prev <-> next
[2023-03-24 22:00:51] - I asked Google Bard how to deal with Skytoss. I liked this part of the response: "Use AoE damage: AoE damage can be very effective against Skytoss armies. For example, Zerg Hydralisks can use Hydralisk Spit to deal AoE damage to ground units, while Protoss Colossus can use Colossi Beam to deal AoE damage to air units." -Paul
[2023-03-24 16:21:44] - in the queue for D4. We'll see how it goes. I'm not sure how I feel about the MMO influence on it. However its hard to know where the game goes since D3 at launch was so different than D3 ended up. -Daniel
[2023-03-23 18:34:01] - many of the zoning laws in arlington just changed. the new laws are less restrictive. ~a
[2023-03-23 15:26:35] - Daniel: I'll almost certainly be in the beta this weekend. I was going to skip it, but they're dropping an account cosmetic which is tipping the scales for me. The only reasons for me to not play are to enjoy the game as new at launch. -- Xpovos
[2023-03-23 15:22:33] - Daniel: I was never a huge Diablo guy, and I'm already playing a bit of Immortal with Dave (and have a backlog of other games to play), so I might skip. I hear it's good, though. -Paul
[2023-03-23 14:06:01] - I was wondering if I was the only person who really only knew of the nipple interpretation (not the liquor or slur ones). -Paul
[2023-03-23 14:05:38] - is a slur for Japanese people. -Paul
[2023-03-23 14:05:24] - Daniel: Likely is a financial acronym, but apparently some podcast was talking about "Best Nips" and it was about those tiny bottles of liquor which are apparently known as "nips". Well, one of the podcasters apparently jokingly nominated a female. He claims (and I totally buy it because it seems the obvious interpretation) that he was referring to their nipples. But the female in question is Korean and apparently "nips"... -Paul
[2023-03-23 01:21:40] - anyone else going to try Diablo 4 beta this weekend? -Daniel
[2023-03-23 01:04:58] - Nipples? Though also given the question now I think its probably some financial acronym. -Daniel
[2023-03-22 23:44:13] - Question: Without any context, what would you think I was referring to if I said, "nips"? -Paul
[2023-03-21 06:46:26] - no im out of town until the beginning of april, thanks! ~a
[2023-03-20 18:37:55] - a: care about sc2 day? -Daniel
[2023-03-18 12:59:12] - https://www.fairfaxtimes.com/articles/fairfax_county/in-national-merit-scandal-fcps-agreed-to-pay-outside-lawyers-hefty-fee-2-225-per/article_85cfda2e-c439-11ed That's a lot of money spent on what was claimed to be a simple staffing mistake. -Paul
[2023-03-18 12:29:21] - https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1636729166631432195 I find the whole thread to be interesting and worthwhile, but it gets really notable to me around tweet 23 where natural immunity and breakthrough infections were treated like misinformation. -Paul
[2023-03-17 17:28:43] - Look, it's NottheBee sourcing from Epoch Times, so I get that this is tainted, but it's also incredibly plausible and horrifying. https://notthebee.com/article/cdc-bought-access-to-at-least-55-million-americans-phone-location-data-to-monitor-lockdown-compliance -- Xpovos
[2023-03-17 16:15:45] - a: It's absolutely worth watching. It shows its age, but it has a kind of indie wonder to it. -- Xpovos
[2023-03-17 15:14:41] - it's a bit weird that "the wizard" (similar title) was one year later. that was a good movie from my memory. i mean, it had a preview of a very popular unreleased nes game years before it was released in the us, right? ~a
[2023-03-17 15:09:57] - rotten tomatoes says 40%. should i watch it? ~a
[2023-03-17 15:07:47] - xpovos: quiet down! ~a
[2023-03-17 11:58:33] - title: "I sold my car." "Your wonderful car?" "Mmm-hmm. Sold my property to pay property taxes." -- Xpovos
[2023-03-17 01:13:22] - 64 is kinda old. Early social security is 62. And 401k is 59.5. ~a
[2023-03-16 23:23:03] - https://twitter.com/PotempkinBrain/status/1636469818026262530?s=20 seems like an excessive reaction to the retirement age in france being raised to … 64. - mig
[2023-03-15 20:00:00] - https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/gavin-newsom-ties-to-silicon-valley-bank-17838746.php the svb bailout kind of stinks. - mig
[2023-03-14 18:27:21] - a: "there aren't just two assets" Of course. Bad phrasing on my part. Probably should've said, "a safer asset". It just seems odd that SVB really didn't seem to do anything wrong outside of maybe investing too heavily in long term bonds, which I would never think of as something that would bring a bank down. -Paul
[2023-03-14 16:37:48] - like anything else, bonds can be risky or conservative. it's why there are bond ratings. among other things (for example, i hadn't heard about "available-for-sale" (AFS) vs "hold-to-maturity" (HTM) until this crisis) ~a
[2023-03-14 16:34:12] - paul: "the safer asset" there aren't just two assets. ~a
[2023-03-14 12:58:29] - As an aside, I find it a little ironic that apparently one of the major factors in SVB's collapse (outside of the bank run, obviously) was that apparently they have invested too much into bonds, supposedly the safer asset. -Paul
