prev <-> next
[2021-03-17 15:50:20] - daniel: hmmm. i don't know. ~a
[2021-03-17 15:49:54] - a: "kids should probably be able to vote" - how young are you going with kids there? -Daniel
[2021-03-17 15:48:31] - xpovos: "Age, felon, citizenship status, judicial decision of impairment, etc" yeah, good point. citizenship isn't the only thing that keeps you from being able to vote. but felons and kids should probably be able to vote, i think. i guess i don't have a super strong opinion on "judicial decision of impairment". anyways, i said the idea was "crazy". i guess i didn't fully consider how crazy it was. ~a
[2021-03-17 14:24:18] - a: And eligibility. People can be ineligible in the U.S. for a variety of reasons. Age, felon, citizenship status, judicial decision of impairment, etc. It definitely seems like a no-go unless we address that bigger issue. So the question seems to be not, "why do we register to vote," but more why isn't suffrage truly universal? -- Xpovos
[2021-03-17 13:55:41] - paul: i don't dismiss privacy concerns. i dismiss that this would make things any worse than they are today. ~a
[2021-03-17 13:55:04] - paul: it wouldn't try to solve voter fraud. it would "solve" voter disenfranchisement and any issues with voter registration / identification by pairing it with removing all rules regarding identification. ~a
[2021-03-17 13:53:57] - xpovos: replacement. election ink is typically used instead of voter registration. it would solve many issues with voter disenfranchisement, but it would create a huge host of new issues (mostly you'd definitely pair this with allowing non-citizens the vote, so again it probably wouldn't work here today). ~a
[2021-03-17 13:52:22] - a: I thought something like election ink wasn't super necessary because in person voter fraud was such a tiny problem. -Paul
[2021-03-17 13:51:43] - a: I'm a little surprised you dismiss the privacy concerns so easily considering I feel like you are more gung-ho on privacy than I am. I'm pretty sure a large percentage of the really annoying spam texts/calls/emails that I get are because my info got spread via some sort of political list (maybe not voter registration) and it's been super hard to get rid of. -Paul
[2021-03-17 13:44:12] - a: As a replacement for something? In addition to? I'm not in favor of it, but it's not because it's awful, just I'm not sure what the merit is--that is, what's the problem you're trying to solve? -- Xpovos
[2021-03-17 11:26:50] - it's crazy but what would you guys think about election ink??? obviously wouldn't work for vote-by-mail, and it would let non-citizens vote, so it would def be a non-starter in the united states, but it does otherwise seem like a "good idea" imo. ~a
[2021-03-17 11:26:10] - paul: privacy and big brother are minor concerns, i agree. but if privacy/big-brother were major concerns, they would be major concerns *now* with the status quo today. registration-by-default slightly exacerbates both concerns. voter registration is only semi-public today. ~a
[2021-03-17 01:00:07] - https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-happened-when-2-2-million-people-were-automatically-registered-to-vote/ There's apparently a privacy issue at stake as well in that voter registration is I guess more publicly available? I saw that concern listed in more than one site. -Paul
[2021-03-16 20:54:07] - a: I think cost/complexity/ and furthering the 'big brother' notion. (but mostly partisanship (and racism)) -Daniel
[2021-03-16 20:53:36] - a: Um, I'm sure it's probably harder for various reasons to do an automatic registration because there would obviously be more registrations and more need to check to make sure people aren't registered in multiple states or whatever. -Paul
[2021-03-16 20:42:51] - i guess "cost" is the only "good" reason i've seen so far (i disagree, but its a good reason). ~a
[2021-03-16 20:42:14] - paul: so, there are dumb/unethical/bullshit reasons. i agree with you and daniel on that. but are there any GOOD reasons? if no, that's fine, i get it. but i'm wondering what is something someone who was arguing against making it automatic say? ~a
[2021-03-16 20:37:59] - I know I sound like a repetitive sour libertarian, but seriously, inconveniencing citizens is not something the government tends to care about. Throw in some good old fashioned two party system politics (lower voter turnout favors one party) and that's probably all the incentives you need for a screwed up system. -Paul
[2021-03-16 20:36:36] - Re: Voter registration. Why does the government make us register for it? Because it's the government and it is what they do. Why are passports such a pain in the ass to get? Why do we have to register for selective service? Why do we have to do our own taxes when the IRS is also doing them? -Paul
[2021-03-16 20:27:09] - a: Doesn't seem likely to pass. I think I break with the Dem party at large when it comes to DC voting rights. I think a better solution to giving DC more rights is to shrink DC and give it to MD or VA but none of the parties involved want that. But yeah I don't think that legislation is going anywhere. -Daniel
[2021-03-16 20:21:03] - say whaaaat. this (amendment proposal, i assume) would repeal the 23rd amendment? uhhh, what? and why? this has to be "politics", i can't imagine a world where this would get signed by 38 state legislatures. ~a
[2021-03-16 19:32:33] - there is also personal property taxes and real estate property taxes for those with personal property or real estate. generally . . . not exactly useful for state governments though. ~a
[2021-03-16 19:21:06] - mig: when they move around they continue to pay payroll taxes to their state. also they (are legally required to, but don't always) update their drivers license. ~a
[2021-03-16 19:19:05] - a: is there overhead? To keep the data up to date, absolutely. People move around a lot. - mig
[2021-03-16 19:17:42] - daniel: in many ways this could reduce bureaucratic complexity. how many fewer lawsuits would we have regarding voting discrimination and restricting the voting rights of protected groups? ~a
[2021-03-16 19:15:54] - daniel: "there is overhead to registering everyone and bureaucratic complexity" is there? we have computers now, are you sure there is bureaucratic complexity compared to what we do already? ~a
[2021-03-16 19:12:26] - I guess non partisan and non racist reasons aside there is overhead to registering everyone and bureaucratic complexity. It could be dealt with but I think it would probably be more than now? -Daniel
[2021-03-16 19:12:18] - daniel: "then I think you are left with registering?" i don't agree. you're left with registering as a fallback, but there are tons of ways the state governments have info on where we live right now: drivers license, state tax id, and if you have neither of those, you could register. ~a
[2021-03-16 19:09:21] - a: Partisanship isn't a good reason maybe like ethically speaking (though depends on your stance) but it can be "truthfully valid" since it can be true that registering more people is bad for a party in a given locale. -Daniel
[2021-03-16 19:08:19] - mig: "Nor do I think the federal government would have the authority to compel states to auto register people" whether or not this is true, shouldn't the states choose to auto-register people? shouldn't the people request auto-registering? what's the argument against it? ~a
[2021-03-16 19:08:13] - -Daniel
[2021-03-16 19:08:11] - a: I think there should be a mechanism for attempting to make sure that one person gets to vote just once. So if you don't want to tie to social security numbers or drivers license then I think you are left with registering? I'm sure there are alternatives but I think you need some mechanism so then the question is what. If your question is why are we automatically registered I'm not sure. Privacy? "Quality" of the vote? Partisanship?
