prev <-> next
[2021-05-18 16:52:07] - paul: haha, yeah. at least once per month, i think to myself: how do i short the usd? ~a
[2021-05-18 16:51:42] - paul/daniel: I'm baffled at what the NBA is doing for this years playoffs (play in games for 7-10 seeds). What's the point of it? - mig
[2021-05-18 16:50:16] - paul: this seems like a clear case where personal/property rights should trump states rights. if a state wants to be like "you're not allowed to get a tracheotomy, because i think they're gross". the federal government (scotus) needs to be like, "no, that's dumb. law banned". ~a
[2021-05-18 16:46:11] - daniel: omg! yeah, i guess zerg players do have this bit of "random info" in the early game that the other races don't get. here's a thought: *should* your map and minimap keep information like this? where none of your team's cameras were even observing the overloard? its an interesting "should the rules change" type of question. ~a
[2021-05-18 16:23:45] - Daniel: Nice! Should've gone for the gold. Probably less of a chance we would've seen it.
-Paul[2021-05-18 16:04:32] - I looked at the replay last night from Paul's map hack game. Mark's overlord flew by the hatchery and just BARELY got vision on it. I mean it was like 5 pixels of sight overlap or less. UGH. -Daniel
[2021-05-18 15:40:38] - a: https://twitter.com/BackpackerFI/status/1394673954611253252 Thought you might appreciate this. -Paul
[2021-05-18 15:35:37] - a: I don't think making it easier to put some restrictions on certain types of abortions is a massive change, but I also agree it's not a tiny and insignificant one either. -Paul
[2021-05-18 15:35:03] - a: "wouldn't it open the door for states to increase limits on first and second trimester abortions? " Not sure about first trimester, but definitely second. That's why I say moderate sized tweak. It doesn't outright ban all abortions (which would be one extreme of overturning Roe v Wade), but there's also a bunch of qualifiers on what it DOES do: (1) opens the door (2) second trimester. -Paul
[2021-05-18 15:00:38] - they sure as well don't want to have to retry all these cases if they don't have to . - mig
[2021-05-18 15:00:18] - a: I mean true, but there's not much incentive for states to apply this retroactively. - mig
[2021-05-18 14:39:02] - mig: "Louisiana is free to apply the Supreme Court’s 2020 ruling retroactively as a matter of state law" this seems useful for those not stuck in the federal courts. ~a
[2021-05-18 14:09:45] - paul: "more like a moderate sized tweak" how so? wouldn't it open the door for states to increase limits on first and second trimester abortions? ~a
[2021-05-18 13:36:27] - a: "does it matter if it's "officially" overturned or not" I guess it depends on what you mean. Obviously the outcome of the case will make a difference. I, personally, don't think it would be a significant blow to Roe v Wade (more like a moderate sized tweak). -Paul
[2021-05-18 12:23:13] - https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-of-the-united-states-courts-health-coronavirus-pandemic-government-and-politics-b4ebb69b7a604b7c7a595ac23b6e87b4 speaking of scotus, this is certainly disappointing. - mig
[2021-05-17 20:59:11] - yah ok. i guess its good we didn't place a bet, because i don't know if this counts as overturning roe v wade or not. it certainly damages it in a major way. fwiw, does it matter if it's "officially" overturned or not, out of the context of a bet? ~a
[2021-05-17 20:39:39] - a: https://aporter.org/msg/?action=prev&prev=161000#161165 -Paul
[2021-05-17 20:31:15] - paul: uhh, i don't know. i don't remember talking about it a few months ago sorry. i guess? seems to fly in the face of my plain reading of roe v wade, for sure. ~a
[2021-05-17 20:29:17] - a: Would you consider this "overturning Roe v Wade" if it passes, as we discussed a few months ago? -Paul
[2021-05-17 20:28:53] - I am pretty confident Roberts will vote to overturn since this seems like exactly the type of case where he puts aside his principles for pragmatism. Gorsuch seems like the wildcard to me. Unsure of his position on abortion especially as it relates to federalism. -Paul
[2021-05-17 20:23:13] - I think if it happens its another defeat for civility in politics and a win for McConnels gambit re Garland where its literally get away with whatever you can in order to achieve the ends. ("Ends justify the means"). -Daniel
[2021-05-17 20:21:35] - Paul: I think voting to uphold the MS is unlikely cause I think they know what a political shit show it would be. My guess is 5-4 with Roberts and Gorshuch joining liberal side?? Not super confident in that though. -Daniel
[2021-05-17 20:19:39] - god, i hope they overturn it, but i know they probably won't. ugh what a shit-show. ~a
[2021-05-17 19:55:10] - Wait, maybe that terminology was wrong since I don't know where I stand. I'm ready to hear people's predictions? -Paul
[2021-05-17 19:54:38] - https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-abortion-15-week-ban-5d066a9dc0030a4f8297711f341c9f5a I'm ready to take bets. Will the Supreme Court overturn or uphold the Mississippi law? -Paul
[2021-05-17 18:05:49] - a: Yeah, I can't help but eye-roll about how much people have politicized mask wearing. More humorously: I saw a meme that I appreciated which went something like: "As a libertarian, now that the government said we don't have to wear masks anymore I intend to wear them everywhere." -Paul
[2021-05-14 20:42:14] - yeah, i've heard this sentiment a bunch. its pretty dumb. but i think living in/near a city is probably just a different place when it comes to mask use. every time i go across the bridge into dc i notice a marked difference in mask usage. ~a
[2021-05-14 20:39:57] - https://twitter.com/davidhogg111/status/1393191013808754688 we've reached peak virtue signaling. - mig
[2021-05-14 19:44:58] - daniel: understood and i agree. my feelings on this are mostly idealistic. in some cases, i think judges hold lawyers/police to task on this (when treating each case with the same seriousness), but in many cases i'm sure they do not. ~a
[2021-05-14 19:39:18] - a: I mean I get the theory but I don't think you can tell anyone that and have it actually be true. Having a review process I think changes how people do their work. I get you maybe don't want that to be the case but I'm not sure that is going to happen
-Daniel[2021-05-14 19:38:09] - daniel: maybe my interpretation of "equal protection" is just wrong, i get it. for some reason our justice department won't indict a sitting president, for instance, like wtf. but that seems to be the point of it, right? link ~a
[2021-05-14 19:36:13] - "Maybe?" right yes, that's basically my argument. instead of saying maybe: i'd say "yes". if the fact that its political and going to make the news is the only difference between two cases, then you should NOT work on one or the other any harder. ~a
[2021-05-14 19:34:55] - Like I don't think people are trying to "rush" through regular cases but you are probably just more confident in your rote actions and willing to take some chance with a judge that is like 97% likely to work but maybe in Gaetz you want to get everything perfect to get to 99.9% when you get in front of judge. -Daniel
[2021-05-14 19:33:58] - I mean maybe kind of? But I think its pretty natural to go slower on a case that will 100% definitely be national news and covered by everyone vs the case that is not to make sure you don't make any mistakes / errors. Should that be the standard given to everyone? Maybe? But I'm also not sure that is practical given human nature. -Daniel
[2021-05-14 19:28:05] - daniel: worded differently again, if your political cases are moving slower than your non-political cases because they're more complicated, that's totally fine. but if not, maybe you're doing a "rush job" on your non-political cases? ~a
