prev <-> next
[2021-06-29 18:07:15] - paul: i hardly ever ride in the shoulder: its usually too small or too full of obstacles. BUT it does depend completely on the road (speed of cars and size and state of shoulder). can you give some specific examples of roads where you notice a lot of people riding on the shoulder in your area? ~a
[2021-06-29 18:03:22] - paul: the "appropriate behavior" has changed. i will often give people the "pass me" hand signal if i feel like they're being too cautious. but often, people have the opposite problem, where they aren't being cautious enough. i know this doesn't represent you, but people pass too close at *too high* of a speed: at least 1 out of every 25 cars. i feel, like in arlington, its been getting better, or i've been getting more used to it? ~a
[2021-06-29 17:48:35] - a: I think when it happens, the cyclists are usually on the shoulder? And so I feel like it's okay to drive in the lane next to them? Although if there is room I like to switch lanes just to get further away from those icky cyclists...
-Paul[2021-06-29 17:47:26] - a: Hmmmm, I'm trying to think. Nearly all of my car to bike interactions seem to happen on one lane roads where I never know the appropriate behavior. I don't recall a ton of interactions on two lane roads. -Paul
[2021-06-29 16:13:29] - paul: i just retweeted this but i don't really know how twitter works. and i wanted to discuss it with you off of twitter
you must change lanes, and two abreast, laws change on thursday. i know that in virginia drivers almost NEVER do this, and i doubt it'll change right away. this is a very good law change for safety, but i'm afraid nobody will actually do this. ~a[2021-06-28 20:14:09] - a: "you are a person who uses your car to get to 99-100% of your destinations, right?" Yeah, pretty much, unless I am flying somewhere.
-Paul[2021-06-28 20:10:50] - it also suggested that maybe sometimes things aren't as bad as they seem just looking around me. anecdotes be damned. ~a
[2021-06-28 20:09:31] - "Does that make your eyes roll less?" actually yes! on the other hand, you are a person who uses your car to get to 99-100% of your destinations, right? did you know this related, and surprising fact . . . in arlington, more than half of commuters get to work without a car? (pre-pandemic) that surprised me. ~a
[2021-06-28 19:54:26] - It sounds like it's largely been pretty uncontroversial, and when it HAS been notably in the news, it's often been to the disappointment of conservatives (ie, "defending" Obamacare again). -Paul
[2021-06-28 19:53:42] - https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/28/supreme-court-refuses-to-hear-transgender-bathroom-case-a-win-for-student-gavin-grimm.html Not sure how to say this without sounding snarky, but is there any example of this "conservative" SCOTUS being some disaster in terms of overturning abortion / transgender rights / etc? -Paul
[2021-06-28 19:52:52] - a: Sure, I understand what you're saying. I'm more apt to complain about pedestrians when I am on foot than when I am driving. Does that make your eyes roll less?
-Paul[2021-06-28 17:53:38] - paul: i dropped "i'm not sure that" from your quote accidentally, sorry. hopefully you know what i mean here. ~a
[2021-06-28 17:53:07] - paul: "just because an illegal activity is unlikely to result in serious harm, it means the law can be ignored" on this we agree 100%. which is why i usually follow the law. but when i see someone else on foot not following the law, and i see a person in a car whine, the irony of their whining makes my eyes roll so hard in my head that it hurts my . . . i don't know, eye sockets??? ~a
[2021-06-28 17:51:36] - paul: "it's not just a matter of danger, it's also a matter of inconvenience" i think this might be at the heart of our disagreement. its a matter of danger, and a matter of inconvenience. but the matter of danger is LARGE (usually measured in lives and many dollars) and the matter of inconvenience is SMALL (usually measured in zero lives and small amounts of dollars). ~a
[2021-06-28 17:12:08] - a: Sure, but it's not just a matter of danger, it's also a matter of inconvenience. I'm not sure that just because an illegal activity is unlikely to result in serious harm, it means the law can be ignored. -Paul
[2021-06-28 17:05:58] - paul: i forgot to mention that the front hood + bumper of most cars aren't designed to hit a person at ~50mph: they don't flex like you'd want them to. when humans hit each-other at walking speeds they go "oops, i'm sorry", and usually do no damage to their fleshy bodies. ~a
[2021-06-28 17:01:37] - paul: i.e. if you arrive when the light is green, you have to wait an extra full cycle of all of the lights. ~a
[2021-06-28 17:00:49] - paul: it also doesn't help that most pedestrian crossings on traffic lights in fairfax county don't go white when the light is green passing in the same direction. ~a
[2021-06-28 16:56:06] - paul: i'm usually putting myself in danger and usually not someone else. when you're in a car its exactly the opposite: you're usually putting someone else in danger and not yourself (in suburban and urban areas, anyways). ~a
[2021-06-28 16:55:36] - paul: people behave differently when they're on residential roads. why is that? the laws aren't (hugely) different. its because the equation is different! the chance of hurting someone is different. the chance of killing someone's kid or someones dog has changed. i feel this way about the red-hand. the laws are the same, but the penalty has changed. ~a
[2021-06-28 16:52:31] - paul: ah. i'm totally fine with that inconsistency: pedestrians are usually like 80kg moving with about 40 J of energy. SUVs are often 2500kg moving with about 780,000 J of energy (though usually less passing through a traffic light, across a crosswalk, but not always). that being said, i usually wait at the red-hand when on my bike or on foot . . . but, definitely not always. my 40ish J of energy is fundamentally different. ~a
[2021-06-28 16:48:41] - a: Everybody always used to make fun of me for actually following pedestrian traffic signals (ie, not crossing if the red hand was up) and I pointed out that those same people aren't as cavalier about cars ignoring traffic signals when it suits them. -Paul
[2021-06-28 16:44:36] - paul: i forget. all i remember is bumping them with your bumper at 1mph. hopefully that's not the take you're referring to? if so, i'll remind you of my 5 lb sledge hammer take. ~a
[2021-06-28 16:42:29] - a: You know my take on pedestrians walking despite "do not walk" signs vs cars running red lights.
