prev <-> next
[2020-10-09 15:05:09] - a: close. But I think Graham is probably worse. - mig
[2020-10-09 15:04:44] - mig: ah. you're right. i was conflating blatant hypocrisy with a literal promise. on the other hand, i'm not sure which one is "better" than the other (i mean, they're pretty close, though, right?). ~a
[2020-10-09 15:03:25] - a: that's definitely a flip flop of positions, but that's not an promise "I won't do this." It's different from Graham, who made an explicit promise to not to do so. It ultimately doesn't matter, but I was curious if McConnell had made the same explicit promise that Graham did. - mig
[2020-10-09 14:59:12] - mig: "the american people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let's give them a voice. let's let the american people decide. the senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be" (2016-03-16, again, almost a year before the end of the term). ~a
[2020-10-09 14:57:41] - also as a random aside I'm super tired today so hopefully I don't make to many dumb points in talking through things. lol. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 14:57:16] - mig: "we think the important principle in the middle of this presidential year is that the american people need to weigh in and decide who's going to make this decision. not this lame duck president on the way out the door, but the next president" (note the date, 2016-03-20, when obama wasn't even a lame duck!). ~a
[2020-10-09 14:57:13] - I think the central tenet of the R party is to make the fed gov look bad then run on how bad the fed gov is which is at its core not a good faith argument. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 14:55:20] - mig: I would be interested in some more accurate accounting cause I could totally believe my biases factor in but I do think that R's in general are much more interested in pushing the envelope wherever possible and less interested in things like fairness and operating in good faith. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 14:55:17] - mig: he did. he made more than one statement. not all of them were hypocritical! which is how he was able to (immorally) claim lack-of-hypocrisy. ~a
[2020-10-09 14:49:46] - a: did McConnell ever make that promise? I'm not sure he did. Graham definitely did though. - mig
[2020-10-09 14:41:26] - if not, what does that change? ~a
[2020-10-09 14:30:13] - Were D's ever interested in fairness good faith? History didn't begin with the Garland nomination. - mig
[2020-10-09 14:25:17] - among us animation ~a
[2020-10-09 14:18:22] - i love this response. it reminds me of how people feel about jk rowling changing the meaning of things. or lucas / spielberg changing old movies. ~a
[2020-10-09 14:11:25] - paul: still, i agree with one thing daniel said. if one side takes the low road *nonstop*, i have a hard time faulting the other side for taking the low road on occasion. its kinda just where we are. it'll take a while to dig out of this shit. ~a
[2020-10-09 14:10:28] - "cheat" in terms of the prisoners game. I don't think either side would have acted illegally under the hypothetical outcome. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 14:09:47] - paul: for what it's worth, i disagree with daniel. i doubt the court packing thing will happen. the fact that he's not promising not to do a thing that probably won't happen is just a play (imo). ~a
[2020-10-09 14:09:30] - IMO court packing will happen / be attempted if Amy is confirmed. I think at some point D's decide that R's aren't interested in fairness / operating in good faith and so why should they? Its a prisoner's dilemma type thing. If one side just "cheats" all the time then there is no incentive for the other side to not "cheat" as well. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 14:07:17] - paul: they (graham and mcconnell) promised they would not to do this and then did it. it is legal to lie, but that is very immoral. (for better or worse) biden has made no promise, so i don't see anything illegal or immoral. two wrongs don't make a right, but i'm not sure how i feel about two-unfairs. ~a
[2020-10-09 14:01:15] - a: I mean, if what the Republicans have been doing is completely legal, then is it also completely fair? You don't have a problem with it? -Paul
[2020-10-09 13:58:56] - a: "i don't follow this argument." Not everything that is allowed is fair? I refer again to my Diplomacy analogy. Would it be fair if somebody controlled Russia and Turkey and Austria and Italy at the beginning of the game? -Paul
[2020-10-09 13:58:01] - a: "they're both completely legal" Great! I said I wasn't sure they were both completely legal. What do I mean about it seeming more illegal? I guess I would associate it with sex with a 16 year old in Georgia. It's legal, but it seems more illegal than sex with an 18 year old. -Paul
[2020-10-09 13:55:10] - "more illegal than what the Republicans have been doing" how is that possible? they're both completely legal, so i'm not sure what you're talking about here. "Even if the rules don't explicitly say it isn't allowed, it certainly doesn't seem fair" i don't follow this argument. i understand its just, like, your opinion man, but i'm not sure what its based on. it has happened before, was it unfair when it happened before? ~a
[2020-10-09 13:54:05] - a: Yes, I consider court packing to be wrong. Being upset that the court doesn't have the composition you like doesn't mean you should just add more seats. Why not just give California 10 more Senators while you are at it?
