, I believe. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:50:35] - did you guys see that the company that brent metz started (who hired macisaac, among others) is looking to go public? paul, any idea why brent isn't in the leadership of the company anymore? ~a
[2017-08-25 10:42:20] - a: Can I do it maybe later? I already broke my promise to post that last thought and then bow out for a bit.
-Paul[2017-08-25 10:33:21] - well let me put it back on you then: should google have fired him or not? it sounds like you're struggling with "I'm not the CEO so I can't really weigh the pros and cons". but please: weigh the pros and cons (with the information you have). ~a
[2017-08-25 10:32:02] - the practical difference is huge. one is a PR nightmare and the other is a coworker saying something off-the-cuff. ~a
[2017-08-25 10:25:35] - a: Eh, I don't know. What's the practical difference? He put more time and thought into his, but they're both about sharing an apparently fire-able opinion with coworkers. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:15:36] - paul: "mentioning something" and creating a "memo" are two completely different things. i doubt you'd ever be fired for "mentioning something" like that. ~a
[2017-08-25 10:14:31] - a: Especially if I thought I had the weight of science behind me, which, whether accurate or not, he clearly thinks he does. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:14:12] - there's more than one kind of intelligence. i would keep the respect of my coworkers by not sending out this bullshit. and keep from being fired. at least not for that reason.
~a[2017-08-25 10:14:00] - a: I'll be completely honest. If I attended some diversity meeting at work before this whole thing and mentioned that I read somewhere that women were biologically different and that might make them prefer lower stress jobs and then I got fired from my job for saying that, I would be in complete shock. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:12:43] - a: " i think damore is a fucking moron" I disagree with this. Doesn't he have a masters degree from Harvard or something? He got employed at Google and was apparently a pretty good employee before this. By most metrics he is smarter than I'll ever be. I think he incorrectly assumed Google was more open to alternate ideas than they were. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:10:56] - Like if some cop admitted to being a member of Black Lives Matter or something. There are any number of reasons why the police department might want to fire him and they are probably good ones about making the department look biased or something. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:10:40] - paul: nah, i don't think he's a racist. i think that was just daniel. i think damore is a fucking moron who don't know what he has done is stupid and will get him fired. got him fired. ~a
[2017-08-25 10:07:35] - Should Google have fired him? I dunno, I'm not the CEO so I can't really weigh the pros and cons. I totally understand why they would want to, though. Firing him was the easy decision. I just wish they had taken the courageous stand and not fired him just because of public outrage. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:05:27] - a: It wasn't intended to be bate (or even bait). Honestly, I am not even sure it was aimed at you. I think Daniel was the one who said he was pretty comfortable calling Damore a racist. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:04:21] - a: "nah. you've already colored the argument. the argument is: damore: should google have fired him or not?" Colored which one? We're not discussing whether he is racist or not anymore? -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:03:46] - also bait. i'm not taking that either. ~a
[2017-08-25 10:03:04] - i'm not taking that bate. google should have fired him. for at least a dozen reasons, the least of which is that he's hurting the company and not helping the company: why would you keep paying someone like that? ~a
[2017-08-25 10:01:42] - It instead sounds like somebody who is earnestly trying to discuss a topic scientifically (even if his scientific points might be completely invalid) but people are trying to draw him into saying things to make him sound bad. -Paul
[2017-08-25 10:00:57] - https://www.wired.com/story/internal-messages-james-damore-google-memo/ Check out this article, a little less than halfway through when it talks about a coworker of his trying to bait him into making comments about race. That doesn't sound like somebody with secret racist tendencies who is trying to hide it from most but dog whistle others. -Paul
[2017-08-25 09:59:05] - paul:
this is why i changed the argument. i'm not arguing he's some super secret racist. ~a[2017-08-25 09:58:29] - So doesn't it seem strange that he would be some super secret racist who is hiding the subtlest messages in his memo and using dog whistles to appeal to people? What would be the point? Why be so outspoken about something that is getting him so much backlash (his gender views) but be super secret about his supposedly racist views? -Paul
[2017-08-25 09:58:26] - *on. ~a
[2017-08-25 09:58:10] - argument #2: should the government increase tax the top 1% of earners to come closer to zero deficit. ~a
[2017-08-25 09:55:21] - paul: nah. you've already colored the argument. the argument is: damore: should google have fired him or not? ~a
[2017-08-25 09:53:31] - Let's take the anti-Damore argument: That he is a sexist who is abusing science to leap to unfounded conclusions about women and who is loudly sharing his opinion and not backing down. He wasn't shy about sharing his opinion with coworkers (as ill-advised as that might seem) and stuck to his guns even after he got negative feedback and after he was fired. -Paul
[2017-08-25 09:52:32] - paul: it's always 2 against 1. seriously though, miguel sides with you more often than not (on both topics). ~a
[2017-08-25 09:50:38] - I have one more thought as I was thinking about this last night, and then I really have to drop this for a little bit to get work done... -Paul
[2017-08-25 09:50:18] - a: Ha, I was going to say, whenever Daniel is back in the area. Would it be a formal debate with our friends as the audience? Is it 2 against 1? -Paul
[2017-08-24 17:22:16] - i've never done a formal debate before, but i think it would be fun, and we've been practicing here for like 18 years. daniel would have to google-hangouts in. ~a
[2017-08-24 17:16:46] - daniel/paul: so then, when are we all going to get together to debate taxes on the top 1%, and whether damore should have been fired? ~a
[2017-08-24 17:05:05] - Paul: Definitely agree on that last point
-Daniel[2017-08-24 17:04:01] - Sorry, but I have to run to pick up my girls now. Would be nice to have this discussion in person some time. Feel like I'm wasting a lot of time at work typing out thoughts that I could speak in 1/10th the time.
-Paul[2017-08-24 17:03:21] - Daniel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence Also, from wikipedia: "The majority of anthropologists today consider race to be a sociopolitical phenomenon rather than a biological one". So if I had to guess, this wouldn't be a biological issue? Again, we're way outside of my area of competence, though, so I don't know if I have much to say. -Paul
[2017-08-24 17:01:59] - Daniel: "Do you think that IQ is determined based on race?" Does Damore? Maybe I missed the part of the memo where he said that? Don't different races on average have different results on IQ tests? Isn't that based on faulty testing methodology, though? I guess I'm not sure where you are going with this. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:58:28] - a: I'm not entirely sure what you are saying, but Obama went to Jeremiah Wright's church for... years? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright_controversy) How badly does that reflect on him? I dunno. I don't automatically assume Obama is a racist, even though his association with Wright is much longer than Damore's with a podcast. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:58:06] - daniel: i'm guessing paul's going to tell me it counts as jumping to conclusions if you don't actually judge the content of the podcast . . . does you (or anybody) have a link to the alt-right podcast with damore? ~a
[2017-08-24 16:53:25] - Paul: I think you think its not that bad but thats what I've tried to state that there is a bigger context of IQ in these conversations. So when you are having this conversation to drop IQ in the middle of it probably isn't accidental or innocent. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:52:27] - Paul: Do you think that IQ is determined based on race? And that given someone's race (or gender) you can predict their IQ and that there is a causal link between someones race/gender and their IQ? -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:51:53] - paul: you appear as a guest on an alt-right podcast, then, based on that interview, i claim you're alt-right. does that count as jumping to conclusions? does this count as relevant information? ~a