-Paul[2021-06-28 16:35:58] - daniel: i know you're partly tongue-in-cheek, but sensationalizing the news isn't always good for society. ~a
[2021-06-28 16:34:33] - paul: . . . people on bikes have a similar problem: people are like "look at this guy on a bike acting like a dick". and they're ignoring 100-fold more cars around them every day acting like dicks. they're all like "i see cyclists breaking this law", and ignore "i see cars breaking this other law, but like, WAY more often, and with a MUCH higher potential for problems" ~a
[2021-06-28 16:33:56] - paul: agreed. but yeah, i don't forget that. ~a
[2021-06-28 16:32:33] - People having car accidents is old news. Computers having car accidents is new news! -Daniel
[2021-06-28 16:32:01] - a: At the same time, I can't tell you how many people I've spoken to lately where it's been awhile (ie, meeting up with family I haven't seen in years) and I expect them to ask me about investing or something and instead it's all crypto and meme stocks. I'm certainly on high alert for bubbles. -Paul
[2021-06-28 16:30:27] - a: Yeah, it reminds me sometimes of how every Tesla accident is like a big news story, and everybody forgets there's like a thousand accidents involving ICE cars every day. -Paul
[2021-06-28 16:25:26] - on the other hand . . . if you hold 1.5b in bitcoin, your "share" of that output is fairly substantive. i wonder if large holders of gold (to the tune of billions) have any feelings of sodium cyanide and mercury in our waterways and food supplies. ~a
[2021-06-25 18:26:10] - paul: hmmm, i found this in another article. about 50% of all bitcoin mining is in sichuan (as of 2016). that's super-meaningful to me. never mind . . . musk is an idiot, (until the recent chinese ban) bitcoin mining has been super clean! probably *way* below the average 0.4kg co2e / kWh. ~a
[2021-06-25 18:22:37] - a: https://fortune.com/2021/05/25/bitcoin-mining-china-pledge-btc-environment-crack-down/ No numbers, but the paywall is further down.
-Paul[2021-06-25 18:17:16] - i don't see any numbers, only the paywall
~a[2021-06-25 18:16:31] - a: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-18/hydro-rich-chinese-city-is-said-to-clamp-down-on-crypto-mining Here's another. -Paul
[2021-06-25 18:16:03] - a: https://fortune.com/2021/06/22/china-bitcoin-mining-ban-sichuan-hydropower/ There's a few with promising headlines, but they are behind paywalls. -Paul
[2021-06-25 18:12:15] - paul: i don't know. do you have any numbers on that? i only have looked at co2e per kWh for a bunch of countries and china is higher than the worldwide average (worldwide average is ~0.4kg co2e / kWh as of a few years ago. probably closer to ~0.5 if you count transmission losses). ~a
[2021-06-25 18:06:54] - a: "china has particularly dirty electricity" But don't they have a ton of hydroelectric power which is often used to power bitcoin mining since there is often excess? -Paul
[2021-06-25 17:59:52] - paul: also, related to "surprised China has decided to take the steps of banning bitcoin mining": china has particularly dirty electricity. they put out more co2e per kWh than most countries. ~a
[2021-06-25 17:45:47] - paul: related to elon musk and bitcoin: i found this graph today. carbon output of legacy finance won't be changing much in the future. but carbon output of electricity seems to be going down a lot. this is good for bitcoin, but the electricity draw of bitcoin mining is by no-means constant. it will (probably) go up if the price goes up. ~a
[2021-06-25 13:07:48] - https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/25/elon-musk-jack-dorsey-discuss-bitcoin.html Related, Jack and Elon were talking about bitcoin over twitter. -Paul
[2021-06-24 16:58:21] - a: https://www.thebword.org/c/the-b-word -Paul
[2021-06-24 16:29:45] - So... yeah, it kind of goes hand-in-hand with what Miguel was bringing up before that it's hard to reconcile the rhetoric from Democrats sometimes (kids in cages, defund the police, Jim eagle, etc) with their actions. -Paul
[2021-06-24 16:28:32] - a: In that Biden has been one of the more "law-and-order" Democrats (his crime bill was his shining accomplishment for a while) and his VP was a prosecutor. It looks like a... weird-ish Adams is going to win the Democratic primary for NYC mayor largely on a tough on crime platform. -Paul
[2021-06-24 16:27:12] - a: Heh (to the reddit image, not the dark discussion about suicide). I just recently started following Glenn Greenwald on twitter and he's been going on about how a lot of the Democratic Party has been moving towards a "fund the police" agenda recently. -Paul
[2021-06-24 16:24:44] - "democrats do a shitty job at moving the country forwards while republicans do an amazing job at moving the country backwards" (from reddit with this image)
~a[2021-06-24 16:23:40] - paul: i did think that was a funny thing for him to say, at the time. but now, i'm just sad. i had a very close friend kill himself four years ago, and its . . . heartbreaking? unlike epstein, i belive mcafee probably killed himself. but yeah, it is kinda weird he specifically said he wouldn't kill himself. ~a
[2021-06-24 14:08:13] - https://twitter.com/officialmcafee/status/887024683379544065 Also, if it was suicide, couldn't he have at least carried through with this first? -Paul
[2021-06-24 14:06:35] - https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/mining-bitcoin-could-get-easier-after-china-crypto-crackdown.html I'm a little surprised China has decided to take the steps of banning bitcoin mining instead of banning transacting in bitcoin. I guess because the latter is harder to regulate? -Paul
[2021-06-24 00:04:00] - a: And apparently a few years ago he tweeted that he was collecting incriminating evidence against powerful people and that if he ever "Epsteined" and "killed himself" in jail, then it wasn't true and it's a cover-up, so cue the conspiracy theories. -Paul
[2021-06-23 23:03:14] - we made it to the top of r/catastrophic failure, yikes. i pass under this bridge very often (i'm sure xpovos does to on occasion). its on 295 and i go under it to get to the eastern shore or anywhere north of the city. if you drive on 295 you probably recognize it. ~a
[2021-06-23 23:01:34] - jesus. that's surprising and very sad. i actually didn't know he was even in jail. ~a
[2021-06-23 20:39:01] - https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/23/john-mcafee-found-dead-after-spanish-court-oks-extradition-for-tax-crimes-.html Speaking of the LP and fringe people involved in the party that were perhaps embarrassments... -Paul
[2021-06-23 17:35:16] - a: Most of it is news to me too. I knew of the simmering tension between the Mises caucus and the more... mainstream? wing of the LP, and I had heard something crazy was going on in NH, but I didn't realize the chair had stepped down or anything until today. -Paul
[2021-06-23 17:16:08] - i think even i don't write off the republican party based off a few wackos. but, instead, i write them off for their stated mission. i don't do that for the libertarian party. but, i also haven't been following the coup at all. everything in your link is news to me. ~a
[2021-06-23 17:15:02] - a: Point taken about the parting shots from the current chair, but it's almost like a coup in the party so it makes some sense that the departing administration isn't very warm and cuddly towards the incoming one. For the record, I disagree with the departing chair that the Mises caucus is just completely full of racists and bigots. -Paul
[2021-06-23 17:13:50] - a: It's less about individuals getting a pass and the entire party getting a pass. I don't think most people write off entire parties based off a few wackos (although, I suppose maybe you would for the Republican Party.