-Paul[2020-10-09 13:51:54] - a: "is court packing illegal or immoral?" Not sure about the legality, but it seems at least more illegal than what the Republicans have been doing (they had the Senate both times). Immoral? Yeah, it feels more like cheating. Akin to deciding to play multiple countries in Diplomacy. Even if the rules don't explicitly say it isn't allowed, it certainly doesn't seem fair. -Paul
[2020-10-09 13:35:32] - paul: is court packing illegal or immoral? "extreme"? how do you define extreme? its not unprecedented. it hasn't happened in a few years, but these are (admit it) unprecedented times. "two wrongs make a right" i assume you consider court packing to be "wrong" then? how exactly is it wrong? "damning" damning how? ~a
[2020-10-09 13:26:22] - The court packing question is a big thing for me. Yeah, the Republicans are playing a bit of dirty ball with the court now, but court packing is another level entirely, and I've never been a believer in "two wrongs make a right" anyway. Biden doesn't HAVE to answer it, but I think it's pretty damning that he won't. -Paul
[2020-10-09 12:23:44] - either way the most striking thing for me was the rationale given. I mean, heaven forbid we might discuss a presidential candidates stated position on a contentious issue. The fucking horror! - mig
[2020-10-09 12:22:14] - this feels far more likely, he's trying to have it both ways among moderates who may find court packing extreme and the more progressive wing that are for it. - mig
[2020-10-09 12:19:28] - pierce: the pro-life lobby is going to think that regardless of his answer. The ammo is already there. If anything his adamant non-answer probably gives that ammo nayway. - mig
[2020-10-09 07:43:23] - (and as much as I would prefer to actually know candidates' honest positions, I recognize that even if they say something's their position that doesn't mean it actually is, anyway) - pierce
[2020-10-09 07:34:42] - and especially given that progressive policies demonstrably reduce overall abortions, it's arguably defensible for biden to avoid giving his opponents ammo for that fake war. - pierce
[2020-10-09 07:31:19] - but yeah... more likely, he's recognizing that the court is a major engagement issue for the religious right wing; there are a lot of single-issue voters who don't care about the world going down in literal flames because their pastor told them biden will kill the babies. - pierce
[2020-10-09 07:31:04] - mig: if you assume for the sake of argument that Biden believes the court is being corrupted (which is beyond just disagreeing with it), it would make sense to save that until after the election: the outcome of congressional elections would inform whether packing the court would mitigate the corruption. - pierce
[2020-10-09 03:00:20] - a: no but I think voters have a right to know his position on it, just like any other major issue. - mig
[2020-10-09 02:58:51] - mig: I think there is a difference in how it would be treated between some rando D talking about court packing and Biden talking about it. Same as the diff between Steve King being racist is a smaller deal than Trump. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 02:26:29] - mig: is packing illegal or immoral? i get that you want biden to go in the record saying he'll do it or he won't do it, but too bad. he's likely going to evade that question. ~a
[2020-10-09 01:50:36] - daniel: I don't agree. Court packing has been talked about among democrats since the Kavanaugh confirmation. - mig
[2020-10-09 01:21:31] - mig: It wouldn't be an issue if they weren't doing that in the first place. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 01:21:16] - mig: I don't think its great but I do understand his position that as soon as he answers the story shifts to that rather than on Trump / McConnell trying to shove Amy through. -Daniel
[2020-10-09 00:18:56] - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/biden-says-he-won-t-divulge-position-court-packing-until-n1242658 "voters can't know my position on an issue of great import until after the election." that's really ... something. - mig
[2020-10-08 21:23:18] - i knew you'd hate that argument. let me just stop with "happiness is weird" and leave that last message out of it. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:22:08] - a: So, sure, you don't want a car and think cars are sucky. Fine! That's great. Good for you. Don't buy one. But for those who like cars or find them helpful, is it better if the car costs them a full year's salary or just 6 months salary? -Paul
[2020-10-08 21:20:54] - a: Sure. I guess I would say that your point is independent on how cheap things are, right? You are making a point about mindset and the choices people make. Some people are not happier with a luxury car or apartment. Great! They don't have to get one. But for those who ARE happier with it, wouldn't it be better if it was cheaper for them? -Paul
[2020-10-08 21:13:23] - i've been much happier since i stopped spending money on car maintenance. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:13:05] - happiness is weird. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:12:45] - i'm not sure a luxury car would make you happier (in the long run) than your current car. just as an example of this. but, also, i don't think a luxury apartment in manhattan would make you happier either. or buying both the xboxx *and* the ps5, vs just picking one. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:11:28] - "I think that works for most things most of the time" here's where we might disagree. i think that works for only some things only some of the time. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:10:51] - " I think getting to the point where we only need like 0.1% of humanity to spend their time producing food...is an improvement" i agree with this (ignoring for a second that all consumption shouldn't be treated equally) but disagree that making things "cheaper" is the only way to do that. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:10:35] - a: And I think that works for most things most of the time. I think it's better that more people have access to washing machines and air conditioning and clean water and yes, even cars. It generally makes people's lives better and makes humanity better off and maybe even makes us happier in general. -paul
[2020-10-08 21:09:09] - paul: i'd like to differentiate between "cheaper" and "more efficiently". because of how we price goods getting things more efficiently doesn't always mean they'll be cheaper (in real terms). because of how we decide what money is worth and what goods are worth seems to be disconnected from how efficiently they are made. so getting rid of technology would make things less efficient. ~a
[2020-10-08 21:09:06] - a: Again, I get the point that having 2 big screen TVs isn't exactly going to make you happier than having 1 (or even having 0), but I think getting to the point where we only need like 0.1% of humanity to spend their time producing food (freeing the other 99.9% to do other stuff) is an improvement over having all of us spend all our time making food. -Paul
[2020-10-08 21:07:26] - a: Well, I kinda feel like the whole point of human advancement has been based around the idea of making it easier to get things so that we are more freed up to do other stuff, right? Like, if getting more stuff for cheaper is bad, then shouldn't we all get rid of all technology and go back to hunting and gathering with all of our free time? -Paul
[2020-10-08 20:36:39] - paul: "more consumption doesn't necessarily equal increased happiness" therefore fracking, if you ignore the damage to the environment, still isn't necessarily good or bad for happiness. if you don't ignore the damage to the environment, it seems like it can't be good for happiness. ~a
[2020-10-08 20:33:50] - "generally, lower costs are a net positive" i believe you, but i'm not sure if i follow the logic of it. ~a
[2020-10-08 20:31:32] - "For those who are rich who might just spend it on 100 new TVs... does it make their lives worse?" oh often yes. the mining that was required to get the heavy metals that went into those 100 tvs often pollute the air and waterways (especially if you count *everything* like the petroleum and coal). the 100 tvs when the rich people are done with them go into the trash. assuming the trash doesn't pollute the air/waterways, it'll landfill ~a
[2020-10-08 20:27:05] - "Biden says his plan will not raise taxes on Americans earning less than $400K per year, according to fact-checkers" Just saw this headline and thought it was silly enough to share.