[2021-03-16 18:28:30] - it would have to be done on the state level. You don't register w/ the federal government, you register with the state. Nor do I think the federal government would have the authority to compel states to auto register people.- mig
[2021-03-16 17:51:03] - are there privacy issues i haven't considered? it sounds like a few countries that already do this (sweeden, estonia, australia) already have a database of citizens, which does sound like it could have some "big brother" issues. but maybe if it was done at the state level (which would be the expectation) the privacy issues for voters would be no worse than they are now. ~a
[2021-03-16 17:49:09] - i guess i don't care if votes are being actively suppressed (i mean i do care, but let's ignore that for now). why is "registering to vote" even a thing? why isn't being registered to vote the default? like, is there a truthfully-valid reason registering to vote is a requirement to voting? ~a
[2021-03-16 16:43:32] - a: I agree, Hard Candy is not a film for everyone. But it was pretty well done. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-16 14:07:31] - also, watch hard candy, but i have a hard time recommending that movie to people because its a very hard movie to watch. ~a
[2021-03-16 14:06:42] - rainn wilson is in juno too: its only like one scene, but a scene that i remember. juno actually has a bunch of other actors i really like. jason batemen, allison janney, michael cera, jk simmons, etc. paul you should watch juno. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:59:40] - paul: i don't know. its probably discouraged. i see that i did it first though. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:59:06] - its possible i really only like page because of the "hard candy" role. but maybe i wouldn't have liked hard candy if i hadn't seen juno first? i dunno. they're both very good movies and page is in like basically every scene of both. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:59:05] - a: Same role. She was there at the final battle. Remember her interaction with the Juggernaut? Uh... are we allowed to call her a "she" if we're talking about his past roles? -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:58:15] - Daniel: Could be right that it is capitalizing on the newsworthiness instead of the... new genitalia? I was going to say chromosome but I guess that doesn't work here. I guess hopefully that's the case? Not sure making decisions on directors based on them making news for something unrelated to directing is a great thing either. -paul
[2021-03-16 13:57:42] - technically she was also in "xmen: the last stand" but i don't really remember her role in that. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:56:50] - a: Oh, right! Yes, I liked her as Kitty Pride, but it was a small part. -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:56:27] - a: Re: Fantasy Investing.... even Daniel is beating me!
-Paul[2021-03-16 13:56:26] - paul: xmen days of future past. kinda "meh" in that i think. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:55:46] - didn't see juno??? wow. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:55:28] - a: I like Page as well, but I realized I actually haven't seen a ton of stuff he has been in. Didn't see Juno or Hard Candy. I guess Inception might be the only thing I can think of. -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:52:29] - paul: you might be right. i do feel like the landscape is changing, i'm interested in seeing how this plays out. i'm a big fan of page (my favorite is "hard candy"), and am excited to see the new content. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:51:54] - First directing post transition I guess? No idea if he directed stuff before he was he? -Daniel
[2021-03-16 13:51:05] - Paul: Depends on the lens? I get your point but there is also the idea of just going with someone who is currently in the press / getting more press as a way to get the project free press. I bet people will write articles about Page's first directing project etc. -Daniel
[2021-03-16 13:45:49] - a: No, I don't blame him, but is it a positive thing? I guess that's what surprised me. Is it positive that some people didn't want to give a female work but a male who is the exact same person they're all lining up for? I'm far from somebody who is the first to cry sexism, but that really seems like sexism, no? -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:43:35] - a: Ah! Okay, I get it now. Thanks, and wow! I hadn't even noticed that. Been a crazy first few months of the year, eh? -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:38:33] - "Put that way.... isn't that a little sad?" yes, but sounds like he's looking at the positives. do you blame him? ~a
[2021-03-16 13:36:49] - paul: and i was referring to the "s2021" link above. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:36:34] - paul: your child. i didn't want to put her name here since this is like a public page or whatever, and your wife has a fairly uncommon name. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:35:57] - a: I'm not sure who t is and what they are outpacing us in. -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:35:22] - https://twitter.com/DiscussingFilm/status/1371799057954443266 "Elliot Page says his team is seeing more activity than they have in years for him to direct, act & produce since announcing that he is transgender." Isn't another way to look at this that when Elliot was a female, he didn't get nearly as much offers for work than when he was a male? Put that way.... isn't that a little sad? -Paul
[2021-03-16 13:34:39] - i just noticed that she was behind you and gurkie, and now she's ahead of you and gurkie. ~a
[2021-03-16 13:34:13] - a: Outpaces? -Paul
[2021-03-15 20:41:59] - if you had said, hey, how many protesters (or whatever) went *into* the capitol on jan6? i'd say "i dunno. 100?" i didn't realize that the number was so much higher. wapo says 800+ in an article about a police fatality. ~a
[2021-03-15 18:34:50] - t... outpaces paul *and* gurkie . . . ~a
[2021-03-15 16:29:05] - paul: alternatively . . . we could go all crazy-land and just let everybody edit *any* comment. (with history. sorta like an anonymous wiki?) ~a
[2021-03-15 12:37:19] - i could oauth2 with facebook or gmail . . . ~a
[2021-03-15 12:36:50] - paul: you would need a username / password first. should i create a login?