) -Paul[2021-06-23 16:42:45] - paul: again, that might not be fair: a toxic culture probably also exists in the democratic and republican party. but, you also rarely hear about the national chairs discussing these things in public while resigning. ~a
[2021-06-23 16:29:30] - paul: two problems. 1. the other parties don't get a pass. when there's a racist motherfucker in the republican party, they don't get a pass. (maybe the reporting/determination isn't fair or balanced, but there are no "pass"es) 2. you're not talking about a few members of the party. you're talking about a "toxic culture" according to the chair of the national lp. ~a
[2021-06-23 16:14:52] - As the former chairman of the LP once said when a Republican pointed out that a guy did a strip-tease on stage at their convention one year (paraphrasing): Our embarrassment was quickly ushered off-stage and kicked out of the party. Yours became your presidential nominee. -paul
[2021-06-23 16:13:25] - a: I don't at all deny that there are racists and bigots in the LP. Any sufficiently large group of people is going to have their weirdos and people with fringe beliefs. What irks me is that people use that to uniformly dismiss the whole LP while the major parties get a pass. -Paul
[2021-06-23 15:39:51] - paul: one of the few libertarians in office said about his own party: "no tent is big enough to hold racists and people of color, transphobes and trans people, bigots and their victims". seems pretty interesting to * anybody * who thinks the libertarian party might have an image problem . . . ~a
[2021-06-23 15:39:24] - nobody thinks that biden's win is meaningful. ~a
[2021-06-23 15:38:48] - Although one could argue that the Democratic Party has been largely unaffected, if you assume Biden's win is meaningful. -Paul
[2021-06-23 15:38:08] - It's super interesting to me that the three largest parties seem to be lurching to various realignments at the same time, even though it seems like the smart thing would be for one of them to lurch towards the center instead. -Paul
[2021-06-23 15:36:45] - https://reason.com/2021/06/23/inside-the-battle-over-the-soul-of-the-libertarian-party/ Long article that non-libertarians probably won't find terribly interesting, but the short story is that the LP seems to have had a mini-revolution where... (differently? more?) radical elements have seized control of the party. -Paul
[2021-06-23 15:00:50] - also it semes like a lot of languages don't at all have a translation. turks for instance. but also martians. also, martians have a flag??? ~a
[2021-06-23 15:00:03] - translation of "its all greek to me" directed graph. wow, i guess it makes sense that the greeks don't ever say "it's all greek to me", but also i'm surprised that almost *nobody* says that. ~a
[2021-06-23 14:41:40] - paul: same topic as your video from yesterday. . . . and a very similar version where the operator kills everybody. ~a
[2021-06-23 14:32:41] - maybe not even that much. ~a
[2021-06-23 14:32:36] - mig: compromise requires concession? "oh no, really never had any issues with it" seems like a totally unfair summary of what happened. instead, i see them saying "[nothing] particularly controversial" which is likely a rosy picture of the bill. but honestly, i haven't read it yet. anything that requires a state-sponsored id is a huge problem for me. but, my guess is that it merely allows for a requirement of a state-sponsored id? ~a
[2021-06-23 13:41:01] - a: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democrats-voter-id/2021/06/22/0cd24d54-d36e-11eb-ae54-515e2f63d37d_story.html this is a reason I don't take much of the "hardship" argument with voter ID laws very seriously. We go from "racist and undue hardship" to "oh no, really never had any issues with it!" in just the span of a few days. - mig
[2021-06-22 20:09:46] - a: This is why I rely on my spreadsheets... I often mess up the math when I go rogue and do it on my own. -Paul
[2021-06-22 19:41:20] - a: And sorry, I would've tagged you but I wasn't sure if you wanted to be called out that way. -Paul
[2021-06-22 19:40:55] - a: Hah, yeah, you're right, I sold myself a bit short by assuming a 30% drop from here instead of a 30% drop from the high of a few months ago. Whoops. -Paul
[2021-06-22 19:19:06] - paul: "The difference between an 11x return and a 10x return feels different than a 30% drop." i have some issues with your math. the difference between an 11x return and a 10x return is not a 30% drop. 10x/11x = 10% drop. or 30% drop = ~8x/11x. you've done something wrong? also you can call me @arichnad on twitter, since i'm your "friend"
~a[2021-06-22 19:12:43] - i've only ever gotten money from a customer, sorry. ~a
[2021-06-22 19:11:04] - Anybody have any experience or thoughts about how to monetize a website without using Google AdSense? I found AdSense too hard to deal with and it kept putting up obnoxious ads where I didn't want it. -Paul
[2021-06-22 16:16:55] - Daniel: "You can get good returns without having to figure out which stocks are good or stressing about being wrong" On this, we 100% agree. I think index funds definitely have their place and most people should probably use them instead of picking stocks. It's a lot less work and less of a chance of screwing things up. -Paul
[2021-06-22 16:14:58] - a: I would never concede, especially less than halfway through, but I definitely expected that there would finally be a year I lost and that this one was a good contender for it considering how crazy most of my stocks went in 2020. -Paul
[2021-06-22 16:05:09] - a: Stocks are crazy! Winning / beating Paul would be fun but I think my steady 8-10% returns for my indexes is a victory on some level itself. You can get good returns without having to figure out which stocks are good or stressing about being wrong. -Daniel
[2021-06-22 15:53:02] - never! daniel should be nervous though. it almost seemed like you had conceded to losing to daniel in 2021, so its fun to see you back beating daniel again, already. ~a
[2021-06-22 15:51:35] - a: Getting nervous about Fantasy Investing yet? -Paul
[2021-06-22 15:51:24] - a: Ah, got it. Okay. Well, I'm far less certain about never having to have had to provide an ID before. Maybe it was the registration card I didn't need to provide? -Paul
[2021-06-22 15:37:08] - paul: yes, the url you posted has been updated because the law was signed in 2020 (well before the presidential election in 2020) ~a
[2021-06-22 15:36:37] - a: The URL I posted seemed to imply no ID was necessary, though. So maybe if an ID is necessary then it's a Fairfax County specific thing? -Paul