[2021-05-14 19:26:07] - daniel: shouldn't political cases move the same average speed as non political cases? or worded more correctly shouldn't the fact that they're political not affect the speed of the case? equal protection is literally part of our constitution. ~a
[2021-05-14 19:24:18] - political cases move slow to avoid f'ing up and to avoid looking like its politically motivated? Mostly just a guess though. -Daniel
[2021-05-14 19:02:01] - any guesses to why there have been no indictments of matt gaetz yet? like, i get it, investigations take time, but usually people like him get arrested eventually, right? ~a
[2021-05-14 18:17:23] - a: Fair. I had a tiny bit in it for various reasons (basically, an amount I am comfortable being in a hot wallet). -Paul
[2021-05-14 18:11:24] - cashapp is its considered custodial. that means they hold your keys, you do not. there are a *lot* of bitcoin wallets like this, so i don't see any real issues with it. but i typically don't hold medium-term or long-term funds in a wallet like that (using gbtc is my big exception to this rule). in other words, i'd still be putting the money into and taking the money out of cashapp each time, so it wouldn't decrease fees for me any. ~a
[2021-05-14 18:02:23] - a: https://www.crowdfundinsider.com/2021/03/173405-fintech-square-cash-app-users-now-able-to-send-instant-bitcoin-payments-for-free/ Next time we settle one of our bets in btc, maybe we should use CashApp? -Paul
[2021-05-14 15:38:01] - mig: We could try to make it harder? But yeah basically the same problem where we are dependent on just trusting the people who are going to make poor decisions and hope it doesn't screw us India style. -Daniel
[2021-05-14 15:25:51] - daniel: the problem is that requiring proof of vaccination would be rendered meaningless pretty quickly. These things are pretty easy to forge. - mig
[2021-05-14 15:08:46] - mig: i had heard that too, but i assume its low, because the CDC's current guidance takes that into account. right? ~a
[2021-05-14 15:07:59] - paul: vaccinated people can still technically spread it to the unvaccinated, but I thought the risk of that was relatively low. - mig
[2021-05-14 14:51:58] - Paul: Which is why I think we just hope we don't end up in the worst case I listed below. Or start to require proof of vaccination for things but I think thats been shown to be pretty unpopular. So hope that the dumb people don't screw over the country? Woo! -Daniel
[2021-05-14 14:51:12] - paul: i agree. ~a
[2021-05-14 14:48:16] - a: "naw, that goes against the cdc guidance so i think its dumb" Right, but the idea is that they'll be able to "pass" now since lots of people will be without masks so the stigma might be gone. -Paul
[2021-05-14 14:35:20] - paul: oh haha, i didn't even read that right sorry. i didn't see you said "de-masking for unvaccinated people". naw, that goes against the cdc guidance so i think its dumb. i agree that people will "take advantage", but that doesn't change how dumb it is. ~a
[2021-05-14 14:33:43] - " de-masking for unvaccinated people" - Best case nothing serious happens. Medium Case - they just kill themselves. Worst Case - New variants like India and we are all screwed again for another year or more. So its hard for me to know the odds of those things are? I think we mostly have to hope cause I'm pretty sure that if you are choosing not to get vaccinated you aren't going to choose to wear a mask. -Daniel
[2021-05-14 14:33:00] - paul: there will always be people yelling on both sides! when i hear the angry pro-mask people i roll my eyes. i haven't read the literature myself, but i trust fauci and the cdc. they say the vaccinated can demask entirely: if you don't have state laws / business rules that preclude it. i'll still wear a mask for the allergies outdoors
~a[2021-05-14 14:25:56] - Because vaccinated people can still spread it, there are variations, and people who aren't vaccinated might take advantage of this guidance and de-mask too. -Paul
[2021-05-14 14:25:25] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/14/politics/joe-biden-cdc-mask-guidance/index.html Where do people here stand on de-masking for unvaccinated people? From what I've heard, this is super late and the science has been known on it being acceptable for awhile, but Gurkie has heard the opposite from her circle about how this is a super dangerous move... -Paul
[2021-05-13 19:02:37] - That was what Cuomo did in his manipulation. Was trying to change how things were accounted to then change / skew the numbers. Maybe somewhere that kind of something happened in FL as well and maybe could be a story but also could just be banal where some committee had to decide what stuff counts as "covid related deaths" and what doesn't. -Daniel
[2021-05-13 19:01:01] - If people were actually going in and somehow editing database rows or whatever I would be surprised just cause it would seem the kind of conspiracy thats much harder to actually keep quiet. -Daniel
[2021-05-13 19:00:51] - And it went on to detail how such a cover-up would have had to involve so many levels of government and a collaboration between private entities like hospitals and various government agencies and it's a little hard to believe everybody involved would keep quiet about it. -Paul
[2021-05-13 19:00:12] - mig: Mostly agreed. I think its probably more the more normal manipulation of all data / stats that gov and politicians do. Like how are things accounted / do you present in total numbers or per capita etc etc. I mean I think if she labels that manipulation thats kind of true? But also not really a crazy huge deal. -Daniel
[2021-05-13 18:59:48] - There was a really good article I found lately (that I unfortunately can't find now) which was basically: "Why do so many people believe there's some cover-up in Florida COVID deaths based on a single person's account that has yet to be corroborated by anything else?" -Paul
[2021-05-13 18:53:28] - daniel: i think the main thing that moves the needle for me is that there's be (to my knowledge) no real follow up reporting on florida's alleged data manipulation, while there hasn't been any shortage of reporting critical of DeSantis's handling of the pandemic. If we are working from the premise that Jones allegations are true, that's rather strange. - mig
[2021-05-13 18:39:26] - mig: that's totally fair: moving of goalposts for sure. and i'll even go further and cop to being a jones-believer. not surprisingly, i didn't like that nationalreview story at all. they're like "she's made the whole thing up. 100% fabrication" and i don't believe them. maybe i missed the smoking gun? i did only skim the story, so i could have just missed it. ~a
[2021-05-13 18:33:45] - mig: I'd agree the credibility has gone down as well. I do think how you present data is important in big data situations though. I do also think the public is willing to believe that politicians are willing to fudge numbers for their own goals *cough* Cuomo *cough*. -Daniel\
[2021-05-13 18:30:18] - a: and sure, guns drawn is still excessive, but dismissing the fact that they didn't point guns at anyone feels like moving the goalposts. - mig
[2021-05-13 18:28:54] - a: I think Jones credibility, in my eyes, has gone way down since the initial reporting. - mig
[2021-05-13 17:54:15] - mig: do you believe the national review's side of the story? i know i don't. did they point a gun at her? no. but the national review seems to skip over the fact that they *did* have guns drawn. which is def not normal procedure for a warrant of this kind. ~a
[2021-05-13 17:27:07] - a: I found a hundred dollar bill once in middle school next to a street curb. I kept it. I think the window for giving it back to the original owner is basically a window measure in seconds. Past that its pretty much impossible to tell. -Daniel