-Paul[2020-10-08 20:26:11] - a: But I still think that generally, lower costs are a net positive. Why isn't cheaper milk or cheaper bread or cheaper gasoline or cheaper TVs a good thing? For those struggling to make ends meet... it makes their lives easier. For those who are rich who might just spend it on 100 new TVs... does it make their lives worse? -Paul
[2020-10-08 20:24:32] - a: Hmmm, so I might agree that on a philosophical level, more consumption doesn't necessarily equal increased happiness. -Paul
[2020-10-08 20:21:06] - "Frees up more money for other things OR means people have to work less for the stuff they want?" it doesn't feel like that's how economies work. can we agree that oil prices being lower is neutral at best? (pls factor in the private jet thing you mentioned) ~a
[2020-10-08 20:17:46] - i'm strictly not saying that inflation is good. ~a
[2020-10-08 20:17:39] - i'm more arguing these two things: 1. more consumption doesn't always increase happiness. less consumption doesn't always decrease happiness. more *efficient* consumption seems to almost always be better. 2. if *everything* costs more or costs less at the same rate, then nothing has changed (the value of money has changed, and nothing more). ~a
[2020-10-08 20:16:20] - i'm not arguing that inflation is good, sorry if that didn't come across as good. ~a
[2020-10-08 20:16:16] - Like, what's wrong with letting the savers have their moment? -Paul
[2020-10-08 20:16:00] - a: I understand your larger question as it relates to inflation vs deflation, but I guess I have never bought into the idea that we need constant inflation or else doom happens. -paul
[2020-10-08 20:14:54] - a: "can you tell me why reduced costs of things are better?" Because they people need to spend less money on those things? Frees up more money for other things OR means people have to work less for the stuff they want? -Paul
[2020-10-08 19:20:38] - (i don't like your medicine analogy, but i imagine you're not surprised by this) ~a
[2020-10-08 19:20:00] - paul: "shouldn't reduced energy costs (specifically petroleum) help bring down the costs of a lot of other things too?" possibly. regardless, can you tell me why reduced costs of things are better? i'm seriously asking, not being a jerk. my understanding of inflation is . . . loose, but reducing the costs of everything seems to be similar to reducing the costs of nothing? that being said, reducing friction seems to always be good? ~a
[2020-10-08 19:14:39] - a: Ah, I suppose reduced energy costs would make private jet fights cheaper too. Fair enough. I guess I just have a hard time imagining that reducing energy costs could overall be considered a bad thing. That feels like rooting against lower medicine costs in order to incentivize people to lead healthier lives to avoid getting sick.
-Paul[2020-10-08 19:12:14] - a: At a high level, shouldn't reduced energy costs (specifically petroleum) help bring down the costs of a lot of other things too? More specifically, though, I was thinking of the stereotypical old lady who has to choose between heating her house or buying food each month. -Paul
[2020-10-08 19:11:52] - paul: "there are benefits to cheaper energy in that it should disproportionately help the poor, right?" not right, no. cheaper energy disproportionately helps the rich. putting gas in car isn't the only (by far) place where petroleum gets used. ~a
[2020-10-08 19:08:54] - i often wish/hope for more expensive gas, because it'll encourage people (rich and poor alike) to take "better", imo, forms of transportation. ~a
[2020-10-08 19:08:50] - "there are positives to reduced energy costs as well" can you iterate them? ~a
[2020-10-08 19:08:15] - a: "does consumption actually make us happier?" I am hesitant to say yes, but I do think there are benefits to cheaper energy in that it should disproportionately help the poor, right? -paul
[2020-10-08 19:06:36] - a: "rank it compared to what?" Coal and... petroleum? I'm honestly not sure what fracking replaces. It's not just pollution, though, it's also about the health consequences of miners. Also, I know it isn't "environmental impact", but there are positives to reduced energy costs as well. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:47:28] - does consumption actually make us happier? ~a
[2020-10-08 18:46:25] - without going into "how much" decisions (i.e. lets just say its all fairly marginal), and you were given the option between 1A and 2C, which would you pick? worded differently, does maximizing the world energy consumption/output *always* or *sometimes* decrease the most human suffering? ~a
[2020-10-08 18:46:12] - paul: "the world is probably overall better off with fracking having happened versus a world where it never happened" this got me thinking: there are like ~6 scenarios: without fracking our worldwide energy consumption would have: 1. stayed the same, 2. been lower. and worldwide pollution output would have been, A. higher B. the same or C. lower. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:38:14] - yeah, uhh, sure that counts as level 4. is the price going to be under 30k? (also, is "this" accurate?) ~a
[2020-10-08 18:37:15] - oh i was looking at the wrong tweet. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:36:20] - paul: "The vehicle performs all safety-critical functions for the entire trip, with the driver not expected to control the vehicle at any time" was the old definition we had at the time the bet was made (the definitions were changed). pretty sure robot taxi won't count as old-level-4. but it does count as old-level-3. is the price going to be under 20k? (and/or 30k?) ~a
[2020-10-08 18:32:13] - a: https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1314265240268402691 "The latest build is capable of zero intervention drives" Assuming this is accurate (which I understand is a huge assumption), would that count as level 4? -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:31:29] - rank it compared to what? slightly above coal? on the other hand, fracking pollutes both our waterways and our air. coal (mostly) just pollutes our air. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:29:41] - a: Sure. I suspect we mostly agree. When I said, "largely be done safely and with minimal environmental disturbance" I was thinking relative to alternatives since it's kinda hard to measure environmental disturbance otherwise. Where would you rank franking in terms of energy generation vs environmental impact? -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:27:56] - i imagine a world where people hold insurance that *actually* protects people from misadventures. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:26:26] - paul: if we could be like "each spill has to be cleaned up. no, really. actually cleaned up. basically no, not what you're currently doing." i feel like fracking would stop being so profitable. and the curbing would happen itself. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:25:25] - paul: if it matters i'm pro-"not banning fracking" as well. i'd like to heavily curb fracking
~a[2020-10-08 18:24:38] - paul: you said "we should allow companies to do it since it seems like it can largely be done safely and with minimal environmental disturbance now". this does sound pro-fracking to me, and logical except that it's based on what seems to me to be a strictly faulty presumption that it can be done safely and with minimal environmental disturbance. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:23:45] - I am pro-"not banning fracking" is probably the best way I would phrase it. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:23:08] - a: "but isn't that a classic false dichotomy?!" I guess, which is why I tried to caveat my statement that I was "pro-fracking". I think the world is probably overall better off with fracking having happened versus a world where it never happened, but that doesn't mean there aren't better methods out there that we should move towards. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:19:41] - paul: 16% of hydraulic fracking wells spill liquids every year. there have been 7000 releases from wells in four (us) states in a 10 year period (2007-2017 i think). your link to the usgs seems to be glossing over what mitigation means in terms of human suffering and long term affects. the alternative is relevant, i agree of course. ending fracking to reopen coal plants would be a dumb plan. but isn't that a classic false dichotomy?! ~a