[2021-06-22 15:36:37] - paul: ok. well its all historical anyways. we don't currently live in one of the orange or red states. ~a
[2021-06-22 15:36:00] - a: It's possible I'm wrong. In fact, I'm beginning to remember them taking my driver's license once and commenting about how the address was different (we had recently moved). But I also remember offering it once and they said they didn't need it? I don't know, now I am confused. -Paul
[2021-06-22 15:33:56] - mig: ok. well sorry. i don't even have any anecdotes, so you don't have to worry about that. i guess i'll concede that point because i have literally zero data, and i'll pivot: how about this, do you agree that many or most homeless are going to have a hard time proving their social security? ~a
[2021-06-22 15:30:44] - i'll bet there are literally thousands (maybe even millions?) of people in the united states that have no easy way of proving their social security? do you disagree?" yes. I've only heard this point being made as a statement of fact without any data backing it up (anecdotes aren't data). - mig
[2021-06-22 15:00:15] - its entirely possible it was a very-short-term law in virginia. i'm not even sure how many elections it was a thing. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:58:37] - paul: "I don't recall the last time I needed a photo ID" oh, waaait. then you do recall needing a photo ID? is it possible you used a drivers license in 2016? ~a
[2021-06-22 14:55:08] - paul: 2020. i understand your point, but i don't have full information here, so all i can do is hand-wave. 1. i'm in a different voting area. 2. not everybody has their voter registration. i def don't have mine. 3. seriously, you voted with ONLY your voter registration? that's it? i'm actually dumbfounded by this, seriously, but i def believe you. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:53:09] - paul: "Voting might not be as easy as it should be, but it seems a lot easier than everything else". i'm fine with this summary. i also agree that voting might not be as easy as it should be, but it seems a lot easier than everything else. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:52:56] - a: Also, when did HB19/SB65 pass? Because I don't recall the last time I needed a photo ID. -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:52:31] - mig: should you be required to pay $35 to vote? ~a
[2021-06-22 14:52:30] - a: "driver's licenses are very hard to get" This kind of goes to my tangential point, though. Everything is hard with the government. The DMV sucks. Taxes suck. The Post Office sucks. Voting might not be as easy as it should be, but it seems a lot easier than everything else. -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:51:45] - mig: proof of legal presence will be pretty hard for the homeless. proof of identity will be pretty hard for the homeless. proof of social security will be pretty hard for the homeless. do we think homeless people shouldn't vote? do we think the unemployed shouldn't vote? ~a
[2021-06-22 14:51:02] - sorry no idea on the exact numbers* -Daniel
[2021-06-22 14:50:51] - paul: Yeah I was just making up an example for the idea about restricting hours / locations. No idea but I think its the idea of being x minutes away vs y (where y is lower than x) and polls being open m hours instead of n etc. -Daniel
[2021-06-22 14:47:34] - mig: sorry, i don't have a citation for you, but i did just quote the requirements. i'll bet there are literally thousands (maybe even millions?) of people in the united states that have no easy way of proving their social security? do you disagree? i don't think even I-9 requires proof of social security, does it? ~a
[2021-06-22 14:44:12] - "many people *can't* *do* *this*" citation needed. I've looked at the requirements to get an ID in VA and they don't seem like a high bar- mig
[2021-06-22 14:43:44] - paul: its not irrelevant though. driver's licenses are very hard to get, and before virginia HB19/SB65 photo identification was required. where's xpovos when we need him. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:41:45] - a: Okay, but that's irrelevant, no? Driver's licenses aren't required. That's my point. -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:41:20] - Daniel: "If you have shift work that is hourly being 30 minutes from the nearest polling place that doesn't open till 8am that is harder to vote than if you are 10 minutes away and it opens at 7am." https://www.elections.virginia.gov/registration/election-voter-faq/ According to this, polls are open for 13 hours. That seems like enough time for almost all workers, no? -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:41:00] - paul: (also fwiw i live in a different voting district than you and the rules are different in my voting district than yours) ~a
[2021-06-22 14:39:57] - paul: please read my post again. those are the requirements to get a driver's license. your voter registration card was not enough for a period of time. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:39:56] - a: https://www.elections.virginia.gov/registration/voterid/index.html This seems to indicate an ID is not necessary. -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:39:08] - a: I don't recall ever having to provide three forms of ID to vote. In fact, I think there have been times I haven't had to provide any. Most every time my voter registration card has been sufficient. Are you sure you need all those things in VA? -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:35:20] - daniel: I think that's been the thing I view as far more important in terms of making it easier to vote. Fighting over voter ID requirements has always been an absurd battle in my eyes. - mig
[2021-06-22 14:35:10] - mig: didn't you already have a drivers license though? ~a
[2021-06-22 14:34:35] - paul: also, you have to do this in a virginia dmv during 9-4 weekday hours. many people cannot get this time off. that's strike two for many people. you also can't have unpaid parking tickets in other states. strike three for many people. it's not free. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:34:32] - paul: getting a drivers license is insanely hard in virginia, and in virginia is actually one of the easier states. you must provide one proof of identity, one proof of legal presence, one proof of social security, and two proofs of virginia residency. many people *can't* *do* *this*. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:34:21] - paul: I think for a time it was required. At least I remember having to show them my ID once. Either way, voting in VA has always been pretty painless (for me at least). - mig