~a[2021-03-15 03:18:11] - Ugh, works for the man. Where's my edit button?
-Paul[2021-03-14 21:03:24] - yeah i word for the man too though. sort of. ~a
[2021-03-14 20:55:38] - a: Heh, sure. Sounds like he is done, though. I'm a little surprised by his seemingly strong opposition to bitcoin (apparently on energy usage grounds), but I guess I could see his bias against it in general considering he words for the man.
-Paul[2021-03-13 18:47:37] - a: i find it amusing to define Biden’s first 50 days as “historic”, yet acknowledging he’s failed pretty badly on one of his major campaign planks (unity). - mig
[2021-03-13 18:37:31] - I always worry about Googling on the Lemon test these days. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-13 04:30:56] - paul: we should take turns on tim. we'll wear him down. after his next reply, it's your turn. ~a
[2021-03-13 04:12:44] - a: Okay, I am relieved it was a misunderstanding.
-Paul[2021-03-13 04:12:09] - a: "By almost every measure, Biden's first 50 days have been a historic success." I don't know how he'll ever recover from such brutal criticism. -Paul
[2021-03-13 04:04:56] - i know sarcasm is hard to read in text, but "biden inherited a mess, but his first 50 days as president have been a historic success" read as . . . kinda partisan. even if its true, there's like, much more objective ways of saying it?
~a[2021-03-13 04:02:08] - i was confused. i thought you were talking about my establishment clause post. ~a
[2021-03-13 04:01:37] - oh shit, yeah i was being sarcastic that time. ~a
[2021-03-13 04:01:17] - a: So you think the article that you posted was an example of the media being hard on Biden? -Paul
[2021-03-13 01:01:34] - paul: i wasn't being sarcastic. daniel: whether its optional seems irrelevant. it fails at least 2/3rds of the lemon test. ~a
[2021-03-12 18:55:56] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/12/politics/new-york-congress-cuomo-resignation/index.html "He also, without naming names, attacked the lawmakers who have called on him to resign, saying politicians who take positions "without knowing the facts" are "reckless and dangerous" and bowing to "cancel culture."" -Paul
[2021-03-12 17:29:35] - Re: Japan. They were the country that I thought whose wealth per capita was probably the closest to ours. I'm a little surprised ours is still so much higher. -Paul
[2021-03-12 17:28:43] - a: I don't know that it does since it makes everything optional? It doesn't enforce that you have to do it. Just that you can if you and the students are willing. /shrug. -Daniel
[2021-03-12 17:27:51] - a: I assume you are being sarcastic? But I actually am not sure. -Paul
[2021-03-12 17:10:48] - i just found this . . . how does this alabamian law not violate the establishment clause? ~a
[2021-03-12 16:18:05] - daniel: fwiw, our population is only 2.5x theirs. so if what you say about 5x is true, our budget is still *much* higher than theirs (per person). 2x? ~a
[2021-03-12 16:10:40] - a: Hmm no I wasn't looking per person. I see the logic there. -Daniel
[2021-03-12 16:08:04] - daniel: "our annual budget is 5x that of Japan" really? per person? we've been looking at vaccine data per person, so i feel like budget needs to be viewed per person, as well, for the same reasons. ~a
[2021-03-12 16:05:17] - Paul: Quick googling says our annual budget is 5x that of Japan. I imagine there are a lot of places that manifests but I imagine it creates space to reallocate $ to vaccine purchase as well. -Daniel
[2021-03-12 16:04:24] - mig/paul: you guys complain about media being too easy biden, but i dunno if i agree. check out this biting business insider article: biden inherited a mess, but his first 50 days as president have been a historic success and "biden gets it done without republican support in congress, but with americans behind him" (same link) ~a
[2021-03-12 15:58:56] - a: Hard to imagine it is a single run, but I've seen impressive Rube Goldberg videos that were apparently real one cut things so I don't know. -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:57:56] - Chile is super interesting in terms of how well they are doing, but I removed them and added Japan because it felt like a good comparison to the US in terms of wealth. -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:57:28] - paul: any thoughts on if you think its a single run or not? i figured maybe they did some (cg assisted) cuts? ~a
[2021-03-12 15:57:26] - Yeah, sorry, I don't know how they choose what countries to highlight at first. I modified my view to take out some countries and add in some others. -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:56:21] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VgS54fqKxf0 This is a pretty neat video shot by drone in a bowling alley (sound adds to the experience but is not necessary). -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:54:44] - daniel: chile is actually what i fucked up. it was the "same color" as the EU and thought it was the EU. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:54:26] - daniel: "one place" is just the highlighted places. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:54:01] - Isn't the EU like one place behind us? So its not like they are super far behind? What surprises me on the graph is Chile. I didn't see that coming. -Daniel
[2021-03-12 15:49:13] - paul: hmmm, ok, nm. i misread some stuff about the EU. ignore me sorry. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:48:26] - imo, the thing that matters is where the money is. we have lots of money. you say "The EU isn't doing nearly as well" and i'll question that. why did you say that? the UK is beating us in vaccinations per person. and, in aggregate, the EU is basically the same place as us. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:45:11] - "Why would it matter where the bean counters live?" the bean counters are where the decisions are made. but, i'm only guessing on all of this. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:44:32] - a: Ah, I didn't read the fine print about doses. "in general vaccines were not created here and were not researched here" Wouldn't that seem to indicate that it doesn't matter much? Why would it matter where the bean counters live? -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:42:00] - in general vaccines were not created here and were not researched here. (there are exceptions to that of course) ~a
[2021-03-12 15:41:14] - paul: generally neither. the HQ is where the bean counters live. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:40:58] - "Israel has administered more than 100 doses per 100 people" yeah that's expected with the two doses. the goal is 200 doses per 100 people. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:40:33] - a: But are the vaccines created here? Or were they just researched here? -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:40:23] - out of sight out of mind. (people dying across the street from your HQ is going to get priority) ~a