[2020-10-08 18:15:41] - a: And it's all relative, right? Fracking almost certainly isn't perfect, but is it preferable to coal mining or whatever the alternative is? Probably. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:15:11] - a: https://www.usgs.gov/faqs/what-environmental-issues-are-associated-hydraulic-fracturing?qt-news_science_products=0#qt-news_science_products See: "It is important to note that not all of these potential impacts occur at every site and many impacts can be avoided or mitigated with the proper practices." -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:14:53] - a: "why do you think this?" Why do I think it is safe? Because I feel like most of the horror stories I have heard about fracking came from years ago and/or when proper safety measures weren't taken and that it seems like the general consensus now is that as long as proper safety measures are taken, the impact is low. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:11:40] - a: Sure, those are logically the same statements I suppose. I just prefer the statement that makes it clear that I still think the system is questionable, even if it might be best. It's like saying "person A is the least worst murderous dictator" instead of "person A is the best murderous dictator". -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:07:53] - paul: "it can largely be done safely and with minimal environmental disturbance now" why do you think this? ~a
[2020-10-08 18:07:13] - a democracy can do bad things, of course. trampling minorities is a great example. if your electorate is moronic, then your democracy is doomed to fail. but i feel like, /democracy is the worst system except all the other systems/ is the same as /democracy is the best system/. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:06:27] - a: Fracking: I think I am largely pro-fracking, although I guess it depends on what you mean by that. I think we should allow companies to do it since it seems like it can largely be done safely and with minimal environmental disturbance now. At the same time, I do think we would ultimately be better served by other forms of power like nuclear. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:05:28] - holding bnd is as close as i get to holding usd for now. when i get closer to retirement i'll probably start holding some tips (vaipx/vtip). ~a
[2020-10-08 18:05:12] - a: "are you saying that democracy is the worst system except all the other systems?" Pretty much. I almost even used that exact quote. I don't know if there is a better system, but I guess I just don't have the same reverence for Democracy. A democracy can do bad things too. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:03:33] - a: I think I have something like 1% of my assets in USD, although that's mostly because I like having the cash cushion to handle unexpected emergencies. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:02:53] - "Democracy can easily turn into mob rule where the rights of minorities are trampled" which system specifically do you prefer? are you saying that democracy is the worst system except all the other systems? or are you saying that there are better systems? ~a
[2020-10-08 18:02:47] - a: Yeah, I'm a tiny bit surprised 1% is considered radical. That doesn't seem like a ton. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:02:03] - for what it's worth, i wouldn't put 1% of my assets in USD nor in gold nor in CDs. ~a
[2020-10-08 18:02:02] - a: Gerrymandering? Seems bad. Not sure what the ideal solution is. Also, not sure what that has to do with democracy? -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:01:36] - a: Not sure which take is what I'll hate, but I do think there is merit to the idea that Democracy in itself is not necessarily a great end goal or a cure-all. Democracy can easily turn into mob rule where the rights of minorities are trampled. -Paul
[2020-10-08 18:00:37] - rookie numbers. don't tell daniel, though. he thinks it should be 0%. ~a
[2020-10-08 17:59:10] - https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/08/square-buys-50-million-in-bitcoin-says-cryptocurrency-aligns-with-companys-purpose.html Sounds like some smart people have 1% of their assets in bitcoin. Maybe I need to look into buying some more. -Paul
[2020-10-08 17:48:15] - i was kinda disappointed with the fracking discussion last night. paul, are you pro-fracking? ~a
[2020-10-08 17:38:07] - paul: i'm pretty sure you'll hate this take. mike lee says democracy isn't the goal. and that's because he's an authoritarian? i've heard you (before) say that increasing voter turn-out isn't an admirable goal. on the other hand, i think decreasing voter turnout is usually a problem? what do you say re gerrymandering? ~a
[2020-10-08 16:37:52] - paul/daniel: i don't like a virtual debate because in person comms are quicker and higher fidelity. until we get <10ms latency and microphone/camera technology goes through a couple more generations, you won't have the same fidelity as an in person debate. i don't HATE the idea though: it honestly can't go any worse than the september debate, so why not give it a shot?! ~a
[2020-10-08 16:33:51] - as nice as it would be, letting jo debate won't happen. (though it could be a useful narrative) ~a
[2020-10-08 16:33:04] - a: I'm Harry Reid. I reject your filibuster. -Paul
[2020-10-08 16:32:46] - i'm trying filibuster here, paul. ~a
[2020-10-08 16:32:28] - ah yes i was going to answer that question, sorry. ~a
[2020-10-08 16:30:37] - a: If Trump doesn't like it, then let Jo debate! I'm curious why you don't like the virtual debate idea too. -Paul
[2020-10-08 16:28:38] - sabotage has a cooldown. so yes, you can/should consistently do it, but you're limited how often. "What does sabotaging comms do?" crewmates . . . can't see their tasks? something like that. it's actually super annoying. sabotaging lights is annoying too (and make it much easier to kill people because impostor can still see perfectly when lights are sabotaged). sabotaging doors is a thing too. ~a
[2020-10-08 16:15:22] - in free play I can sabotage all the stuff as the imposter. Can you do that in the real game? Like why wouldn't you just constantly sabotage o2 and reactor? What does sabotaging comms do? Thanks for the tips
-Daniel[2020-10-08 16:03:22] - haha, ok, here's a thing i really wish i had known: if you're the impostor, don't accidentally click on the "report" button if you found your own (or your teammates) dead body. it's REALLY easy to accidentally do. if you do click on it, (intentionally or accidentally) have a good lie ready. ~a
[2020-10-08 16:01:16] - daniel: anyways, none of this matters. you'll learn it all on the job. ~a
[2020-10-08 16:01:01] - for instance, it's sometimes weird if you're not the impostor and you legitimately didn't see a dead body. everybody will just assume you're the impostor. ~a
[2020-10-08 15:58:36] - obvious give away: someone coming out of a room that has a dead body in it. that was a quick-death as an imposter for me in one game. if you're not an imposter: always keep your eyes open, and brain on. it kinda matters. ~a
[2020-10-08 15:55:38] - *vents. ~a
[2020-10-08 15:54:50] - no you can't hear anyone in the vets, but if you see someone appear out of the vents (or appear in a place that can only be coming from a vent), then its pretty obvious what happened. ~a
[2020-10-08 15:54:10] - daniel: everyone has their own task list (if you're an imposter, your task list is unimportant). ~a
[2020-10-08 15:46:58] - aaron: For Among Us - does everyone share the task list or is it per person? Can crew hear imposters in the vents? Are there any other obvious give aways I should be aware of? -Daniel
[2020-10-08 15:45:49] - -Daniel
[2020-10-08 15:45:47] - a: why do you hate a virtual debate?