[2021-06-22 14:32:16] - If you have shift work that is hourly being 30 minutes from the nearest polling place that doesn't open till 8am that is harder to vote than if you are 10 minutes away and it opens at 7am. -Daniel
[2021-06-22 14:31:48] - Paul: I'm not a voting rights expert but I think generally it falls into three categories that I'm aware of. Number / Location of voting locations which impacts how easy / long it takes to get to a polling place. Hours of polling place. Requirements for verification at polling place. -Daniel
[2021-06-22 14:30:40] - a: We don't require any kind of photo ID in Virginia, right? You get your voter registration card mailed to you. Could it all be easier and more efficient? Probably, but again, this is the government we're talking about. They don't do anything efficiently. Voting is one of the least painful interactions I've had with the government. -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:28:23] - a: "nobody cares if paul can vote" Fair, but I guess I am questioning (not in an "I know this is wrong but am framing it as a question" way, but in a legitimate "I wonder if this is the case" way) just how hard it is to vote. If Virginia was recently considered one of the "bad" states, what was so hard about voting in VA? -Paul
[2021-06-22 14:23:22] - mig: i understand and maybe that's along the lines of paul's question "what was the reason we would probably think". i'm actually not particularly mad at the democrats (or republicans) that voted against it. i'm more mad that it didn't pass in general, or that they weren't able to get a bill that would pass. ~a
[2021-06-22 14:10:59] - a: the bill doesn't have support from some democrats. Manchin is the most vocal in opposition, but he's not th eonly one. - mig
[2021-06-22 13:58:23] - paul:
"uh ohhh". i believe this child doesn't think those toys are real. ~a[2021-06-22 13:54:14] - paul: "I'm sure that this represents my privilege or my bubble or something" <-- this. nobody cares if paul can vote. i only care if people who aren't paul can all vote. ~a
[2021-06-22 13:51:05] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-N_RZJUAQY4 I love the trolley problem, and I love this boy's solution. -Paul
[2021-06-22 13:15:15] - Not to mention how often I have opportunities to register to vote thrust in my face. I mean, seriously, I can't think of any other government run programs that is so easy to deal with. Infinitely better than the DMV or taxes or getting a passport. -Paul
[2021-06-22 13:13:05] - I'm sure that this represents my privilege or my bubble or something, but has anybody here actually had any trouble voting? I registered forever ago and don't recall ever having any issues or having to put forth much effort. The biggest hurdle is getting notifications when elections are. As far as government run things, it's one of the easier things to deal with. -Paul
[2021-06-22 13:10:35] - a: Wait, what was the reason we would probably think? -Paul
[2021-06-22 11:31:52] - xpovos: interesting that virginia was recently removed from that map. any thoughts on this? i keep forgetting to ask my mom about voter id stuff in virginia. ~a
[2021-06-22 11:30:03] - this makes me pretty mad. not because of the reasons you probably think? but, because of the content of the failed bill would make it easier for people to vote in some states. i'm fairly pro-states-rights, but when republicans are able to do bullshit like red+orange, then state's rights be damned. ~a
[2021-06-22 11:13:41] - paul: yeah i have a long-term bias too. about a lot of things. i probably have it to a fault, where i'll chase some things longer than i should. or put good money after bad, that sort of thing. but yeah, bitcoin has been one wild and crazy ride. pretty much any non-negative real number wouldn't surprise me at this point. i guess if the price gets too high it'll be a sign of the usd collapse . . . ~a
[2021-06-22 02:48:17] - a: Yeah, I guess a 45% drop is pretty extreme. I guess this is just my long term bias showing, but I remember back when it being $20k was considered crazy and a level it would never return to. Now I'm seeing all of this doomsday talk over btc at $30k and I just can't quite panic. -Paul
[2021-06-21 21:46:00] - paul: yes and no? yes, we (the market) have decided to start ignoring china, but i think tesla did have a very big effect on the price. tesla announced buying 1.5b in bitcoin at the beginning of february: price 32k. price went to 63k (+100%). then tesla announced they weren't accepting bitcoin anymore in mid-may: price 57k. price went to 32k (-45%). those swings are pretty serious and almost exactly timed with tesla being weird. ~a
[2021-06-21 21:41:08] - daniel: replied. ~a
[2021-06-21 21:01:04] - Daniel: I'm really tired.
~a[2021-06-21 19:21:03] - a: Back to replying to the email?
-Daniel[2021-06-21 18:36:58] - daniel: i'm back, baby! ~a
[2021-06-21 18:36:43] - a: You still out on SC2? (also if anyone else wants in on sc2 let me know!) -Daniel
[2021-06-21 15:12:32] - a: I've been kinda surprised by bitcoin's resiliency lately. Despite all the negative news around Tesla/Elon and China and everything else, it still hasn't really dropped below where it was at the beginning of the year (which is still up huge from previous years). -Paul
[2021-06-20 19:09:21] - a: Seems like an odd line for a movie. -Paul
[2021-06-20 18:27:03] - here's a line from a movie i just watched, that made me laugh. "you ruined his life" . . . "his life was already ruined. he was a software engineer!"
~a[2021-06-18 20:53:23] - its not an article. its a picture (a graph), so no need to "read" it. ~a
[2021-06-18 20:49:52] - a: I haven't read your article yet (sorry, about to log off for a walk with the family), but typically I've heard that the unemployment rate doesn't count people who are not looking or are "underemployed", so it's a very imperfect measure. With all the stimulus being thrown around and holds on evictions, it wouldn't surprise me if a lot of people stopped looking. -Paul
[2021-06-18 19:59:46] - (they seem to define "labor force" very strictly, but don't define what "unemployed" means at all
. . . for instance those who give up on trying to find a job probably stop counting as unemployed? and they stupidly still counted in the "labor force"?) ~a[2021-06-18 19:56:09] - what do we think about the the federal reserve bank of st. louis's reporting of the unemployment rate? do we believe that the unemployment rate now is lower than it was during ANY TIME between 2009 and 2014???