[2021-05-13 17:18:00] - https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/05/rebekah-jones-the-covid-whistleblower-who-wasnt/ thought this was worth a read given how much attention this person initially got. - mig
[2021-05-13 17:12:06] - paul: interesting, yep. charity probably would be able to have "more fun" with it than some random stranger, that's a good point. ~a
[2021-05-13 17:11:38] - a: I suppose you could donate it to your charity of choice. That seems even better than some random stranger having fun with it. -paul
[2021-05-13 17:11:15] - a: Yeah, I guess reporting it to the cops is a possibility. If it starts to get into multiple hundreds that seems like something that almost anybody is going to go looking for. -Paul
[2021-05-13 17:08:50] - paul: understood, ok. it was $50 in this case, but i hear you. if it had been $100, i probably would have done the same thing. otoh, if it had been 10x$100, i then would feel obligated to tell the cops about it. ~a
[2021-05-13 17:08:14] - right. but in my mind, that's almost a 100% certainty. the situation i forsee, is will someone else have a great time with it, whereas i'll probably just (very indirectly) save it. ~a
[2021-05-13 17:06:54] - a: "is that bad?" It's bad only in that the original owner isn't getting it back. -Paul
[2021-05-13 17:06:32] - a: "what is a "large amount"?" Really hard question to answer. What is a large amount to somebody might not be for somebody else. I was thinking of something like >= $100, but even then.... what can be done? Somebody might come looking, but you can't just sit there and wait. -Paul
[2021-05-13 17:04:49] - "It was cash on the road by itself?" yes. ~a
[2021-05-13 17:04:12] - paul: "If it was a large amount" please define this. what is a "large amount"? it's funny you mention a rock, my coworker said rock too. "there is no way to get it back to the original owner" that correct. in this context there were no people around or even in the distance. "it seems far more likely some other person just takes it" is that bad? i don't that this is a problem: i'm not judging though, because i def took it. ~a
[2021-05-13 17:01:58] - a: I suppose you could try to put it under a rock somewhere there in case somebody comes back for it? But it seems far more likely some other person just takes it. -Paul
[2021-05-13 17:01:27] - a: Buy BTC? It was cash on the road by itself? I guess keep it. There's really no way to get it back to the original owner, right? If it was a large amount and/or in some sort of container then that might be another thing. -Paul
[2021-05-13 16:56:30] - i found some cash on the road today (in the roadway). what do you guys do in this situation? i'm just curious, though. ~a
[2021-05-12 15:17:16] - he does.
~a[2021-05-12 15:15:18] - Nice. Guess he has your vote? -Paul
[2021-05-12 14:15:28] - paul: i already told daniel, but one of the people who replied to that petition (he just said "yes") is on my primary ballot
~a[2021-05-11 14:40:44] - i'm party to a petition, if you want to sign. i'd appreciate any signatures. use a throwaway email address though, i have no idea how reputable change.org is about not spamming people. ~a
[2021-05-11 14:40:09] - mig: yeah. i'm looking into the arlington board position because the arlington board made this terrible, horrible, decision to let the parks and rec department shit on all of the cyclists in our area. i'm a one-issue voter, for sure
sadly, i think the arlington board decision is also a "fait accompli" too. ~a[2021-05-11 14:33:49] - a: well either way they have their nominee, though McAuliffe (ugh) seems fait acompli on the democrrat side. - mig
[2021-05-11 14:30:04] - mig: here's the exact wording: "the republican party did not call for any primary elections in arlington. there is not a republican primary in arlington on june 8, 2021." link ~a
[2021-05-11 14:25:15] - mig: the republicans in my voting district opted to not have a primary. ~a
[2021-05-11 14:23:15] - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/10/us/politics/glenn-youngkin-virginia-governor-republicans.html apparently the gop va gov primary already happened. - mig
[2021-05-11 14:20:33] - a: Especially when it involves foreign stocks. If I recall, Naspers did a weird thing where they spun off parts of their business to list on some European exchange and it took like over a week for things to sort out. -Paul
[2021-05-11 14:19:52] - a: Uh, as long as you have a reputable broker, I wouldn't worry too much. I have some stock splits and other things take longer than I expected to resolve properly. -Paul
[2021-05-11 14:13:54] - the top answer suggests that i'm maybe i'm just looking at the wrong prices (because there are multiple tickers with the same name), but i feel like they are as well. ~a
[2021-05-11 14:12:34] - hah i found this online. looks like i'm not the only one. ~a
[2021-05-11 14:11:55] - paul: so, i have this foreign stock (vwdry). i had 80 shares. it did a 5:1 stock split on friday. so i'd expect to have 400 shares. but my broker still says i have 80 shares. and, my broker says i've taken a loss on that position (probably related to not "seeing" the split). it's tuesday, wtf is up??? i imagine it'll eventually resolve itself, but in the mean-time, my portfolio looks like it took a huge hit. should i be worried? ~a
[2021-05-11 14:00:47] - yeah i agree. 2020 was a crazy year for me too. so many stocks did so insanely well, that its not surprising there was some price pullback on a few of the overperformers. its kinda why i generally like watering my weeds, or whatever you call it. ~a
[2021-05-11 13:54:38] - a: I think there's a decent chance this is the year Daniel finally wins one. I'm still 100% confident in my strategy long term, but 2020 was an insane year. So much performance pulled forward. Wouldn't at all be surprised to see a flat or even down 2021 for my portfolio. Even now, my portfolio is at the level I originally projected for 2028... -Paul
[2021-05-11 13:53:09] - daniel: 3rd place! đŸ¥‰ wooo. go, daniel, go. you've passed the top 25% and are now in the top 20%. i doubt it'll last until july 1st (the halfway mark), but its fun you got this far. ~a
[2021-05-11 13:09:08] - a: Sometimes. I'm pretty sure Virginia allows people to vote in either because I definitely have memories of voting in both Republican and Democratic primaries. I think it has always been for presidential nominees, but it's possible I have done so for other offices as well. I've only just recently become aware that there are a number of candidates running to replace Northam. -Paul
[2021-05-10 19:17:50] - paul: do you vote in the (republican or democratic) primaries? i'm trying to decide who will be the best governor/lieutenant-governor/attorney-general at the primary level. ~a
[2021-05-10 17:50:09] - it blows my mind that etfs generally have a LOWER expense ratio than their mutual fund counterparts. i have some guesses why that is, but it makes me sad that i mostly hold mutual funds vs etfs. ~a
[2021-05-10 17:35:32] - jeeze, is daniel going to be in 3rd place later today??? there's a small chance he'll be above talia. daniel, next year you should pick etfs so we don't have this problem. vemax -> vwo, veusx -> vgk, vpadx -> vpl, vlacx -> vv, vsmax -> vb. ~a
[2021-05-08 19:30:19] - yah gotcha. ~a
[2021-05-08 18:27:00] - a: I've been thinking about it, and I think the difference is when I think of a "standard", I am thinking of a universal standard. So it's not just that the format follows certain rules, but that it's rules that everybody else agrees on (this goes back to the xkcd thing). -Paul
[2021-05-07 17:18:32] - i'd argue, though, that milliseconds and seconds are both good.