[2021-03-12 15:40:08] - Amusingly, that graph seems to indicate Israel has administered more than 100 doses per 100 people, which I guess could be true. -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:39:30] - paul: the eu doesn't have any major vaccine headquarters. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:38:53] - Daniel: "We were 4th already on Jan 20th" Wouldn't that imply Biden didn't have much to do with it, barring Pierce's idea of a secret negotiation between Biden and companies before he took office? "I imagine its the product of being a rich first world country that can afford to buy early rounds of the vaccine" The EU isn't doing nearly as well. -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:30:49] - First World privilege! -Daniel
[2021-03-12 15:29:39] - i'm not sure. we have a lot of money, and the vaccine is for sale? i imagine it doesn't hurt that *all* *three* of the major vaccine companies are HQed in new england? these are guesses though. i don't know. maybe project warp speed? ~a
[2021-03-12 15:29:31] - I don't know if its 100% biden but I think he helped a lot in pushing and ramping up goals / expectations. We were 4th already on Jan 20th. I imagine its the product of being a rich first world country that can afford to buy early rounds of the vaccine. -Daniel
[2021-03-12 15:29:14] - a: Not even 10% for Harris? That feels a little sexist AND racist. The double deuce. -Paul
[2021-03-12 15:25:00] - paul: biden. 100% biden. ~a
[2021-03-12 15:16:50] - https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations So, by most metrics, I would say the US has been pretty good compared to the rest of the world when it comes to vaccination distribution. Do we have any good theories as to why that is? Is it our health care system? Our state and local governments? Our pharmaceutical companies? The federal government response/plan? -Paul
[2021-03-11 19:54:28] - i just realized that i've been to that area. i went on a bike ride that was within 1km of that corner. i went by there exactly one year before floyd was killed. ~a
[2021-03-11 19:21:17] - paul: right. and none of that means that police don't go there. i have more experience with the dc autonomous zone: police definitely went there a lot. . . . maybe too much. but there were very short periods of time where the police didn't go there. it's like a temporal thing: there were probably days or weeks when police didn't feel comfortable going there: but my guess is that it doesn't include today. ~a
[2021-03-11 19:12:19] - a: Well, the wiki article mentions numerous shootings that talk about how emergency services had trouble getting there. -Paul
[2021-03-11 19:10:38] - paul: "are autonomous zones essentially attempts by people to secede from the United States" i more feel like its attempts by people to create a libertarian paradise. ~a
[2021-03-11 19:10:07] - paul: "it sounds like the police don't go in there?" i imagine they would go there if a major crime was committed. what's more, wikipedia didn't explicitly say that police don't go there, but instead "Police officers largely avoided the area surrounding the Square in the months after Floyd's death, lending to the perception that the area was a 'police-free' or 'no-go' zone", with other examples of police saying they wouldn't go there. ~a
[2021-03-11 19:05:14] - I never really thought about it before, but are autonomous zones essentially attempts by people to secede from the United States? -Paul
[2021-03-11 19:03:14] - a: Wikipedia mentions it as an autonomous zone as well, and it sounds like the police don't go in there? -Paul
[2021-03-11 19:00:56] - google says "road closed until apr 24" ~a
[2021-03-11 18:59:23] - paul: OSM has it listed as a "pedestrian zone" (with barriers that prevent cars. which actually does make sense here, since mowing down protesters is a common response). they also have it listed as a "memorial". my favorite though, is the middle is listed as a "garden"
~a[2021-03-11 18:55:35] - Paul: I'm unfamiliar with it. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 18:54:13] - Sorry that was @Mig. I've been bad that that lately. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 18:53:48] - When you say phrases like "I don't recall any sort of concern" I'm never sure if you mean here? the internet in general? NYT/wapo? USA Today is reporting it and Twitter suspended their account so its not like it was deemed ok. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 18:53:02] - https://twitter.com/BrianEntin/status/1369456310073298944 Have you all heard about what is going on at George Floyd Square (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Floyd_Square)? What exactly is an "autonomous zone" anyway? -Paul
[2021-03-11 18:20:32] - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/11/08/mob-tucker-carlsons-home-antifa-break-door-chant-fox-host/1927868002/
[2021-03-11 18:20:22] - speaking of harrassment, I don't recall any sort of concern regarding when Tucker himself experience actual physical harrassment, but hey again, he's an "other", so fuck that guy. - mig
[2021-03-11 18:16:10] - but along the same vein, there's times decrying "harassment" and not dealing with the actual criticism of their reporter (i.e. she lied in an effort to destroy someone's reputation). - mig
[2021-03-11 18:04:40] - And that happened during the Obama presidency too, lots of responses of "man, people are just mad a black man is president." to criticisms of Obama policies. - mig
[2021-03-11 18:03:36] - daniel: I mean, it was practically the theme of the 2016 Clinton campaign. Every criticism was responded to with some form of, "man you all just don't want a woman president." - mig
[2021-03-11 17:58:22] - Mig: I agree - is it just random twitter / reddit people that say stuff like or does it actually appear in articles somewhere? I think the area we would disagree on would be nuanced and what counts as "reflexively deployed". -Daniel
[2021-03-11 17:55:12] - and it's particularly irksome when, as greenwald points out, charges of racism and sexism are reflexively deployed against any literally any criticism of a Dem figure. - mig
[2021-03-11 17:46:19] - daniel: sure there's plenty of legit criticism, and that's fine! but when it starts to venture into the teritory of "clown in blackface", "feckless cunt", or amos and andy mockery, that's kind of where my line is drawn. - mig
[2021-03-11 17:38:02] - I've seen tons of criticism of those people and would totally believe that there is racism / sexism directed towards them but I would agree that its not ok. I don't like Thomas as a judge but its the same ballpark as not liking Kavanaugh as a judge. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 17:38:00] - Even things that did get reactions like Biden questioning the blackness of any blacks that might have reservations voting for him, felt pretty muted in comparison to other reactions to racist statements. - mig
[2021-03-11 17:33:08] - I'm probably more serious about the "racism is/sexism is OK against certain sets of people." I've seen enough ugliness said about people like Clarence Thomas, Herman Cain, Sarah Palin, the Trump women, et. all and the meh reaction to it to formulate that viewpoint. - mig
[2021-03-11 17:30:45] - daniel: partial hyperbole, partial seriousness. - mig