like, i believe its possible, but uhhhh, wtf? are we miscounting? or should i be insanely optimistic about the present/future? ~a[2021-06-18 19:46:45] - paul: understood. i agree with your four messages. except maybe "It's hard to adjudicate a lot of those grey areas"? if it is truly hard to adjudicate, then i think you'll only get the loud-minority on board. ~a
[2021-06-18 19:42:48] - mig: cancel culture includes criminal behavior (as an overlap) in many places i've seen it. as evidence i'd just point to the wikipedia article where they specifically talk about metoo. ~a
[2021-06-18 19:38:34] - mig: i don't agree. i don't think other people use it that way. ~a
[2021-06-18 19:05:23] - when we are talking about "me too" we're talking about potentially criminal behavior, and that's a big distinction in my mind. - mig
[2021-06-18 18:47:48] - a: I'm not necessarily trying to argue either side here, more just saying that it's kind of impossible to make any kind of blanket rules or assumptions. I think we can all agree some people deserve to be "canceled" (if that's what we want to call it), but I also think most of us can agree that some of these cases are examples of "cancel culture" going too far. -Paul
[2021-06-18 18:46:26] - a: I think I just saw where some international soccer player was suspended for making the slanty eyed gesture at some point during a game. Apparently it's a "racist gesture" now. I'm 100% positive I used to do that as a kid. Yes, times change, but also other cultures are different. Do we hold them to our standards? -paul
[2021-06-18 18:45:07] - a: Wearing blackface now? Oof. Ten years ago? Twenty? Saying a light-skinned mixed race person looks like a monkey? Praising a dark skinned mixed race person for being clean and articulate? It's hard to adjudicate a lot of those grey areas. -paul
[2021-06-18 18:41:24] - a: (Not trying to speak for Miguel). Right, that goes to what I said about it being vague and every case is different. Using a racial slur on the job? Seems like an easy firing. Using on your non-work related twitter feed? A few years ago? In a yearbook decades ago? -Paul
[2021-06-18 18:01:23] - mig: i don't think that's right at all. i think it also includes people being canceled for being "me too"ed like harvey weinstein and louis c. k? and i think it also includes people being canceled for saying racist shit publicly? roseanne barr and michael richards didn't have an "incorrect" political viewpoint. neither did kevin spacey or al franken or charlie rose or matt lauer. ~a
[2021-06-18 17:13:11] - I would consider it to be any sort of movement or campaign to get someone fire or otherwise "exiled" from polite society of an "incorrect" political viewpoint or belief. - mig
[2021-06-18 17:04:22] - "as we currently understand it" we?
i have no idea what cancel culture is. ~a[2021-06-18 17:03:09] - so yes, what happened to Eich was pretty much cancel culture as we currently understand it. - mig
[2021-06-18 17:02:32] - a: Yes, I do. And it wasn't just the board on it's own. There was also the manufactured outrage like OkCupid badgering firefox users over Eich's donation. - mig
[2021-06-18 16:21:18] - is fnaf a good game? i'm not sure i've ever played a horror videogame, and if it has even one "jumpscare" i'm not sure i'm interested. ~a
[2021-06-18 16:18:25] - a: It's a nebulous term for sure. Just wanted to point out that this is another example where it was the power brokers who made the decision based off of outrage from what I'm guessing was probably a vocal minority? Maybe I'm misjudging. At the time it seemed like he had a lot of defenders. -paul
[2021-06-18 16:15:17] - mig: eich was fired by mozilla when they found out he donated to a cause trying to ban same-sex marriage? does cancel culture apply here? i'm honestly asking, i'm not sure how far-reaching this (loaded) term goes. if you're ever fired because people publicly found out you did something, cancel culture counts? ~a
[2021-06-18 16:08:33] - also anyone remember brandon eich? cancel culture isn’t exacly a new thing. - mig
[2021-06-18 16:07:44] - https://www.businessinsider.com/five-nights-at-freddys-scott-cawthon-retires-backlash-gop-donations-2021-6 speaking of cancel culture. - mig
[2021-06-18 16:05:48] - from the comments "sardonicism is the key to russian philosophy of life". i feel like this video is a great example of this and it does put the cherenobyl miniseries in a different light. 3.6. not great, not terrible. and where do we sail to? ~a
[2021-06-18 16:01:43] - video . . . (needs sound) my favorite part of this is the casual and calm statements by the driver and passenger. they're just like, "whatevz". ~a
[2021-06-18 15:38:57] - paul: gotcha, yeah, ok. back to the original point, though, i'm not sure there are "strict" limits on comedians (including chapelle, stewart, and colbert). unknown and small-time comedians strike out their space on the non-media circuit first. and many of those guys will punch-down (and do voices. and all sorts of other shit). limits, which i'll argue aren't strict, are on the already-famous. ~a
[2021-06-18 15:35:40] - a: And again, that's not all cases and every case is different. Harvey Weinstein is a lot different from James Gunn. -Paul
[2021-06-18 15:34:07] - a: Uh, I think in a lot of cases it's something like 1% of the people being very noisy and the people in power being afraid of bad PR from those people and "canceling" people who if we just took a vote, most people would be fine with. -Paul
[2021-06-18 15:08:14] - paul: so, you think cancel culture is actually executives (intentionally and/or incorrectly) deciding the will of the people? that's def something i hadn't considered. "Maybe because we don't hear about the people who get canceled who aren't popular" yeah, we also don't know *why* people are canceled or not-canceled. was it because of social media? or was it just the excuse? ~a
[2021-06-18 15:07:07] - Maybe because we don't hear about the people who get canceled who aren't popular.
-Paul[2021-06-18 15:06:46] - But I guess it just seems to me that in a lot of these instances, it is people who have huge followings who get in trouble by what seems to be vocal minorities in twitter. -Paul
[2021-06-18 15:06:03] - a: It's tough, though, because ever case is different. I could've used Joss Whedon as an example of a hugely popular director who got canceled by executives too, but that seems a little different. -Paul
[2021-06-18 15:04:51] - Chappelle and JK Rowling seem to have largely avoided it so far, but if they did someday get canceled I can't imagine it would be because they aren't popular, but instead that a vocal minority convinced power brokers to cancel them. -paul