[2017-08-24 16:51:38] - Daniel: Sorry, that might come across as pretty direct, but I'm almost positive I've written or said stuff that is 10x worse than referring to IQ once in a 10 page memo about gender. As for the alt-right podcast stuff, I've never been in a position, but I have been a big supporter of Ron Paul who has his own racist ghosts. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:50:13] - Daniel: Wow, okay. I guess we just have drastically different bars for considering somebody racist. Do you consider me racist? -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:44:59] - a: I have no idea. How relevant is it that he appeared on an alt-right podcast, though? Politicians get caught appearing on media that in retrospect seems unsavory all the time, and they're public figures. This guy is just some software engineer who presumably has no experience dealing with publicity. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:44:46] - Paul: I think I'm pretty comfortable saying he might be racist based on throwing IQ into a discussion of attributing factors to people based on biology and his subsequent dealings with the alt right. I might have just said he's throwing in a possibly racist idea if not for the alt right stuff. Could he not be? I guess? Maybe he is just super dumb? -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:40:41] - Daniel: "I'm not sure what the burden of proof is not being applied equally?" I know this was directed at Miguel, but I think I started that train of thought. You don't see anything weird about accusing him of being racist based on two letters in a 10 page essay that has no mention of race, but also bashing him for drawing conclusions that go too far from scientific studies? -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:40:39] - paul: "everybody basically jumping to conclusions about him (racist, alt-right, etc) " did anybody say he was alt-right before he voluntarily appeared as guest on the alt-right podcast? ~a
[2017-08-24 16:37:30] - Daniel: "undercharacterization". Maybe, I didn't put a lot of thought into that statement. I was just trying to sum up his memo in a few words. Either way, I still think not vaccinating is a more dangerous opinion to hold. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:36:32] - Daniel: I don't think for my point it matters what the debate was about. Also, disagree about what? -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:35:04] - Paul: And also thats an undercharacterization of what Damore did. Its not predisposed to certain interests that he put in his memo. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:34:31] - Paul: Disagree. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:33:28] - Daniel: Again, if somebody says they don't believe in vaccines (which frankly seems like a FAR more dangerous position than the idea that women might be biologically more pre-disposed to certain interests), I don't think most people think they should be fired. At worst their ideas get ridiculed. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:32:48] - Paul: He was trying to have a discussion on how to manage diversity based on the idea that women are more neurotic because they are women (among other traits that are based on their gender according to him). The debate about how to manage diversity wasn't why he was fired. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:31:15] - Daniel: So, yeah, even if we assume "there doesn't really exist the science to support Damore's side" (which, again, I am completely willing to assume is true), what I would've liked to have seen is for people to point that out and for his ideas to have "lost" based on their merit. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:29:03] - Daniel: Because from what I can tell, he was trying to have this debate (the memo had gone through some iterations and changed based on feedback and he solicits feedback in the memo). Then the next step is that he was fired, and it seems like he was fired for trying to have this debate. -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:27:17] - Daniel: I didn't need a robust debate (particularly if "there doesn't really exist the science to support Damore's side"), I just thought that the debate should've been allowed without him being fired and everybody basically jumping to conclusions about him (racist, alt-right, etc) and his memo (anti-diversity, manifesto, rant, etc). -Paul
[2017-08-24 16:15:45] - mig: I'm not sure what the burden of proof is not being applied equally? He came up with some sexist conclusions that weren't supported by the science offered. I'm not sure what more we need here? -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:14:59] - Just because you aren't aware of the possible racist context doesn't make it possibly less racist and less valid to point out. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 16:14:32] - Paul: I think part of the problem is that you want there to be a robust debate on this but there doesn't really exist the science to support Damore's side so he was shut down on that basis and then because he had readily accepted those conclusions he was labeled as sexist. Also again apparently IQ has a long history of being used in racial eugenic stuff. So while its POSSIBLE Damore didn't know that it definitely hints at racism. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 15:59:36] - a: Netflix. I had bought 610 shares in 2004 and sold it I believe less than a year later for nearly a 50% gain. The stock was at around $16 a share then. Since then, there has been a 7:1 split and the stock is now at $160 a share. -Paul