[2021-03-11 17:10:47] - mig: I mean its hard to tell sarcasm vs sincere in text so not sure where that is falling mig but I would disagree. A) at the term "woke cult" B) that only those in A are people C) that they are then free targets. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 17:07:41] - so racism and sexism and all sort of vileness against those non-humans is ok. - mig
[2021-03-11 17:07:16] - paul: remember paul, if they aren't part of the woke cult, they aren't really people. - mig
[2021-03-11 16:49:40] - mig: It's certainly frustrating to see how often any and all legitimate criticisms of certain people (almost entirely people on the left) are derided as being sexist or racist while ACTUAL sexist and racist attacks against others (almost entirely people not on the left) are considered perfectly okay. -Paul
[2021-03-11 16:47:54] - mig: I don't know enough about the Taylor Lorenz story specifically (I know she has a reputation for trying to snoop out people saying the wrong things and has been caught lying, but I also suspect Tucker probably wasn't being very charitable either with his coverage), but I do agree with the overall sentiment being expressed. -Paul
[2021-03-11 16:00:50] - We'll see if my super concentrated portfolio can build me any wealth
-Daniel[2021-03-11 15:53:43] - Daniel: Yeah, the "YOLO" comment was mostly tongue in cheek.
"they think it is their only path to actually being able to retire" There's a really interesting saying I have seen that says something like you should have a concentrated portfolio to build wealth and a diversified one to protect it. -Paul[2021-03-11 15:51:32] - Also I'm interested if NYT has done anything about a reporter that is lying. I would think NYT would want to protect its own reputation which depends on the reporters it associates with. In that either NYT seems to be slipping there or disagrees with his characterizations. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 15:48:12] - But I do think that criticism of public figures and journalists is fair game. Also that Greenwald and NYT journalists should both not be getting death threats or harassed. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 15:47:30] - mig: I'm unfamiliar with the NYT reporter talked in the article but I think in terms of internal consistency there is an issue in the article where in the beginning he is frustrated by her calling out people for harassment / violence and equating that to criticism but at the end of the article talks about how he gets death threats and that you should just be ok with that as a public figure. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 15:15:52] - "they think it is their only path to actually being able to retire" i'll hazard a guess that it's often not their only path to being able to retire. get rich quick schemes usually involve making it harder to retire, not easier. "it still makes me queasy a bit for them" yah. ~a
[2021-03-11 15:14:06] - https://greenwald.substack.com/p/criticizing-public-figures-including i thought this was a pretty good read. Goes through a lot, but the title itself speaks to a big annoyance of mine that I've noticed trending for a pretty long while. - mig
[2021-03-11 15:09:21] - YOLO would have been actually changing my 401k / IRA's into GME. I've seen reddit screenshots of people doing something like that and while on one hand if they think it is their only path to actually being able to retire I understand taking a shot it still makes me queasy a bit for them. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 14:52:52] - YOLO'ing seems a strong term for my position but I do agree. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 14:45:03] - a: But I also agree it is crazy pants that Daniel is the one YOLO-ing gamestop. -Paul
[2021-03-11 14:44:46] - a: Yeah, I think we're mostly in agreement here. I think I'm just a little more hesitant to condemn the way others choose to try to invest. I prefer talking about what I do and what I think works rather than talking about what other people are doing wrong. -Paul
[2021-03-11 14:40:25] - a: lol - I think that is fair. -Daniel
[2021-03-11 14:39:52] - the crazy scenario that i couldn't have possibly predicted was that daniel would be the one of us that bought into gme. ~a
[2021-03-11 14:38:26] - paul: for every winning trade, there is going to be a losing trade. it's not exactly a zero-sum game obviously (because the market generally goes up), but it's close. "time in the market..." is probably closer to the argument i'm trying to make. ~a
[2021-03-11 14:36:43] - paul: i'm not totally sure what point i'm trying to make, fwiw. other than, i guess, a toned-down version of an argument that matt herndon or daniel would make. ~a
[2021-03-11 14:35:56] - paul: "I don't want to judge others who think they can time stuff like Gamestop" i do want to judge those people. "plenty of people have done pretty well with it" this is exactly the wrong metric to look at, right? "he basically perfectly timed his sale of broadcast.com right before the dot com bubble burst" for 100% of the shares he sold, he sold to people that bought right before the dot com bubble burst. absolutely every share. ~a
[2021-03-11 14:33:14] - a: and, honestly, you could be smart and play that game. If you look at Mark Cuban, he basically perfectly timed his sale of broadcast.com right before the dot com bubble burst, so a lot of his wealth is tied a bit to market timing in a way. -Paul
[2021-03-11 14:32:22] - a: "its a game that nobody is qualified at all to play" I mostly agree, but I also realize the very idea of investing in individual stocks is a bit controversial by itself so I don't want to judge others who think they can time stuff like Gamestop. After all, plenty of people have done pretty well with it. -Paul
[2021-03-11 05:33:12] - interesting article about the GME saga and how people are using call options to make a stock go up more than would be normal otherwise. https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgecalhoun/2021/03/10/gamestop-the-second-surgeanatomy-of-a-gamma-swarm/?sh=3a5c36d74225 -Daniel
[2021-03-10 18:16:59] - paul: "That's a game I don't feel qualified at all to play" i'll take it further, and say its a game that nobody is qualified at all to play. anybody who thinks they are qualified to play it is deluding themselves. buying and selling gme is totally fine, of course, but i wouldn't do it with any serious amounts of money. if i owned gme today, i probably wouldn't sell all of it, but i'd sell some. that's my MO: make small decisions. ~a
[2021-03-10 18:13:54] - Daniel: That's a game I don't feel qualified at all to play. Like you mentioned during SC: When do you decide when to get out? I guess the answer is before everybody else? I just don't know personally how to answer those questions. -Paul
[2021-03-10 18:13:04] - Daniel: I agree there is some reasoning behind the movement of the stock. I guess my issue with it is that the reasoning mostly seems to involve guesses regarding the diamond hands or paper hands of a bunch of random people on reddit and/or if hedge funds want to fight back or not. -Paul
[2021-03-10 17:50:09] - Daniel: Yeah, perfect timing because now it is like $200.