~a[2021-05-07 17:18:08] - maybe . . . "a bad standard is the same thing as no standard"? i guess i could get more behind that kind of thinking. ~a
[2021-05-07 17:16:29] - sorry i meant lightning, not thunderbolt. even dumber that i forgot its name. ~a
[2021-05-07 17:15:30] - a standard can be good or bad. published or unpublished. open or proprietary. i don't like the thunderbolt standard, for instance, because you can only use it to charge (and connect) apple devices. which is super dumb. a super dumb standard. ~a
[2021-05-07 17:14:36] - a: There is a USB-C standard. As we mentioned before, you can basically plug anything USB-C into anything else USB-C and it works. Micro USB and USB Mini are different connectors. They share the same three letters, but the ports and cables are different. I would say there is a USB-C standard but not a USB standard. -Paul
[2021-05-07 17:14:00] - paul: good question: yes, there can be 10 or 50. usefulness of a standard decreases when the numbers of standards increase. everyone can have their own published standard if they want to all publish them. but again, usefulness drops drastically (exponentially?) as you increase the number of published standards. ~a
[2021-05-07 17:12:21] - a: Well, let me ask you this: Where does your permissiveness of standards stop? Can there be 10 standards? 50? Can every person on earth have their own "standard" of how to represent dates? At some point it doesn't make sense to call them standards anymore, right? -Paul
[2021-05-07 17:07:13] - paul: yes. you seem to be arguing that 2==0. that's our difference of opinion.
"two different definitions of the word 'standards'". yes, sure. because usb-C and usb-B exist, there are no standards for connecting your phone to power or to a computer? your grandparent test is reasonable, but it's not going to change how i use the word standard. grandparents are often luddites. they're gonna confuse ethernet with rj11. ~a[2021-05-07 17:04:45] - a: I propose the grandparent test: If there could be a situation where a grandparent buys the wrong item (an HD-DVD disc for a blu-ray player) then there is no practical standard.
-Paul[2021-05-07 17:03:18] - a: It almost seems like two different definitions of the word "standards". -Paul
[2021-05-07 17:02:25] - paul: yes. ~a
[2021-05-07 17:02:08] - a: I think I understand our differences of opinion. Is it like blu-ray vs hd-dvd? I'm saying that there was no high definition standard for discs, and you are saying there were two. Does that analogy work? -Paul
[2021-05-07 16:59:51] - a: "if the 4 months stretches to 12 months, will you still feel the same?" Probably? 12 months is still relatively short when it comes to investing IMHO. My original projection from late 2019 for the end of 2021 for the Freedom Portfolio is less than half of where it is right now, though. So even if the rest of 2021 goes horribly, I would still be doing pretty well if you look at a 2 year window. -Paul
[2021-05-07 16:59:22] - including metadata is fairly common. ~a
[2021-05-07 16:58:59] - paul: maybe we should include some metadata? a unit maybe? ~a
[2021-05-07 16:58:06] - "there is no standard for time since epoch" there strictly are. there are two of them. the whole "there are two standards, so there are zero standards" is an argument that doesn't seem to stand up to simple logic. ~a
[2021-05-07 16:55:58] - a: To use your analogy, it would be like if there were two .txt files and one could only be opened by notepad and the other could only be opened by wordpad. -Paul
[2021-05-07 16:55:16] - a: Yes, but there is no standard for time since epoch, right? It could be in seconds or milliseconds, and translating the wrong one means you get a date which is like 100+ years off. -Paul
[2021-05-07 15:59:25] - a: Its hard to take our challenge and broaden that out to your philosophy on how the stock market works and the best way to approach it. -Daniel
[2021-05-07 15:58:54] - a: In Paul's defense I don't really expect the stock market challenge to really sway his beliefs the way it didn't really sway mine when you guys did well for 3 years or whatever its been. -Daniel
[2021-05-07 15:24:04] - paul: your argument (in my opinion) boils down to, you have .txt files and .docx files . . . if i open a .docx file in notepad it doesn't work. because there are two standards. its like a complete misunderstanding of the scope of a specification. ~a
[2021-05-07 15:22:08] - paul: great explanation (and i agree, so far). if the 4 months stretches to 12 months, will you still feel the same? ~a
[2021-05-07 15:20:11] - paul: "when you have multiple standards for the same thing, you don't have a standard at all". huh? iso 8601 is literally a standard. you have it. ~a
[2021-05-07 15:19:53] - xkcd always wins. -Paul
[2021-05-07 15:18:59] - a: Daniel is crushing me because, after 3 years of growth stocks crushing the index funds, it makes sense for them to have a 3 month breather.
-Paul[2021-05-07 15:18:24] - a: Disagree. That's like saying there is a "standard" for dates. One which is yyyy-mm-dd and one which is mm-dd-yyyy. When you have multiple standards for the same thing, you don't have a standard at all. -Paul
[2021-05-07 15:14:06] - https://m.xkcd.com/927/ XKCD for everything. -Daniel
[2021-05-07 15:13:07] - paul: now tell us why daniel is crushing you.