[2021-06-18 15:04:41] - paul: those are interesting examples. i'm not sure i knew about either of them. ~a
[2021-06-18 15:04:02] - a: For example, wasn't Roseanne one of the most popular network shows before the executives axed the star? James Gunn was similarly hugely popular as a director of Guardians of the Galaxy before he got temporarily canceled. -Paul
[2021-06-18 15:02:56] - a: But cancel culture oftentimes seems to not be the will of the masses determining what is good and worth being out there, but instead the decisions of those white guys in smoky rooms overriding popular opinion. -Paul
[2021-06-18 15:02:22] - i'm not sure i follow. i agree that the gatekeepers are the "old way". ~a
[2021-06-18 15:01:51] - a: It's interesting that you see it that way. I almost see it as the opposite. Thanks to technological advances, the gatekeepers (white guys in smoky rooms) have a lot less power and any random person can make a popular YouTube channel or podcast or be an Instagram influencer or whatever... -Paul
[2021-06-18 14:54:43] - "the whole debate on whether cancel culture ... is real". its real. and, i hate it. but, on the other hand, there's nothing more democratic than a million dumb-asses posting shade about our mainstream content. i kinda hate social networking, so its weird for me to promote the idea of social networking being "good". but, i'm not sure the old way is better? . . . where old white guys in smoky rooms get to decide what media is good? ~a
[2021-06-18 14:49:01] - nm. i think i see your point. ~a
[2021-06-18 14:48:19] - my side? i don't think i have a side here, as you define them. if anything i'm saying there aren't these two sides that you describe. ~a
[2021-06-18 14:47:51] - There's no way I would take a chance on any kind of race-based humor like that for fear it might ruin my career. -Paul
[2021-06-18 14:47:20] - a: Sure, and this gets back to the whole debate on whether cancel culture (or whatever you want to call it) is real. Is doing a stereotypical Chinese voice as part of a comedy routine not appropriate anymore if somebody like Chappelle is allowed to do it? I can see your side, but at the same time, if I was a less popular comedian that didn't have millions in the bank already... -Paul
[2021-06-18 14:43:44] - i'll also mention that making fun of "poor white trash" is probably beginning to become passé. ~a
[2021-06-18 14:37:42] - a dumb double negative there, i hope you can navigate
~a[2021-06-18 14:36:57] - paul: uhhhhhh, what??? not sure how that's strict. chapelle's comedy is *definitely* not "strictly forbidden", and the people who don't think he's funny are not 100% of comedy lovers. ALSO can you explain where punching down "unless, of course, it's against whites" makes any sense? making fun of "poor white trash" is allowed, but making fun of "poor" or "disabled" people is (non-strictly) unfunny, even if they happen to be white? ~a
[2021-06-18 14:33:25] - a: Well, the whole "punching down" and race based humor being off-limits (unless, of course, it's against whites). Chapelle had a whole bit about it on his Netflix special, right? I mean, I was really surprised Stewart had a "voice" for the Wuhan people at all, even if it didn't sound Chinese in the slightest. -Paul
[2021-06-18 14:30:28] - paul: the only thing i can think of regarding "strict limits" and comedians, is "me too". we've (re-)established this in recent years. and those limits are strict. but i'm like 100% sure that's not what you're talking about. ~a
[2021-06-18 13:16:04] - "strict" limits? if anything, limits on comedians are non-strict. it's possible that I have no idea what you're talking about. ~a
[2021-06-18 03:36:54] - bit and that's worth noting, but I thought we had established over the recent years that comedy has strict limits too. -Paul
[2021-06-18 03:36:09] - And now Jon Stewart is allowed to push it on network TV (complete with voices!). I get that he's going to immediately hide behind the "I'm a comedian
[2021-06-18 03:35:09] - mig: I'm guessing it's a bit (although I'm not sure if Colbert knew it was coming ahead of time). Still, it's a little frustrating that just like a month ago (and for a year plus), voicing the lab leak hypothesis was considered an ignorant conspiracy theory that is just trying to stoke anti-Chinese hysteria... -Paul
[2021-06-17 22:54:13] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfejgwbDQ8 discussion starts at about 3:00 in. I've seen some people describe this is Colbert being genuinely disturbed by Stewart asserting the lab leak theory as true, but I can't tell if they are both playing a bit here. - mig
[2021-06-17 21:05:51] - its nice sharing responsibility in my opinion. ~a
[2021-06-17 21:05:26] - i've honestly had people who approved the merge request be like "omg, i'm sorry i didn't catch that", haha. ~a
[2021-06-17 21:05:00] - also, you can always blame it on the guy who approved your merge request
~a[2021-06-17 21:00:04] - honestly, if its gets past "merge request" and CI/Unit-tests, then i don't beat myself up. that sort of shit is always going to get through on occasion! ~a
[2021-06-17 20:59:10] - i guess "merge request" is a good place to catch stuff too. because then you (usually) have one other person looking over your logic changes. ~a
[2021-06-17 20:58:31] - ah yeah, gotcha. unit tests aren't perfect, but they do catch my dumb-mistakes pretty often. lots of times when i do a merge-request people will be like "add unit tests for this!", and i'm like "UGH, FINE"
~a[2021-06-17 20:57:36] - a: We do. I thought the thing was tested but it was tested in the wrong spot. So the tests passed and in my head we were good. Alas, we were not. -Daniel
[2021-06-17 20:55:27] - daniel: do you have CI and unit tests? i feel like these two in close-conjunction catch a lot of mistakes. if the unit tests don't pass, then it won't build, and nobody gets to see it!
~a[2021-06-17 20:54:20] - mmm always a fun moment when you realize something is broken and its your fault and you should have caught the problem before it made its way to others. Woo! -Daniel
[2021-06-17 18:57:07] - never. ~a
[2021-06-17 18:56:47] - a: Getting close to you... -Paul
[2021-06-17 18:35:15] - daniel: mixing my potential future bonds into the mix, i've been using 4.4%. ~a
[2021-06-17 18:24:42] - i think knowing how many bonds you'll have in the future is also hard? i've been averaging how many bonds i think i'll have in the future as an approximation? ~a
[2021-06-17 18:23:23] - daniel: i'm guessing you have at least 15% bonds. so probably want to use between 5 and 6?