[2020-10-08 15:22:02] - paul: they're actually doing (or trying to do) a virtual debate! you had all of your requests granted. sort of. trump doesn't like your plan and is fighting it (successfully). it's weird, though . . . i kinda hate the idea of a virtual debate. i'm totally with trump on this one. ~a
[2020-10-08 05:05:57] - paul: his vote will literally kill me! - mig
[2020-10-08 02:54:16] - a: Huh, I also imagined it being indoors. Good to know. Thanks. -Paul
[2020-10-08 02:53:21] - https://twitter.com/kenbone18 Ken Bone, the undecided voter in the red sweater from the 2016 election who became quasi-famous, has announced he is voting for Jo Jorgensen, and people are not happy. -Paul
[2020-10-08 02:19:20] - i biked over to the courthouse. i forgot to bring a mask (for some reason i imagined the drop-box being outdoors). they had a mask there for me! it was pretty sweet. you're closer to your dropbox than i am to mine. honestly, there is no reason not to trust the mailman: i just used it as an excuse to get out there on a nice day. ~a
[2020-10-08 02:10:59] - a: Okay, filled out. Now to decide to chance it in the mail or drop it off at the government center. -Paul
[2020-10-07 21:15:21] - paul: yeah people are recommending you fill it out and mail it (or drop it off) as soon as you receive it. ~a
[2020-10-07 21:14:46] - a: I guess I should fill out my ballot and mail it in sometime soon, huh? -Paul
[2020-10-07 21:14:31] - a: I've heard some people list the book as inspirational, while also admitting the author was problematic. I haven't read it myself, but heard enough about the author to have no desire to. -Paul
[2020-10-07 20:52:52] - if you voted in virginia by mail this year, you can look up the status of your ballot. there should be a date under "ballot received" if they received it. ~a
[2020-10-07 20:49:54] - not sure if we've talked about rich dad poor dad. i never read the book and i've heard mostly bad things about it. but here is a harsh take. some of the advice is illegal, the author filed for bankruptcy, loves amway, and "poor dad" isn't poor, and "rich dad" isn't real. ~a
[2020-10-07 20:47:51] -
~a[2020-10-07 20:45:36] - look at mr. family guy over here thinking references are a replacement for humor. - pierce
[2020-10-07 20:03:37] - you're right there wasn't really a joke there, just a reference.
~a[2020-10-07 20:03:33] - you're the joke. ~a
[2020-10-07 20:01:57] - um, is it a reference to the project travis and I did for HCI class in college? I don't really get how that's a joke (unless that was your opinion of our work)
- pierce[2020-10-07 19:07:42] - i think there was once a study done on the usability of the console controllers. (this is a joke. i'm not sure if anybody gets it). ~a
[2020-10-07 19:05:55] - mig: Yeah, might be what you get used to. -Paul
[2020-10-07 19:04:56] - I’ve always hated the xbox controller. Different strokes i suppose... - mig
[2020-10-07 18:34:58] - Oh, and I've generally liked the Xbox controller better than the PS controller too. Small things. -Paul
[2020-10-07 18:34:32] - Daniel: That's interesting! I know for a generation, the Xbox was actually closer to a PC and the Playstation tended to be more proprietary. I guess that trend has reversed. -Paul
[2020-10-07 18:33:51] - Daniel: Doesn't seem like it anymore. I'm not sure. I don't really follow what PS has. Apparently Ori was only on Xbox and was an arcade style of game? -Paul
[2020-10-07 18:33:23] - PS5 uses M2 expansion slot for hard drive expansion. XBox uses proprietary storage expansion. Thats a reason! -Daniel
[2020-10-07 18:30:41] - a: Yup! Textbook example. I'm human like anybody. Frankly, I don't know if there is a huge reason to choose either console over the other (unless exclusives are important to you), so sunk cost it is. -Paul
[2020-10-07 18:23:39] - Paul: Does xbox have games that PlayStation doesn't in terms of arcade? That you also can't get on PC? -Daniel
[2020-10-07 18:07:02] - "I usually don't consider Playstation because of sunk costs" that's literally the sunk cost fallacy though, right? shouldn't you be ignoring your sunk costs? i get the peripherals and the game pass that you could reuse on a future console: but aren't those (for the most part) small potatoes next to the next-gen console decision? ~a
[2020-10-07 17:59:55] - a: Eh, I didn't mean it as a positive, but I also don't think I only pick Xbox because of being locked in. I was just stating it as an undeniable fact: I usually don't consider Playstation because of sunk costs.