~a[2021-05-07 15:11:24] - paul: "Because standards are nice". lol, we have two excellent standards. seconds since epoch and milliseconds since epoch. both of those standards are nice. it's like you're complaining about such a weird thing. there are millions of standards, you can't blame one standard because a second one exists. ~a
[2021-05-07 13:56:26] - a: After your call out last night, I checked the Fantasy Investing standings this morning. I love so much that the reason Talia is crushing me is because Noodles and Company is up 50%.
-Paul[2021-05-07 13:13:35] - a: "why not?" Because standards are nice. If somebody is sending me a time since epoch, it would be nice to know exactly how to convert to a datetime without having to eyeball just how many digits are there. And maybe this is embarrassing, but there are often so many numbers that I actually can't easily tell the difference between the two. -Paul
[2021-05-06 22:48:48] - paul: "I do not appreciate that both of those are standard-ish because those are very different numbers". why not? context is useful. also *generally* you can't easily confuse the two of them . . . anything greater than 1e10 is probably milliseconds. and anything less than 1e10 is probably seconds. but, still its nice to be explicit about which one you're using if its not obvious from context! ~a
[2021-05-06 17:43:29] - a: But, yeah, between time zones and daylight savings and am/pm and different date formats.... timestamps are a mess. -Paul
[2021-05-06 17:43:04] - a: I knew parts of that, but not the whole. I'm often surprised by how often the military seems to have good, common sense solutions to things. Yes, milliseconds (or seconds) since epoch is nice, but I do not appreciate that both of those are standard-ish because those are very different numbers! -Paul
[2021-05-06 17:33:42] - also, for what it's worth, i always prefer to use milliseconds (or seconds) since epoch, because so many stupid problems seem to melt away when i'm using that. ~a
[2021-05-06 17:31:29] - paul: (sorry if you already know this, but) the military actually does this pretty often. they call it "zulu" and there are: 1. no time zones. 2. no daylight savings. 3. no "am" or "pm". 4. if you use "julian day", which they often do, you don't have to worry as much about leap-year, or month rollover, or anything like that. ~a
[2021-05-06 13:14:49] - This is why we need to get rid of time zones and have it be the same time everyplace in the world. -Paul
[2021-05-05 21:59:15] - daniel: i remember or oracle handling timezones pretty badly. - mig
[2021-05-05 21:18:57] - have any of you guys ever looked at java's implementation for "Double.isFinite(value)"? its weeeird. "Math.abs(d) <= Double.MAX_VALUE" which . . . is apparently false for NaN (0./0) and infinity and -infinity. weird, right? ~a
[2021-05-05 21:00:24] - omg, i also hate time zones, yay! that they change at random times throughout the year, depending on your jurisdiction, is infuriating. and for some reason we put lawmakers in charge of deciding when the change?! that seems totally unfair. ~a
[2021-05-05 20:28:47] - -Daniel
[2021-05-05 20:28:45] - The program I'm working on needs to have some particular behavior happen on a certain date at 5pm eastern. We store the date in the database for when this behavior happens each month. Its been a pain in the ass to get all the right things to happen at the right time because stupid java dates keep deciding to be a different timezone. Its mostly our fault though this other guy coded it first and now he's out and I'm stuck with fixing it.
[2021-05-05 20:22:02] - Daniel: Oh, wow, I was just cursing them as well this morning. Why do you hate them? -Paul
[2021-05-05 20:16:23] - I would just like to share that I hate time zones. -Daniel
[2021-05-04 20:19:45] - paul/mig: totally jeese. bodycams for the win. if they weren't so much work to keep one on and charged at all times i'd totally wear one. ~a
[2021-05-04 20:18:37] - mig: Great example of why bodycams are a good idea for both protecting civilians from bad cops AND cops from bad civilians. -Paul
[2021-05-04 19:58:38] - https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1389345964658348032 umm, wow. - mig
[2021-05-04 18:59:07] - back to the microchips in vaccines conversation, heh. ~a
[2021-05-04 18:52:22] - a: Woo! This definitely does seem different than previous years. Maybe just more participants or tech sector not doing as well like you pointed out before. I don't know that Paul or I will ever switch sides on active v passive investing but at least I have some actual results (if only 5 months) that back me up (vs Paul's several years I guess of other challenges). -Daniel
[2021-05-04 18:38:40] - daniel: 5th place in the stock market challenge today. congrats! i know that your mutual funds are going to drop at the end of the day, but i think you still will be in 5th place after that because gurkie is in a distant 6th place. ~a
[2021-05-04 17:11:04] - a: Ah, got it. Yeah, I think that's what threw me for a loop for awhile. The initial story seemed to be: "Basecamp is saying talking politics at work is divisive, so it is no longer allowed" and that didn't sound like something that should've caused a huge amount of outrage. -Paul
[2021-05-04 15:55:47] - paul: yes, its the "simmering underlying tension" that i was referring to. (probably) i wouldn't quit over one really bad meeting. because i like my job and my company? i'd try to "fix" things from that meeting. but if things were already bad . . . if there was, like you say, simmering tension, then maybe a meeting would be all it would take? ~a
[2021-05-04 15:54:55] - Daniel: Right, I only mentioned it here because I saw it pop up on google news, although maybe that's because I saw it on twitter? Not sure how customized google news is. -Paul
[2021-05-04 15:54:24] - a: "1/3rd means things were already fucked, imo" Not sure what you mean? It sounds like 1/3rd left after the uproar. Apparently things were "fine" before that (other than I guess this simmering underlying tension)? -Paul
[2021-05-04 15:52:49] - paul: Never heard of it. I don't really follow twitter or anything though so unless / until twitter things cross over into other news sources I generally am unaware of them. -Daniel
[2021-05-04 15:49:55] - paul: 1/3rd means things were already fucked, imo. on the other hand, more than one third of 57 employees is "only" ~20 people. ~a
[2021-05-04 15:49:18] - The link I posted probably most fills in the gaps and provides additional details for me in terms of what actually happened. -Paul
[2021-05-04 15:48:23] - The initial reporting I heard was the employees were in an uproar over a new company policy prohibiting the discussion of politics at work / on internal work channels, which seemed like an odd thing to get so worked up about. I had also heard accusation of hypocrisy since apparently the founders and senior management were/are quite active on social media talking politics. -Paul