-Paul[2021-03-10 17:30:07] - lol now its crashing. /shrug -Daniel
[2021-03-10 16:58:26] - So it seems less to do with the actual company and more a function of wallstreet shenanigans around the stock that retail investors are trying to get in on? I wouldn't defend it as safe but there is at least some reasoning there (says the one who owns some GME but also isn't buying anymore). -Daniel
[2021-03-10 16:56:54] - GME currently 330. While I agree that the fundamentals for the company don't align with the price I do think there can be an external to the company reason for it to be high. Currently in this case it seems to be trying to force the shorts to buy more. I don't know if that will work out or not but it seems understandable. -Daniel
[2021-03-10 15:03:35] - Xpovos: Ah, okay. That makes a certain amount of sense. It'll be interesting to see if this influx keeps up and how the administration handles it going forward. -Paul
[2021-03-10 05:25:55] - Paul: Literally, unaccompanied minors. Means that there was no adult present at the time of the crossing. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-10 02:40:26] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/08/politics/children-us-border-patrol/index.html Did I miss it, or did this article not at all cover what happened to the adults associated with these children (assuming there are some)? -Paul
[2021-03-09 19:08:06] - a: Maybe check the SEC? -Paul
[2021-03-09 18:05:54] - paul: i also see dozens of "stock grants" per quarter, but don't see any of that earnings report. ~a
[2021-03-09 18:00:25] - paul: where do i find "share offering" history? i don't see it in the earnings report, or yahoo finance. thanks! i found the opposite . . . ("Repurchase of common shares"). ~a
[2021-03-09 17:20:30] - hmmm. i'm not sure. maybe the wall street analysts can't predict the future? no catalyst?
i'll take a different position: i think gamestop won't have a positive net profit in its fiscal year that ends in january 2023. ~a[2021-03-09 17:16:15] - a: "yes, i have been saying they aren't profitable this whole time" No, I know, I just find it strange that analysts think their profitability will improve two years from now. What is the catalyst for that? -Paul
[2021-03-09 16:43:17] - If everyone just had and used the same system, it would be harder for people to grift. And people love grifting. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 15:16:17] - fwiw, the government has a different way of splitting up expenses that also confuses me: "fringe", "overhead", and "general and administrative". i always get lost in what expenses go where. ~a
[2021-03-09 15:05:59] -
~a[2021-03-09 15:05:33] - a: reference for the meme: https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/stop-doing-math -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 15:04:48] - a: Sorry, I was just meming. That may well be the correct terminology, but I can't imagine why when revenue and profit do the job with less confusion. But I'm not a CPA or a tax guy. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 15:04:12] - paul: "Apparently they aren't profitable now but are expected to be in 2 years?" yes, i have been saying they aren't profitable this whole time
just look at their eps? ~a[2021-03-09 15:01:35] - paul: "they've been playing around with other stuff" gotcha, yeah, this could be the thing where we've been talking past each-other. (also the "i'm less sure about that last statement" part is probably wrong) but, their total profit is very negative and most definitions of "profitable" include their total profit. ~a
[2021-03-09 15:01:15] - a: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/business/gamestop-how-much-worth.html "Wall Street analysts, on average, don’t expect the company to become profitable until its fiscal year that ends January 2023" This is interesting. Apparently they aren't profitable now but are expected to be in 2 years? -Paul
[2021-03-09 14:57:17] - a: Well, there is a cost of sales on their balance sheet, so I can imagine that could easily be higher than net sales. I acknowledge your point, though, that they have been losing money a lot lately. It's not immediately obvious to me if that's because selling games is not profitable or because they've been playing around with other stuff. -Paul
[2021-03-09 14:56:42] - xpovos: ??? am i saying it wrong? or is the definition just weird? i usually hated the terms "net profit" and "gross profit": and prefer the terms "profit" (i.e. total) and "revenue". but it seems like CPAs and tax agencies hate those terms for some reason. ~a
[2021-03-09 14:54:42] - Stop doing business finance. "Positive gross profit." "Negative net profit." These are the statements of the utterly deranged. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 14:54:05] - paul: what's more, since they're in the business of selling a product that they didn't physically make, i'm pretty sure their gross profits can't ever be negative? (i'm less sure about that last statement though) ~a
[2021-03-09 14:52:48] - paul: "Gamestop is still to this day a company that makes money on new and used games and console sales". if makes money means: incomes > expenses, then i disagree. ~a
[2021-03-09 14:50:55] - paul: as far as i can tell, "profitable" != "positive gross profit". their gross profit is positive, and their net profit is (excessively) negative. ~a
[2021-03-09 14:43:07] - a: And on the other hand, I believe Gamestop is still to this day a company that makes money on new and used games and console sales and has an established history of being able to do it. Obviously I think their future is bleak in a new digital age, which is why I am not an investor. -Paul
[2021-03-09 14:42:09] - a: So can they ever bring the price down low enough so "normies" will buy EVs without government credits? I obviously think they can, which is why I am an investor, but I think it's a legitimate concern. -Paul
[2021-03-09 14:41:32] - a: The argument I was trying to make is that some people can reasonably point to Tesla maybe having a hard time ever making any meaningful profit because thus far most of their profit has been bolstered by regulatory credits (assistance from the government) and EV credits to help reduce the cost of their cars. -Paul
[2021-03-09 14:40:12] - a: https://investor.gamestop.com/news-releases/news-release-details/gamestop-reports-third-quarter-results-positive-start-fourth So, I don't follow the company much at all, but I think I said that I thought the company was profitable? I see a positive gross profit in their latest earnings. -Paul