-Paul[2020-10-07 17:58:41] - From what I can tell, there is no good reason to get one this year, since next gen games won't be coming out until next year, so barring some ridiculous deal, I'm probably holding off until next year. The Xbox Series S (Xbox has horrible naming, btw) looks intriguing, especially with the subscription pricing they have. -Paul
[2020-10-07 17:57:03] - ahhhh, vendor lockin. sounds . . . great? ~a
[2020-10-07 17:57:01] - A few months ago, I wasn't even considering a new console, but during the lockdown the girls have gotten into video games some and I've been using the Xbox a lot more, so now I'm considering it. -Paul
[2020-10-07 17:55:25] - I've generally been an Xbox person because I liked a bunch of their xbox arcade games and liked the decisions they were making the kinect and whatnot (decisions they later decided to walk back). At this point I've got backlogs of backwards compatible games and credit game pass pre-paid and peripherals that pretty much have me locked into the Xbox ecosystem. -Paul
[2020-10-07 17:30:34] - I will get a PS5 within the next year though not 100% on when. When the next Horizon Zero Dawn or God of War comes out would make me get one. -Daniel
[2020-10-07 17:30:04] - a: Similar to Miguel. I've owned every playstation so far. I generally like their games / design decisions better. MS exclusives were generally Halo and random and were more likely to port to PC as well. -Daniel
[2020-10-07 16:21:49] - a: I've always been a playstation person by default. The exclusives are games I generally will play. - mig
[2020-10-07 16:16:44] - any thoughts on the 9th generation consoles? ps5/xbox series x/s? i've only ever had one console (decades after it came out), so i'm not exactly a key demographic, but i am curious what you guy's thoughts on them are. would you consider buying a ps5 or xbox x/s in the near future? ~a
[2020-10-07 13:47:35] - pierce: "I've been chatting in a different forum at the same time as these comments" Been there, done that. I think I've signed slack messages with "-Paul" without thinking before. Luckily, edits are allowed there. -Paul
[2020-10-06 22:38:54] - "I don't remember that being a quote from Community..." - pierce
[2020-10-06 22:37:44] - d'oh. I've been chatting in a different forum at the same time as these comments, and I accidentally added "- pierce" there even though it's pseudonym usernames with no manual signatures >_< - pierce
[2020-10-06 22:25:55] - as much as I would've preferred someone significantly to the left of biden on some of those issues (like warren, sanders, etc) it might end up being crucial that he's not weak (among the older demographic) on any of the general topics trump tries to highlight. - pierce
[2020-10-06 22:08:27] - so they're left piggybacking on the general biases against democrats ("bad for the economy!", "soft on crime!"), which aren't great selling points for trump himself right now, and aren't strong arguments specifically against biden among that crowd. - pierce
[2020-10-06 22:04:45] - which are maybe not issues where trump compares favorably >_> - pierce
[2020-10-06 22:03:14] - well I might point out that biden is missing some notable characteristics that have historically had negative corrolations in that age group, when you compare him to hillary clinton or barack obama. the trump campaign's big angles against him have been "he's old so he says stupid things and makes bad decisions!", "he has problematic interactions with women!", "his kids are corrupt and benefit from nepotism!" - pierce
[2020-10-06 19:46:00] - a: Maybe because they're the ones in most danger from COVID? -Paul
[2020-10-06 19:14:37] - cnn polling: huh: im surprised that biden is doing BETTER in age 65+ voters than age 35-49 AND age 50-64. is this common? i thought generally older = more conservative. i wonder why trump is bucking this trend. ~a
[2020-10-06 14:40:34] - pierce: he wasn't tweeting much in the hospital. Gotta make up for lost time. - mig
[2020-10-06 14:30:54] - yeah, i was happy with little bill and little ted and deviation from gender stereotypes. i also had a few laugh out loud moments, like when they're being held at gunpoint and they're like "put the gun away!" and then they immediately start walking away, that cracked me up - aaron
[2020-10-06 13:10:14] - trump's smallest lie of the day "as you've probably read, [melania is] slightly younger than me, just a little tiny bit." slightly, and little, and tiny, and bit? it sounds like they're basically the same age. ~a
[2020-10-06 12:51:20] - Pierce: Aw, I thought Brigette Lundy-Paine did a most excellent job. Yes, sometimes it felt a bit forced, but there were other times when she seemed to make a better Ted than Keanu himself (although I am coming to realize that is probably because Keanu wasn't trying to play Ted like he was 30 years ago, but as a mature version of him). -Paul
[2020-10-06 12:47:14] - https://www.reddit.com/r/shittymoviedetails/comments/j5zei3/in_arrival_2016_amy_adams_tries_her_best_to/
[2020-10-06 12:15:55] - pierce: i'm with paul, the stock market isn't one guy with one opinion, but it also definitely went down when he went into the hospital. in general the market "likes" republicans and lower taxes/regulations (even if they, provably, aren't good for the market after they're elected). i think in general the market is neutral towards trump because he is kinda crazy first, and a republican second. ~a
[2020-10-06 03:32:11] - paul: I mean, he was the "STOCK MARKET UP BIG, 466 Points! 28,149. Great News for America. Jobs, Jobs, Jobs!" guy today. whether or not those things are related, he wants them to be related but not in the sense that the market wants his hospitalization to help deny him a second term. - pierce
[2020-10-06 02:37:44] - aaron: "better than the dumb and dumber remake" is the epitome of damning-with-faint-praise.