[2021-05-04 15:46:52] - https://www.theverge.com/2021/5/3/22418208/basecamp-all-hands-meeting-employee-resignations-buyouts-implosion Has anybody followed what has been going on with a company called Basecamp? Until a few days ago I had never heard of it, and still really don't think I fully understand what happened, but it was all the rage on twitter for a few days. -Paul
[2021-05-04 14:47:56] - i mean, i get the goal, but scientists *had* to predict the idea of having something traceable in their skin being a big no-no. our culture uses rfid (microchip) on dogs, but humans is probably a nonstarter for lots of obvious reasons. ~a
[2021-05-04 14:45:11] - ohhhhhhh i finally got an explanation for the microchips in vaccines thing. there was a (failed) attempt to put a traceable ink or die into vaccines, so you could see who had the vaccine: i.e. track people with an rfid-like technology inside vaccines. not actually as far-fetched of a conspiracy theory as these things go. ~a
[2021-05-04 11:50:37] - a: Heh, yeah, when there are people out there who think Bill Gates is slipping microchips in to the vaccines to track you for world domination.... saying that a lot of people should get the vaccine but that healthy young people don't need to is relatively mild by comparison. -Paul
[2021-05-04 03:11:40] - wow, tucker carlson is also leaps and bounds past rogen in the realm of hesitancy. maaaaybe i should lay off of rogan. ~a
[2021-05-04 01:42:26] - wtf, i just watched alex jones's anti-vax statements. it makes joe rogen seem uber-provax by comparison, jesus. ~a
[2021-05-03 21:53:22] - probably the first time ever that duckduckgo worked better than google! ~a
[2021-05-03 20:55:07] - so . . . i was looking for a trump tweet "NEVER, EVER THREATEN THE UNITED STATES AGAIN OR YOU WILL SUFFER CONSEQUENCES THE LIKES OF WHICH FEW THROUGHOUT HISTORY HAVE EVER SUFFERED BEFORE" when i google that i don't get many results. i would have at least expected a link to NPR. do i just suck at googling? or what? ~a
[2021-05-03 17:20:08] - i was in a bike race yesterday where they allowed ebikes. on the one hand, they were labeled and classified as such (they were in a different "division"). all of the ebike racers beat me, except one. i think its a good thing that ebikes have gained such popularity and normalcy, but it definitely wasn't something i expected to happen. ~a
[2021-05-03 16:45:04] - also long covid / multiorgan effects of covid. ~a
[2021-05-03 16:44:41] - a: And I assume he didn't make any of those qualifiers or else we would have heard about it.
-Paul[2021-05-03 16:44:11] - a: Uh, sure? I never listened to that initial episode, so I am hesitant to say for certain. I can agree that for the good of society we want healthy young people vaccinated and that speaking out against that is unhelpful and that even if he was "right" about it being rare for healthy young people to die from COVID, it's not helpful for establishing herd immunity and convincing the vaccine hesitant. -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:42:07] - a: Because these people listen to Rogan because they either like him or believe he is right, so leading with: "Rogan is an idiot and wrong about everything" is likely to just close their minds. -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:41:48] - ok, ok, i'm sold. for my own sanity, though, can you confirm that joe rogan said none of these things, and made none of these arguments? can we (just the two of us) agree that rogan made zero good points? ~a
[2021-05-03 16:41:18] - And by "our", I mean like the media and everybody. -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:41:03] - a: It's not about Rogan here, I'm saying OUR response to Rogan. Instead of trying to cancel that episode or label him an anti-vaxxer or go on and on about how wrong he is, I think the better response is: "Rogan made some good points, but here is what he missed:" -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:39:58] - a: "both are wrong" Yes, but I don't think focusing on how people are wrong is the best way to change minds, especially if you go about associating them with more extremist elements. Like, if somebody wasn't full on KKK but maybe had hesitation about their kid marrying a black person, I don't think I would lead with a lecture about how the KKK was evil and lynching people is bad. -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:37:39] - *forced ~a
[2021-05-03 16:37:27] - even when force to be given the chance to make that argument, he still did not. ~a
[2021-05-03 16:36:41] - paul: ok, that's fair. and honestly if that was your argument from the beginning, i would have been 100% behind you. but rogan wasn't EVER making any argument that was even resembling that one. ~a
[2021-05-03 16:36:37] - a: And from there, you can explain things like herd immunity. I think going immediately for: "You are stupid and all your concerns are stupid and you are an anti-vaxxer" is NOT going to get good results. -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:35:50] - a: "whyyyyy" Because, if your goal is to change minds (which I think should be the goal here), then I think it is FAR more effective to approach somebody who is vaccine hesitant by trying to make some common ground and trying to understand their POV to gain their trust. Acknowledging that most healthy young people don't die from COVID seems like a good place to make common ground. -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:33:49] - a: "why only focus on death?" Because that's probably what 99% of people who are vaccine hesitant think about. Heck, it's probably what like 90% of everybody thinks about. I agree that could be a useful thing to point out, though. Are young people as susceptible to those long term effects? -Paul
[2021-05-03 16:16:10] - you're trying to put these people into two distinct groups and I see no need. theyre both wrong. one group thinks vaccines cause autism and the other group think vaccines aren't necessary for young people. both are wrong. ~a
[2021-05-03 15:54:59] - paul: if someone says "healthy people don't need the vaccine", whether you want to call that "antivaxxer" or not i guess i don't care: it's simply ignorant. ~a
[2021-05-03 15:54:00] - paul: "it's important to differentiate between the 'selfish' case and the 'helping society' case" whyyyyy. "because it seems like too many people are being lazy and just throwing around terms like 'anti-vaxxer' and whatnot" that's your "because"? that "because" makes no sense with the first part. ~a
[2021-05-03 15:52:47] - paul: does a young healthy person have nothing to fear from covid? like, what about long covid? or multiorgan effects of covid-19? another link? ~a
[2021-05-03 15:52:19] - its not about dying, paul. there are soooo many problems with covid. why only focus on death? ~a
[2021-05-03 15:51:50] - ok. i wanted to reply to your first message because i agreed with it. i disagreed with every message after it. ~a
[2021-05-03 15:51:37] - It's why I think it was really bad for the CDC to have lied about masks early on. -Paul