[2021-03-09 14:26:00] - xpovos: "Knowing enough to be dangerous, but not enough to be helpful" ironically, since you think this way, this probably doesn't apply to you. i'm usually more slowed down by people who think they know what they're doing: the overly-confident ones are dangerous (similarly, people who know about dunning-kruger are less affected by it?) ~a
[2021-03-09 14:25:34] - xpovos: you're worried about the flowchart being publicly viewable, but not that the javascript is publicly viewable? or is that "enough" of an obfuscation? ~a
[2021-03-09 14:20:16] - Ideally, I can create this in a way that doesn't have the whole flowchart just publicly viewable. That's overkill, and as the flow chart is a business process, inadvisable from the business perspective. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 14:19:25] - a: In simplest terms I can come up with, what I'm trying to do, is host a webpage with a complex flow chart as it's base logic. It'll take user input in the form of "Yes" or "No" button clicks and display information as appropriate from the flow chart. So I needed a way to "POST" user button presses, but it doesn't have to be POST, and I don't think POST is actually a good choice. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 14:16:21] - a: Yeah, probably my error in not communicating the issue clearly enough, or in precise jargon. It's tough, sometimes, being the guy on the cusp. Knowing enough to be dangerous, but not enough to be helpful. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 13:19:18] - paul: i know you were saying "hey, i'm a tsla investor", but you were also saying it made sense that gme, as a company, had something of worth. am i misremembering? ~a
[2021-03-09 13:17:43] - paul: why did you say last night that gme had positive profit? looks like they do net profit somewhere between negative 500 and negative 700 million per year. i'm with dewey: i also don't get it. (very likely, but not definitely) gme has nothing of value to give investors in the long or short run, and (very likely) tsla is the exact opposite of that. ~a
[2021-03-09 13:14:49] - xpovos: because i didn't have enough context, is my guess. if you don't think you need to talk to a server, you probably don't have to talk to a server. (i guessed, incorrectly, that you needed to either have the inputs "secretly" stored on a server, or the user-choices/outputs stored on a server). ~a
[2021-03-09 12:57:08] - I mean, I'd prefer to have it not all be in public facing code, so that's a reason, I guess, but I'm not sure it makes sense given my level of code experience to go this route. I really do just want a sample that I can show as a proof of concept so that hopefully better coders finish the job. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-09 12:56:06] - a: Thanks for the links yesterday, I've got a test file running some js and now I'm thinking this through even more. Why am I going to be kicking js to PHP via XMLHttpRquest? Shouldn't I just keep it all running in js? Yes, my js is going to become massive, but I'm not expecting to actually ping the server on this for any calculations. The only calculation is based off the button presses of the user. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-08 21:02:34] - paul: not for long
~a[2021-03-08 21:02:22] - xpovos: if you want to do this from javascript . . . you can do a post like this: (i googled "javascript post", and its the first result) new XMLHttpRequest().... you can put stuff like that into a function, and call the function from an onClick on a button. ~a
[2021-03-08 20:44:42] - a: VTSAX is beating ARKK now.
-Paul[2021-03-08 18:52:10] - Searching on that just finds way to embed a Visio object (the chart itself, not the process flow) into a webpage, which isn't what I want. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-08 18:49:25] - Any way to just parse an existing flow chart (e.g. Visio doc) into javascript? That sounds like fantasy, but people do weird things with code. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-08 18:38:35] - a: As for examples, I know I've seen them, but I'm hard pressed to think of any. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-08 18:31:35] - a: Yeah, that looks about what I'm trying to do. I just don't know javascript. Which makes my task significantly harder. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-08 18:13:21] - also, for what its worth, this is *very* easy to do if you know javascript. the differences are very minimal from what you're already doing. ~a
[2021-03-08 18:11:39] - xpovos: asked differently, do you have an example of a website that does something similar to what you describe? (most things do a post behind the scenes. many times, this thing uses javascript to do the post. often rest on the server side is involved) ~a
[2021-03-08 18:06:30] - xpovos: by "robust" can you describe the scenario you're trying to avoid there? (i'll assume by "obfuscated" i'll assume you're referring to people changing the url to answer . . . or find answers). these days, a lot of websites use javascript to handle workflows: i.e. this thing. i assume that's not exactly what you mean? but just checking if that's what you mean? ~a
[2021-03-08 17:56:03] - Hey guys, I need a tech solution, and the tools I know of and can build aren't going to cut it, so I'm looking for suggestions. I need to build a website that receives binary input from a user (click button A or click button b) and advances through a flow based on the series of A/B statements. I'd like it to be more robust than HTTP Post, but at least obfuscated HTTP Post. Hence my PHP isn't enough. -- Xpovos
[2021-03-08 15:41:26] - mig: I think its definitely a good thing to look into and spend more time on. I've seen lots of theories / ideas on the subject. I know there were area's of TX that Trump did way better than expected so it would be interesting for people to spend time on why that is and try to figure out actually. -Daniel
[2021-03-08 14:35:41] - mig: Oh, I don't consider that a pushback. I agree he was pretty overtly racist against Hispanics. The narrative seems pretty accurate to me. What I find interesting is how Hispanic support for him (compared to the first election and compared to Romney) seemed to increase despite that. -Paul
[2021-03-08 06:33:41] - paul: I'll push back a little bit. Trump was pretty overtly racist against Hispanics. That narrative isn't false, but the overall dynamics are complicated. - mig
[2021-03-07 19:14:37] - If Trump was so racist against hispanics (which, again, I think is fairly accurate), then why did he do better this time around than in 2016 (and better than Romney in 2012)? -Paul