- pierce[2020-10-06 02:36:51] - I don't think this is a spoiler, I really felt bad for Samara Weaving and Brigette Lundy-Paine having to mimic 1990 Bill and Ted so closely. they did a good job but they don't get to skate on nostalgia like Keanu and Alex so it feels really forced. - pierce
[2020-10-06 02:16:24] - paul: (and pierce) thanks! i thought it was good, better than the dumb and dumber remake. i'd recommend it to fans of the original, it was cute - aaron
[2020-10-05 23:59:19] - Pierce: Technically, the market DID drop when he announced he had COVID and did go back up when it seemed like he was doing okay. Still, the market <> the economy <> Presidential performance. -Paul
[2020-10-05 23:57:43] - Pierce: Thanks for the analogy. I like it. I still wish I fully understood the flaws it was trying to expose better, but I definitely not at all at the point where I am going to let it sour me on ranked choice voting. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. -Paul
[2020-10-05 23:55:53] - aaron: I think it's worth seeing, though, especially if you were a fan of the others or at least saw them and remember them fondly. -Paul
[2020-10-05 23:55:32] - aaron: Yes! Watched it first weekend. I thought it was cute and enjoyable, but a lot of that was probably nostalgia, and if it wasn't "Bill and Ted" then I probably wouldn't think so highly of it. So I can't disagree with Pierce much. -Paul
[2020-10-05 23:23:30] - I'll just propose this: in a sane world, Trump maybe shouldn't brag about how well the market is doing with him in the hospital. - pierce
[2020-10-05 23:05:31] - Dexamethasone is a hell of a drug. - pierce
[2020-10-05 23:04:21] - speaking of nihilistic mania followed by unhelpful but mostly-coherent comments, anyone follow trump's tweets today? - pierce
[2020-10-05 23:00:14] - on the one hand, nothing matters at all so why care at all *shrug* WHEEEE!!! but on the other hand, it means we shouldn't unnecessarily hesitate to make a change that's demonstrably better (e.g. ranked-choice instead of FPTP) just because it's not theoretically ideal. - pierce
[2020-10-05 22:46:48] - ....the math assumes unbiased vote counters, a clear outcome on a finite timeframe, a society that solidly accepts the outcome of the algorithm, and none of the above are (mathematically) how anything works. - pierce
[2020-10-05 22:44:19] - frankly, I think our elections have much bigger problems with externalities than they do with ranking. the math treats each voter as having an independent ranking, but that's not how brains work. the math assumes we have the rankings for the eligible voters and that's not how ballots work. the math treats each ballot choice as a distinct member of a set but that's not how parties or spoilers work... - pierce
[2020-10-05 22:39:46] - so I guess the question is, would our elections be functionally improved all or nearly-all of the time by a system that technically violates one or more of the fairness criteria? and would the edge cases where it fails be catastrophic or permanent? - pierce
[2020-10-05 22:36:15] - so I comfort myself by believing that in the real world, it often doesn't matter if something's technically impossible, because it might actually be easy if you're willing to accept small imperfections, or have safeguards to recognize and reject or recover from them, or tweak the problem definition to make them inconsequential. - pierce
[2020-10-05 22:36:00] - so if I can draw an analogy, I think it's kinda like the traveling salesman problem. it's the iconic provably NP-hard "computers can't do this efficiently" situation, and yet I'm able to plug multiple destinations into google maps and get an acceptable route through them all. - pierce
[2020-10-05 22:35:53] - paul: I can't quite resolve all the aspects of Arrow's theorem in my mind at the same time, and whenever I feel like I'm starting to understand the math I find it harder to map that understanding to real-world scenarios. - pierce
[2020-10-05 17:24:56] - errr, *aaron
[2020-10-05 17:24:47] - a: Nina and I watched it. it's fine. some funny and nostalgic moments, but overall it's pretty empty calories. - pierce
[2020-10-05 15:19:05] - bill and ted movie* - aaron
[2020-10-05 15:18:55] - paul: did you watch the third bill and ted music? i might rent it tonight - aaron
[2020-10-05 08:49:07] - generally it fails because of "independence of irrelevant alternatives" . . . thats one of the things. ~a
[2020-10-04 20:56:27] - a: Right, but I thought Arrow's theorem is about how ranked choice fails.... possibly because of the dictator part? I really don't see how it does... -Paul
[2020-10-04 19:22:21] - paul: no. as far as i can tell (i could be wrong here), most real world systems are fine with "dictator" and fine with "unanimity". most real world systems i think have trouble with independence of irrelevant alternatives, maybe? and i don't care. with dictator, we literally throw out all the votes but one. that's bad imo
~a[2020-10-04 13:38:15] - a: Yeah, I think I kinda get that? Is it the third (the "dictator") that is the one you don't really care about? I don't quite get that, but I also don't know if I knew there were that many different ways to count for ranked choice. -Paul
[2020-10-04 12:00:54] - paul: to go a little deeper, there are three properties of "good" counting of ranked-choice, and you can't get all three! one of the those things, i really don't care about, so, i don't care if your method of counting misses that. my guess is that most/all real-world ways of counting ranked-choice voting also misses that one rule (independence of irrelevant alternatives. seems bad, but in practice probably doesn't matter). ~a
[2020-10-04 11:54:04] - paul: i watched some videos, and i think i get it *sort-of*. the problem starts with ranked-choice voting: after you get the ranked-choice votes, how do you decide who won? there are a lot of ways, and provably none of them are perfect. for some kinda-weird definition of perfect. i think that's irrelevant to the real problem of the day: (many methods of counting) ranked choice is billions of times better than what we have. ~a
[2020-10-04 00:54:20] - daniel: haven't been able to get too much time into it, but it definitely has the feel of the old LucasArt flight sims. - mig
[2020-10-03 22:41:08] - Speaking of me being dumb, can somebody explain Arrow's Impossibility Theorem to me as if I were an idiot? -Paul
[2020-10-03 22:14:10] - One thing I've found important to remind myself is that just because somebody is an expert in one area.... it means nothing at all about them being experts in other areas. -Paul
[2020-10-03 22:13:31] - I'm sure you all are nodding your head about some of my beliefs.... assuming you think I am not dumb.