[2021-05-03 15:51:22] - a: Because I think people are going to think, "Why should I trust the CDC and Fauci.... they are lying to me about how deadly COVID is. I know it's like a one in a million chance for me to die from it. It's just a bad flu. Maybe there IS a microchip in there..." It can lead to a slippery slope of disinformation. -Paul
[2021-05-03 15:50:21] - a: I know you disagree, but I think it's important to differentiate between the "selfish" case and the "helping society" case, because it seems like too many people are being lazy and just throwing around terms like "anti-vaxxer" and whatnot. When we refuse to acknowledge things like, "Yes, healthy young people are pretty damn safe from dying from COVID" I think we help drive people away from trusting authority. -Paul
[2021-05-03 15:48:28] - a: I thought about this more over the weekend. I think the best response is to acknowledge that yes, a young healthy person probably doesn't have much to fear from COVID.... but to also explain in a measured, reasonable, and non-emotional way that it is important to get vaccinated to protect others. -Paul
[2021-05-03 14:31:16] - paul/mig: i heard npr talking about joe rogan on friday regarding vaccines. in my opinion they didn't read too much into what joe rogan said (they never said "anti-vaccine" or anything like that) and they only played a blurb of him talking. i didn't think it was out of context, but i'm probably super-biased (as you know i think joe rogan made a damaging move here, and hasn't undone that mistake). ~a
[2021-04-30 18:22:08] - but, regardless i know we won't get 100% buy-in
i'm just hoping for, like, 80% buy-in. joe rogan isn't helping. ~a[2021-04-30 18:19:55] - paul: no idea, sorry. ~a
[2021-04-30 18:19:37] - a: Okay, got it. Assuming we get 100% buy-in with the vaccine, do you know if there is the possibility we could eradicate COVID? Or does it mutate enough that we're probably stuck with it for the foreseeable future like the flu and will just get yearly shots to keep it in check? -Paul
[2021-04-30 18:18:22] - Mine was also pfizer. Yeah, I've heard of worse reactions (like Daniel's), so I count myself lucky it was only one day of discomfort. -Paul
[2021-04-30 18:17:48] - paul: "won't work" is like a continuum. ~a
[2021-04-30 18:17:42] - a: "did it get worse?" Yeah, the next day was rough. Flu-like symptoms. Fatigue. Weakness. Maybe a slight fever? Headache. I'm mostly recovered today, though, so not too bad. -Paul
[2021-04-30 18:17:21] - paul: 1. the herd immunity thing you already said. yes, you hit the nail on the head. (2. afaik, not an issue for this vaccine, but some people aren't able to get some vaccines because of immunity issues). ~a
[2021-04-30 18:16:15] - a: "the vaccine won't work if healthy people don't get it." Wait, you'll have to explain this to me like I'm an idiot. Why won't the vaccine work if healthy people don't get it? I understand how we can't achieve herd immunity without it, but the vaccine should still help the vulnerable populations, right? -Paul
[2021-04-30 18:01:08] - a: Mine was pfizer. -Daniel
[2021-04-30 17:59:19] - daniel/paul: pfizer-biontech or moderna? sorry if you've already told me, i have a short memory. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:58:10] - a: My 2nd shot didn't kick in until almost 24 hours. I got stomach cramps that lasted almost a week and sucked (apparently not very common) and the regular flu like chills / fatigue/ headache stuff for two days. -Daniel
[2021-04-30 17:54:30] - paul: "the second one sucked" what happened? i know you mentioned your second vaccine when we played sc2 on wednesday. did it get worse? i got mine yesterday. it's been ~23 hours and i'm fine so far. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:50:19] - mig: in fact, its often argued that ONLY healthy people should be getting vaccines (worded more accurately though, some people can't get some vaccines). ~a
[2021-04-30 17:49:21] - mig: "Saying young people don't necessarily need the vaccine isn't 'anti-vaccine.'" i disagree strongly with this. the vaccine won't work if healthy people don't get it. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:48:29] - "purely selfishly" you'd have to define this better for me to answer. i'll still probably say "no" though. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:47:34] - Like, it was kind of scary reading the last few paragraphs of the article I posted where they were talking about content removal and the process to go about it with the implication that maybe he should have some episodes pulled down for what he said. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:46:30] - as an aside, I think it's a little unfair of CNN to label Rogan's comments "anti-vaccine". Saying young people don't necessarily need the vaccine isn't "anti-vaccine." Saying don't take it or your kids will get autisim is "anti-vaccine." - mig
[2021-04-30 17:46:27] - a: Anyway, I'm getting all turned around now. I think we 99% agree. I think even healthy young people should get vaccinated for the good of all. I'm mostly healthy and kinda young and I got my two shots even though the second one sucked. I just worry about this sense out there that he needs to be canceled for his comments. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:44:48] - a: Maybe? I actually never listened to his first comments so I have no idea what he said. Also, I don't think I was ever trying to speak for Rogan, my original comment was: "Can't Rogan and Fauci both be right? If you are thinking purely selfishly, then a young healthy person probably doesn't need to get the vaccine." -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:40:21] - paul: you're putting words into his mouth though. he didn't make that argument. and that argument is specious regardless. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:39:25] - mig: right, not literally. criminal in the colloquial sense. ethically bad? ~a
[2021-04-30 17:38:50] - a: I'll push back a little on that. Having a bad opinion is nowhere near being criminal. - mig
[2021-04-30 17:38:49] - a: "a difference without a distinction maybe?" I don't think so. It can both be true that healthy young people have so little to fear from dying of COVID that getting a vaccine for them isn't super important AND that for the good of society that it is important for everybody to get vaccinated. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:37:54] - paul: right. i agree jon was bad about that. but the difference is that jon wouldn't tell people to not take the vaccine. that's borderline criminal (i don't mean literally, but, like ethically?). maybe if he added some qualifications, i could see an argument being made (like, even if he had just said, "wait for the full authorization" or something, sure), but he didn't because he's (apparently) a moron. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:36:50] - a: I don't know if Rogan has a similar schtick. I'm guessing he might? I will say Jon Stewart does seem slightly closer to a journalist than Rogan seems to a doctor.