[2021-03-07 19:08:11] - mig: I'm.... not necessarily surprised, but disappointed that there hasn't been more ink spilled about the voting trends of hispanics over the past few presidential elections. It doesn't necessarily match up with the narrative (which I think has plenty of truth behind it) of how racist Trump is against hispanics. -Paul
[2021-03-06 04:46:58] - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/05/us/politics/latino-voters-democrats.html I would change the headline to “what drives latinos away from democrats”. - mig
[2021-03-04 18:54:50] - ah there we go, i fixed it. now it says i've contributed to "several" repos in the arctic world archive. ~a
[2021-03-04 18:52:26] - oh the date is 2020-02-02? i definitely have a bunch of other stuff before that date. i wonder how to see what repos were included. ~a
[2021-03-04 18:43:23] - paul: i technically created some content that went into the arctic world vault. it was like a super-simple, one-line change to a configuration file that got pulled in
~a[2021-03-04 18:40:59] - https://www.freethink.com/videos/arctic-world-archive I did not know about the Arctic World Archive before. -Paul
[2021-03-04 17:11:14] - a: Maybe? It's hard for me to differentiate between legitimate long term changes in culture and fads. Things like Latinx and (him/his) and bipoc are all things that I hear get relentlessly mocked by some people and earnestly used by others, so it's hard for me to tell. -Paul
[2021-03-04 15:25:39] - it's changing some, but not by much. the younger generations (especially female) are using it more than older generations, but probably not by enough. i would guess that it will probably die out. reminds me of people trying to change "he", "she", "him", "her", "his", "hers" (etc) in english, which obviously didn't catch on. ~a
[2021-03-04 15:21:52] - a: I doubt it's changing, at least among the hispanic people I know. I personally find the term absurd and insulting. - mig
[2021-03-04 15:10:53] - agreed? i'm not sticking with it. i'm just seeing its popularity increase through time. ~a
[2021-03-04 15:10:09] - a: Maybe it will change sure - but it does seem dumb to stick with a term that came from academia if the people that its supposed to be including don't like it. -Daniel
[2021-03-04 15:06:51] - paul: give it a few years. latinx is very unpopular among everybody, but that seems to be changing. ~a
[2021-03-04 14:07:19] - a: Agreed, it would be nice to see some numbers to go along with the opinions. Not sure why he didn't share them. I think the "Latinx" thing can be found elsewhere, though (that most hispanics don't care for the term). -Paul
[2021-03-03 20:24:32] - ok. ~a
[2021-03-03 20:24:20] - a: never said they weren't. - mig
[2021-03-03 20:21:02] - mig: did you watch anything from cpac? i mean, i get it, you don't want to talk about "but teh magas" and it's wearing a little thin. but, to say that the democrats are drifting away from the middle is fine, and i agree with you 100% (and i hate them for it): can we also agree that the conservatives are also drifting away from the middle since 2021-01-06? ~a
[2021-03-03 20:17:07] - a: more like 15? I didn't think about politics much when i was 10 years old. Either way, even then I've been able to find at least some common ground with democrats. These past several years, though, it's been moving to a direction where I'm not sure I can, especially with this woke cult shit getting more steam. - mig
[2021-03-03 20:10:31] - mig: weren't you turned off of democrats like 30 years ago? ~a
[2021-03-03 20:08:52] - daniel: speaking as a minority who's been turned off democrats for the largely foreseeable future, the democrats need to look at this way more seriously, and not just when it becomes a polling liability. The "but teh magas" isn't a good excuse, and it's wearing thin. - mig
[2021-03-03 20:07:32] - paul/daniel: "It seems fairly clear, based on Shor's polling, that Ivy League–educated white liberals' messaging on an assortment of issues falling under a category I have termed 'woke excess'" does it??? you . . . wanna tell us how you came to that conclusion? did i miss a link to shor's polling or something? ~a
[2021-03-03 20:06:31] - paul/daniel: i'll also agree, generally the left has gone off the deep end. on the other hand: "the trouble is that many racial minorities don't actually share that view" is a cool opinion, and all, but it'd be good to see some actual sourcing of that. you're literally talking to a pollster . . . so what did the polls say?! ~a
[2021-03-03 19:33:53] - Paul: I think I would agree with "animating the left over the past year or two might be turning people off." to some extent (~those articles I posted earlier this week~). I think its an issue the left definitely needs to deal with. I don't think its all of the left in the way that Jan 6th didn't represent all of the right but its still something the right needs to deal with. -Daniel
[2021-03-03 19:22:58] - off topic, but i was in dc when they called it. everybody was so happy, it was hard not to smile at the scene. ~a
[2021-03-03 19:22:00] - paul: "second most votes ever and I think most would agree the election was a lot closer than expected" i agree here, but i also agree that slim margins is the wrong wording, especially now. anyways, yep . . . on election night i was sighing pretty hard. the next four days i was rolling my eyes pretty hard at the world, until the news agencies finally called the election. ~a
[2021-03-03 19:13:43] - a: Maybe "slim margins" is the wrong wording, especially now, but Trump still got the second most votes ever and I think most would agree the election was a lot closer than expected and I know people who were freaking out on election night as a result. -Paul
[2021-03-03 19:12:36] - a: Sure, it looks more lopsided now after all the votes were counted, but this was just days after the election when there were moments on election night where it looked like Trump might actually pull out a win. Republicans still outperformed expectations in non-Presidential elections too despite later losing the Georgia Senate races. -Paul
[2021-03-03 19:09:27] - paul: "slim margins"? i'm sorry, he technically won the "Electoral College in a landslide" (306). sarcasm aside, it wasn't a landslide nor slim margins. ~a
[2021-03-03 19:07:46] - Daniel: The idea being that maybe, just maybe, some of the actions and rhetoric that had been animating the left over the past year or two might be turning people off. -Paul
prev <-> next