-Paul[2020-10-03 22:13:00] - In my experience, there is precious little correlation between intelligence / knowledge and how much people tend to believe things that are... out there. I know doctors who are into homeopathy and smart people who believe all sorts of conspiracy theories. -Paul
[2020-10-03 04:02:33] - mig: If you are trying out squadrons let me know how it goes. I don't think I have the gaming bandwidth for it currently but I'm definitely curious. I remember being a fan of XWing vs Tie Fighter back in the day. -Daniel
[2020-10-02 22:04:38] - daniel: okay, added! our next game is october 10th. people filter in and out so if you can only come for like 20 minutes or if you're late that's OK -- whenever you have time - aaron
[2020-10-02 21:19:40] - that makes sense ok. ~a
[2020-10-02 21:19:25] - aaron: You can add me to your email list for the game. I interested in checking it out though I don't know if I'd be able to play everytime. -Daniel
[2020-10-02 20:52:36] - a: so let's say i check vitals, and i see 7 people alive... then 11 seconds later i get paranoid and check vitals, and i see people 5 alive... the kill cooldown is 25 seconds, so there HAS to be two imposters to kill two people that quickly. AND, i know if they get one more kill they win (2 imposters to 2 crew) - aaron
[2020-10-02 20:49:01] - "you can figure out if crew is about to lose" can you explain this? i assume it doesn't tell you which of the impostors are alive, does it? ~a
[2020-10-02 20:45:28] - OH and the concept of "vitals" which wasn't on our map. there's a panel which tells you everyone who's dead, and updates immediately if anybody is killed. it's crazy useful both because you can figure out if crew is about to lose, and because you can use the timing to figure out when people died - aaron
[2020-10-02 20:41:52] - a: the two main gimmicks on Polus are 1. all doors are all unlockable, so if the imposters try to lock you in somewhere you can break out. and 2. the lab area in the bottom right is behind two decontamination doors, it takes forever to get there and there are no vents. so, it's a scary place to be for good guys and imposters - aaron
[2020-10-02 20:39:10] - a: regarding among us, i was just going to do the maps from left to right, so polus next! i thought our games went really well, i didn't expect anywhere near that level of reception, we literally played past midnight and it seemed like everybody would have kept playing. i'm glad they enjoyed it so much - aaron
[2020-10-02 19:30:33] - I've seen people on my fb feed suggest Trump is faking the positive test for ... some reason. It doesn't make much sense, especially now since there are non Trump family positive cases among republicans with tracing to Trump. - mig
[2020-10-02 19:16:09] - https://v.redd.it/c51t2hup5pq51 . . . i'm so excited to play again on the 10th. i've been thinking a lot about this game. i guess to be fair, we shouldn't decide on the map in advance? or . . . i guess maybe it would be more fair to the people who don't play a lot? ~a
[2020-10-02 19:09:27] - thoughts? i considered a strikethrough amendment/addendum (epanorthosis) as being a potential solution to this guy's problem, but they even covered that! (search for "cross out" in the article). is this guy legally not allowed to vote??? ~a
[2020-10-02 18:32:59] - that is (possibly, maybe, who knows) what she is suggesting, yes. ~a
[2020-10-02 18:32:14] - a: Like doctors are faking positives for R's folks as a way to harm them? -Daniel
[2020-10-02 18:17:52] - ah, ok. my wife suggested that maybe lorraine thinks the "positive tests" are fake. ~a
[2020-10-02 18:02:26] - Challenging people on their beliefs is always tricky. Hard to do it in a way that actually leads to them changing their mind. They have to be open to it and you can't really force it. -Daniel
[2020-10-02 18:01:54] - a: suicide by words material there. -Daniel
[2020-10-02 18:00:40] - uhhh, what? at first i thought this person was trying to make a different point than i think she's actually making. maybe . . . her point is that someone is intentionally infecting republicans? though, i'm kinda reaching. regardless, its a dumb thing to say, right? ~a
[2020-10-02 17:48:51] - i agree its not fun to interrogate people, especially people that you're not really close friends with. if it's someone who i think is fine with a ribbing, i'll totally interrogate them. ~a
[2020-10-02 17:47:35] - i know this lady who works in a god damn hospital that told me about carbon dioxide from too much mask use. "i don't know about that." is what i said without intonation in my voice, or a facial expression . . . she is a smart lady. but i dunno, maybe not? ~a
[2020-10-02 17:45:02] - do you think... there's something about THAT magnet which is different from other magnets? do you think... hair is magnetic? do you think... the iron in our blood is somehow pushing the hair out? if i learn enough about you i can make these two pieces line up!!!
well, i try to resist the urge though. it's not fun to interrogate people - aaron[2020-10-02 17:44:00] - my instinct is always like -- these two parts of you don't line up!! i want to pick at both of them and find the seam. you took physics in college... you understand magnetism... you have a PHD... you think sleeping with a magnet in your pillow makes your hair grow faster... and you're serious.... so let's see... - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:41:30] - i just dropped it. ha ha. they're smart. it always surprises me when smart people believe very, very weird things. there was another person who was really smart at my company and they super, super into astrology and healing crystals and stuff like that. i have so much trouble reconciling those two things in my mind - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:41:23] - i know i'm preaching to the choir here, but people with allergies should love that everybody is wearing masks. i bought masks on my own years before covid *because* of allergies. ~a
[2020-10-02 17:40:04] - "i have allergies, and it's unsafe to have something in front of my mouth, it affects my breathing, the government's going too far, in 6 months they're going to make us wear them everywhere," something like that - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:39:20] - our lead literally laughed out loud and she was like "you're laughing!" and he was like, "well, it's just i was a surgeon and wore a mask 8 hours a day for 15 years, so..." but, i think we all just agreed to work remotely anyways so it was moot. but yeah i followed up with her later and it was definitely, like -- yeah it's what you think it is - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:38:22] - indoors, no mask, under 6 feet, 3/3 = maximum dice rolling, yay! ~a
[2020-10-02 17:37:42] - aaron, yeah she's probably both. i typed that before your last message
"what's dangerous about wearing a mask?" definitely would be something i would ask, making sure to not make any facial expressions. ~a[2020-10-02 17:36:15] - but... maybe she's conservative i guess? i try not to pry into those kinds of things. it feels like the less i know about my coworkers the better - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:35:41] - we were talking about some face-to-face coding challenges and how we'd manage to do them remotely, and one of the other programmers was like "i'll work in the same room as all 12 of you, that's fine, but i won't wear a mask because that's dangerous." ...but i don't think she's conservative, i think she's just insane - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:31:54] - he did. i mentioned it below. "...he's got a mask...". no, sadly, i don't think masks have been depoliticized. his family and administration often don't wear masks in public even when there are rules and laws that require that they do. ~a
[2020-10-02 17:29:12] - https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1311839895921467393 wait, did trump actually ridicule biden for wearing a mask at tuesday's debate? i mean i'd sort of expect them to catch it at some point, and i thought masks were somewhat depoliticized at this point - aaron
[2020-10-02 17:24:13] - a: europe in general is very anti-migrant. - mig
[2020-10-02 17:04:03] - pleasantly surprised how high up ireland is. ~a
[2020-10-02 17:02:04] - hah i'd expect at least one county in europe to beat us. weird! (iceland technically a country in europe, but not really, right?) ~a
[2020-10-02 16:05:46] - https://www.statista.com/chart/10804/the-countries-most-and-least-accepting-of-migrants/ A sign that sometimes a country's government doesn't accurately reflect the feelings of its population? -Paul
[2020-10-02 15:10:32] - mig: wh knew trump had likely been exposed to the virus. he traveled and held events anyways. the family "and the trump administration entered the debate hall, where rules required everyone in the room wear masks, without masks". should have guessed that trump wasn't the only one ignoring the rules. ~a
prev <-> next