-Paul[2021-04-30 17:35:19] - a: "he spent 99% of the time telling people that they shouldn't listen to him because he's a joker/comedian. that's a total cop out." I think I mostly agree? I honestly am not too familiar with his work. What irked me about Jon Stewart when he did that is that he was happy to act as an important journalist when it suited him and happy to fall back on being a comedian when he was challenged. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:31:54] - a: I would argue the more dangerous government is when Congress is controlled by the same party as the President. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:31:09] - a: I highly doubt Clinton would've reigned in federal spending had he not had a hostile Republican congress basically forcing him to, and Obama likewise had to deal with a congress of the opposite party for much of his terms, likely blunting most of his big spending plans. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:29:56] - a: I have no desire to defend Republicans (they're awful when it comes to the debt), but I will point out that it is far more nuanced than "R bad, D good". As you note, those economic crashes have usually been unrelated, and looking at things solely through a Presidential lens is looking at only half the story. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:28:20] - a: I'm probably somewhere between 50 and 100% worried. I mean, there's not much I can do about it other than try to keep as little of my net worth as possible in cash and instead seek out things like stocks, real estate (and maybe bitcoin?) that might hold up in case of inflation. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:26:23] - paul: otoh, jon would *never* tell people that they shouldn't take the vaccine. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:26:02] - paul: i watched the joe video response posted to youtube. "But that's a different argument. That's a different conversation" he didn't address how they're a different argument or different conversation. a difference without a distinction maybe? he spent 99% of the time telling people that they shouldn't listen to him because he's a joker/comedian. that's a total cop out. i hated when jon stewart said that same shit. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:23:25] - ok, NOW i'll make it political. this pattern has happened three times now! a republican (reagan+bush sr, bush jr, trump) promises to decrease the debt but *actually* just decreases taxes and balloons the debt, (unrelated!) the economies crash, democrat comes in (clinton, obama, biden) and rights the ship. lots of hand-waving and lack-of-nuance, but its a pattern we've all watched play out. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:14:46] - paul: i sort of buy it. sure, we can undo the mistakes of 2020 in (say) 2022 by lowering the change in m2. and since the fed (which i ToTaLly trust, btw) is non political and outside the scope of our elections, it might actually happen. it's why i'm not 100%-worried, just like 50%-worried. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:11:12] - a: So if, in retrospect, 2008 didn't turn out to be that bad, why can't it happen again? I mean, I don't buy it, but I have to admit that I've been wrong so far so I don't have the best track record here. -Paul
[2021-04-30 17:10:54] - paul: yes. ~a
[2021-04-30 17:10:25] - a: Well, using your logic, don't we have another year to make up for it with a year of low M2 change then? Don't get me wrong, 2020 makes 2008 look like chump change in a number of ways, but I guess I'm just a little gun-shy since at the time, 2008 seemed unprecedented just like 2020 feels now. -Paul
[2021-04-30 16:52:16] - paul: understood, sure. and i agree. but 2008 doesn't really concern me. most of the loans made in 2008 were paid back with interest. the m2 jump in 2008 was mostly undone by a very low amount of m2 change in 2010 (i'm not trying to make this political, that's honestly when it happened). the m2 jump in 2020 is much bigger and hasn't been undone by a slowing in m2 change: yet. ~a
[2021-04-30 16:47:00] - a: Well, I guess the simple answer is that I expected lots of inflation which doesn't SEEM to have shown up (although I know there is some dispute about that). In a more general sense, I didn't expect that "we" (the fed and the gov) could take those actions in 2008 and have... the economy and USD hum along just fine as if nothing happened. -Paul
[2021-04-30 16:36:31] - paul: "I've so far been pretty wrong" i agree with everything you said except this part. what have you been wrong about? did you specifically predict inflation would increase by a certain date? (or some such thing?) ~a
[2021-04-30 16:34:04] - a: You'll get no debate from me. At the same time, I've been thinking the federal reserve / federal government has been ridiculously irresponsible ever since 2008 and I've so far been pretty wrong so I guess maybe we're all living in a crazy world where things don't make sense? -Paul
[2021-04-30 16:16:40] - there were ~4 trillion dollars printed by the united states central bank last year. that's more than the last five years *combined*. it was also lent out at an interest rate of ~0%/y. anybody who thinks that's "ok", please try to explain to me why that's "ok", because i don't get it? if the government wants to give out 25% more usd in a single year than currently exist, at 0%/y, why would we continue to value usd when alternatives exist? ~a
[2021-04-30 15:03:58] - i wasn't serious. sorry, my bad grammar ruined my joke, oh well. ~a
[2021-04-30 15:03:12] - a: Also, is it "an" unanimous? For some reason that sounds funny to me. -Paul
[2021-04-30 15:02:45] - a: scouts or SCOTUS? And which ruling? I don't see one for today? -Paul
[2021-04-30 14:57:54] - paul: the scouts ruling today is an unanimous ruling: they're putting it all in dog money. ~a
[2021-04-30 14:29:49] - mig: Agreed on the lacking of accrued legal experience, but I think I would take that trade-off of accrued legal experience for real-world experience... especially if it was just one justice. Like, we can have the other 8 be old people who know the law, but let's have 1 person be in the room to explain why Dogecoin is a thing. -Paul
[2021-04-30 14:28:26] - mig: 50+ is still old. I mean, I'm 40 and I feel almost out of touch with current pop culture. I can't imagine trying to understand things like NFTs and TikTok and Snap well enough to make sweeping judgements affecting them as a 50+ year old. -Paul
[2021-04-30 14:25:49] - someone who is 30 probably wouldn't have accrued the legal experience in most people's mind to be qualified as a SC justice. - mig
[2021-04-30 14:23:31] - paul: usually they do try to aim young for SCOTUS candidates these days (in relative terms), due to the fact it's a life long appointment. Kavvanaugh is 53, gorsuch is 56, and baret is 49. - mig
[2021-04-30 13:57:30] - There's often a lot of talk about diversity in SCOTUS. Here's a thought: Why not aim to have one young justice? No matter how smart and educated they are, 60+ year olds are almost always going to be at least a little out of touch with new stuff. I imagine there's probably a bigger difference of opinion between a 30 year old white male and 66 year old white male as there is between a 66 year old white male and 66 year old female latina. -Paul
[2021-04-30 13:18:15] - https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/29/arts/disaster-girl-meme-nft.html Not a NYT subscriber so I can't actually read the article, but I feel confident saying that this is one of the best use cases for NFTs that I've heard of.
-Paul[2021-04-30 13:15:47] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/29/media/joe-rogan-clarifies-vaccine-comments/index.html Obviously nobody has to believe him that it is what he intended, but Rogan basically said what I did: ""Their argument was you need it for other people," Rogan continued. "But that's a different argument. That's a different conversation."" -Paul
[2021-04-30 13:12:22] - a: Yeah, I'm in awe of his ability to spin a verse... if that's a saying. -Paul
[2021-04-30 05:36:20] - paul: lol i love remy. he made the arlington rap. 12 years ago. he's pretty funny. we're putting it all in dog money. ~a
[2021-04-30 05:31:43] - hmmm, maybe roger stone is going to jail after all. jeeze, this story has "signal" *and* "bitcoin"? this feels so much like fiction. or, something that would happen to me in a nightmare. ~a
[2021-04-29 17:36:18] - https://twitter.com/reason/status/1387819402578604033 Putting it all in dog money! -Paul
prev <-> next