[2017-08-24 15:29:25] - paul: which stock? ~a
[2017-08-24 15:00:37] - paul: burden of proof for thee, but not for me! - mig
[2017-08-24 14:52:48] - Completely off topic, but yesterday I learned that a stock I had sold for around $9k in 2004 would be worth close to $700k now. That's more than all my retirement funds now (with 13 years of contributions since then) combined. Ouch. -Paul
[2017-08-24 14:46:24] - I mean, it sounds like we all agree that my own RD article had hints of sexism, right? I worry that we're getting to a place as a society where we can effectively shut down debate over things just by throwing out accusations of racism and sexism because, obviously nobody wants to come across as defending racists or sexists. -Paul
[2017-08-24 14:29:28] - Daniel: But at the same time, some people are fine throwing around accusations of racism and whatnot based on "hints". -Paul
[2017-08-24 14:29:04] - Daniel: Hints? Yes. I think JUST hints of racism aren't worth bringing up, especially if the hints are just him mentioning IQ once in the whole memo and never (as far as I know) mentioning race at all. That's pretty weak "hinting". It seems bizarre to me that people are crucifying him (maybe legitimately) for presenting conclusions that aren't fully supported by the science... -Paul
[2017-08-24 13:26:58] - Daniel: It's fine to be outraged, but I don't think having that outrage spill over into your argument helps. Like, I might be outraged at Trump for continuing the war in Afghanistan. That's completely fair. But if I start calling him a war-monger or that he hates the Afghan people or whatever, I think that undermines the objectivity of my argument. -Paul
[2017-08-24 13:23:29] - Paul: Even if it does have hints of racisim? -Daniel
[2017-08-24 13:23:08] - Kryrie > IT but Cavs got flexibility and a good draft pick if Lebron leaves after this year. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 13:23:02] - Daniel: No discounting if they are outraged. I'm discounting when they start throwing in unnecessary tangential arguments. I mean, I'm not a logic expert, but aren't most of those accusations logical fallacies of some type? "contains hints of racism" isn't really a compelling argument to me. -Paul
[2017-08-24 13:22:33] - Paul: I think it is justified to be outraged at someone to be trying to pass off science as proving that women are more neurotic because they are women. I don't think outrage is required and that rational disproving of his science can be a response but I don't think dismissing those that are outraged is appropriate either. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 13:20:53] - mig: Feels like the Cavs got the slightly better end of the deal to me, considering they appeared to have less leverage than Boston. Hard to argue that Boston didn't get better, though. Be interesting to see how Kyrie does out of LeBron's shadow. -Paul
[2017-08-24 13:20:20] - Paul: So because someone is outraged you discount their response? Like to anything? I'm not sure that I understand that I guess. I get on some level 'outrage fatigue' (especially in the time of trump) but I'm not sure that makes what they are outraged against somehow better. -Daniel
[2017-08-24 12:54:49] - paul: I'm kind of a amazed everyone involved kind of got what they wanted. - mig
[2017-08-24 12:52:44] - mig: Yeah, that's a huge trade. I had no idea Irving was that much younger than Thomas, though. -Paul
[2017-08-24 12:50:50] - not to throw of the riveting discussion, but holy shit that Irving trade. And most people are saying the Cavs are still the heavy favorites in the east. Insanity. - mig
[2017-08-24 12:32:03] - daniel: based on his reason interview he did go on Stefan Molyneaux's podcast for an interview. That probably wasn't a good idea. - mig
[2017-08-24 12:26:40] - Daniel: Because I now know they're seeing this through the lens of "I think he's a racist and an alt-right person". -Paul
[2017-08-24 12:26:09] - Daniel: Even if I was completely right (which I am guessing I am not since I just made that up), I don't see how that helps my argument at all. All I've done is alienate anybody who is turned off by the perpetual outrage response to this. I find it hard for me not to discount their objective scientific opinion in the response... -Paul
[2017-08-24 12:25:08] - Daniel: Right, I understand why people might make these connections, but it seems to distract from their (presumably legitimate) criticisms of his... scientific method? Whatever you want to call it. Like I said before, if I was saying an anti-vaccine person was wrong because science shows vaccines are safe and, oh, the Nazis also were against vaccines... -Paul
prev <-> next