~a[2021-06-17 18:13:28] - daniel: yeah, ok, 6.3 and 6.5 are both between 6 and 7. so, i think we're pretty close to each-other. the differences between 6 and 7 might be big, but also, the "real" answer might not even be in between those numbers. ~a
[2021-06-17 18:12:07] - paul: you just passed talia in the stock market challenge
~a[2021-06-17 18:11:50] - paul: "I'm also wondering how I best use this" i watch this number over time. because the inputs change the output drastically, and i like to try to change the inputs closer to a "more-right" answer over long periods of time. sometimes its hard to know when you're looking at it in one sitting, which inputs are patently wrong? ~a
[2021-06-17 18:11:29] - I could retire in 3 years if I get a steady 25% return! -Daniel
[2021-06-17 18:10:59] - a: I normally use between 6 and 7 for my assumed rate of return. But I've played around with it and looked all kinds of crazy numbers. -Daniel
[2021-06-17 18:10:14] - I use nper to figure out how long it will take me to get to my target at my current savings level. I figure out my target by taking my safe withdrawal rate and an estimate spending level to figure out how much I need. So then I can play around with spending levels, safe withdrawal rate, monthly savings and see how it affects time to retire. -Daniel
[2021-06-17 17:55:36] - Also, today is quite a day for my portfolio. Almost up 4% right now with Shopify being a spiffy 2-pop (ie, it is up 2x my cost basis right now). -Paul
[2021-06-17 17:43:22] - a: Yup! Got a number similar to my existing projections. It's pretty neat... but I'm also wondering how I best use this. I guess it's good to plot out different scenarios. -Paul
[2021-06-17 17:35:06] - paul: after you made some of the values negative, did you get a reasonable return value? ~a
[2021-06-17 16:33:29] - paul: nm. ignore my last two messages. i think i misunderstood your overall point. you're talking about this kinda thing where you're looking at positive and negative cash-flows. yeah, i think you're right, this is very similar to nper. ~a
[2021-06-17 16:33:23] - a: Yeah, sorry, I know they are different. But with XIRR you have to (counterintuitively, to me) have the last number be negative. -Paul
[2021-06-17 16:29:59] - paul: sorry, you need to add one, then divide by (1+3%) or more. my mistake. ~a
[2021-06-17 16:28:00] - paul: XIRR? i had to google that. i don't think you use XIRR here, no: 1. its the future, not the past. i'd definitely not use XIRR for this, because you'd be incorrectly assuming that your future returns will keep up with your past returns. "reversion to the mean" is another way of putting this. future returns will likely be closer to the mean! 2. XIRR doesn't include inflation. you need to divide your rate by, like (1+3%). ~a
[2021-06-17 16:20:58] - a: Ah, thanks. Sorry, I missed your example. It makes sense that the solution is to make one of those numbers negative. It's like.... XIRR or whatever, right? -Paul
[2021-06-17 15:41:39] - daniel: yes 6.3% is actually what i've been using for 100% stocks. i agree, its up for discussion. have you used a different value for 100% stocks? ~a
[2021-06-17 15:28:47] - a: 6.5 is your assumed rate of return after inflation? Its a fun number to play around with cause it has a very strong impact. -Daniel
[2021-06-17 15:04:06] - paul: if you want to use the logarithms directly, i've been using this: =ln((NEED_TO_RETIRE-LIQUID)/(LIQUID+(YEARLY_INVESTMENT)/YEARLY_INCREASE)+1)/ln(1+YEARLY_INCREASE) ~a
[2021-06-17 15:01:46] - if you have any bonds (for daniel i guess), make sure you use a number lower than 6.5%. ~a
[2021-06-17 15:00:38] - also, make sure you use 6.5% or else you're totally ignoring inflation.
also in my example i used a money unit of $1k, and a time unit of 1 year, make sure you're using the same unit throughout (mixing monthly and yearly. or mixing dollars and $1k and $1m, will return the wrong answers). ~a[2021-06-17 14:58:35] - paul: yes, you can do this. make sure you notice that in my example the last value is negative. some documentations say to record "investments" as negative. worded differently: nper(6.5%,40-25,1000,-2000)==nper(6.5%,-(40-25),-1000,2000). if you don't make the right things negative, then nper gets mad and refuses to return. (logarithms of negative numbers include an imaginary component, and you can't have imaginary money) ~a
[2021-06-17 14:54:15] - a: So, am I not understanding how NPER works? When I put my numbers in, I am told "Scenario in function NPER is not possible." I thought I could use it to determine how many years it would take my 401(k) to get to a certain value... -Paul
[2021-06-17 14:52:43] - paul: i hear you, and i agree. however, whenever i put in 3.5% into nper instead of 3.9%, it says i need to work much much longer. i'd like to avoid that. so instead, i've tried super hard to forecast what my in-retirement spending will be, so i can use 3.9%.
(i also use firecalc and cfiresim-open to try to simulate these situations). ~a[2021-06-17 14:48:25] - Hadn't heard of nper. I'll have to check it out, thanks! -Paul
[2021-06-17 14:48:10] - I use 3.5% just to be more conservative. As has been discussed already, the bigger issue is determining the amount of money needed in retirement. -Paul
[2021-06-17 14:40:31] - a: I use it in my spreadsheet I have for all my money stuff. Handy indeed! -Daniel
[2021-06-17 14:37:00] - the implementation for nper is somewhat simple, but it uses a lot of logarithms, so using nper does simplify a lot of pretty hard math. ~a
[2021-06-17 14:36:23] - have you guys heard of nper in excel/googleSheets? it's cool. nper can be used to determine how long it'll take to save up money for a thing while you're adding in. if the stock market goes up 6.5% per year, after inflation, on average, and you invest 40k-25k into the stock market every year (from aaron's example), it'll take you =nper(6.5%,40-25,1000,-2000) to go from 1 million to 2 million after inflation. i.e. 9 years. ~a
[2021-06-17 14:22:31] - daniel/aaron: the biggest non-"it depends" i've seen in r/FI is the 4% rule (liquid accounts *at* retirement and multiply by 4%, and that can be your spendingWithTaxesAdjustedForInflation for 30+ years. you cannot adjust this number in retirement if your accounts balances go up). *some* people don't like that number and opt for a lower (safer) one. ~a
[2021-06-17 14:21:32] - aaron: Congrats! I've been saying stuff like "retire early", but really I just want the financial freedom to be able to do whatever I want. Once I get there, there's a decent chance I might end up going back to work to avoid being bored. -Paul
[2021-06-17 14:05:13] - yeah i've been using daniel's link too ( r/financialindependence ). ~a
[2021-06-17 13:56:51] - aaron: If you get bored and want to work on my side hustle work let me know!
-Daniel[2021-06-17 13:49:20] - aaron: oo nice! also https://www.reddit.com/r/financialindependence/ if you haven't seen that. Though there definitely is a lot of "it depends" in financial planning. -Daniel
[2021-06-17 02:16:44] - (except for giving you an idea of the things you need to calculate and how to calculate them) - aaron
[2021-06-17 02:16:34] - a: https://www.reddit.com/r/Fire/ ? yeah i found out about that subreddit a few months ago! it seems like a cool place although 99% of their advice is "it depends" so it's not very helpful in general - aaron
[2021-06-17 00:57:46] - aaron: congratulations! (on the fire forums, they say "go fuck yourself"
). that is great news. i hope to be there some day very soon! ~a[2021-06-16 22:22:47] - i actually quit my job last week and my current plan is to take half a year off and see how it goes. ...but depending on what my financial advisor says and how bored i get i may return to work full time or half time or just not return at all, i haven't decided - aaron
[2021-06-16 22:21:22] - i'm considering retiring early. i currently spend about 40k a year, and about 25k of that is my mortgage which will be paid off in ten years. the rest just goes into the bank, it's been that way for awhile - aaron
[2021-06-16 21:03:45] - Paul's goal. -Daniel
prev <-> next