[2023-03-14 12:51:49] - a: Right, the discussion around banning and regulating social media use is where the article kind of loses me, and it also seems strangely detached from the main point (or at least the point I found most interesting) around how constantly bombarding people with the idea that they are helpless and don't control their own destiny is harmful. -Paul
[2023-03-14 12:05:41] - daniel: the gov said they would make them whole using the DIF. Which wasn't how it's supposed to work. - mig
[2023-03-14 03:48:19] - paul: "It’s time we started treating social media like automobiles and firearms" ignore their dangers completely if addressing them in any way requires effort? fuck me if we don't already. ~a
[2023-03-13 22:09:27] - mig: I think the 250k limit is guaranteed by the gov. If they can work to get JP Morgan or whoever to take over the other stuff from the bank in such a way that people get to keep more than 250k I don't think that makes the 250 fictional. Its just a base line. -Daniel
[2023-03-13 21:07:46] - https://www.thefp.com/p/why-the-mental-health-of-liberal The headline on this feels a little weird to me, and I don't buy into the conclusions, but I found most of the early and middle parts of this interesting. A lot of it confirms to things I already thought, though, so I'm curious if others find it compelling or not. -Paul
[2023-03-13 17:33:22] - ty. ~a
[2023-03-13 15:59:51] - https://abcnews.go.com/Business/silicon-valley-bank-collapse-treasury-fed-fdic-announce/story?id=97807268 - mig
[2023-03-13 15:57:59] - huh, do you have a link? i hadn't heard anything about that. you can get over 250k of course, but it's 250k per account type per depositor, and most people don't know that using that "rule" you can basically be covered to any ridiculously high amount. ~a
[2023-03-13 14:59:36] - a: Yeah, what Miguel said. Depositors are apparently going to be made whole above the $250k limit for SVB. -Paul
[2023-03-13 14:15:44] - a: what’s fictional about it is treasury is working to make sure depositors are covered above the supposed $250k limit with the latest SVB failure. If they are reimbursing people above that than the 250k limit is fictional. - mig
[2023-03-13 13:10:47] - paul, can you explain your fdic tweet? i don't get it. what is fictional about the 250k insurance? ~a
[2023-03-13 01:54:56] - paul: i agree it probably didn't help. and no, i don't know how to measure it either. but these are concrete examples. ~a
[2023-03-13 01:54:24] - paul: "politicization of COVID" i don't for a second consider politicization of covid to result in people coughing in other people's faces. a much (much) bigger effect are the people who refused to get the vaccine for political reasons. or ignored lock-downs for political reasons. or ignore mask mandates for political reasons. or ignored other sensible precautions for political reasons. ~a
[2023-03-12 13:41:13] - Like... maybe a handful of yahoos decided to actively cough in other people's faces? Could that cause a significant swing? Maybe? -Paul
[2023-03-12 13:40:33] - And I have no idea how we would measure the "politicization of COVID" as an impact. I assume it didn't help, but I also don't know of concrete examples of how it could've significantly made things worse. -Paul
[2023-03-12 13:39:54] - Would be great to get some measure of the effectiveness of mask wearing large scale among a populace, but I doubt we're (the royal "we") ever going to get to an agreement considering the reactions to recent masking studies. -Paul
[2023-03-12 13:38:39] - a: Whereas on the flip side, Australia had some of the most extreme lockdowns and... seemed to have done pretty well? But they're also an island. Can that kind of lockdown work for non-islands? -Paul
[2023-03-12 13:37:23] - a: The lockdowns aspect is what I am really trying to zero in on because Sweden still seems like such an interesting outlier as a relatively wealthy country that mostly didn't lockdown and performed.... in some ways better and some ways worse? -Paul
[2023-03-12 12:52:00] - paul: whether covid responses were politicized or not matter more than anything probably. ~a
[2023-03-12 12:51:14] - paul: "I'll grant that we are an outlier given our extreme wealth AND bad positioning" well i think that was all i was saying. "studies to figure out the strongest correlation" yes i hope to see that data soon too. on the other hand, i think there won't be many strong correlations: because (i'd argue) that decisions about masking and lock-downs made a (only sometimes AND only a small) difference. ~a
[2023-03-12 01:57:43] - a: I would be curious if anybody did any studies to figure out the strongest correlation. I'm guessing it has less to do with wealth and.... maybe having their outbreak later? Some island countries seemed to have done well... -Paul
[2023-03-12 01:55:12] - a: My point is only that the wealth of the country doesn't seem to be a strong determining factor. Uzbekistan and Tajikistan did almost as well as Japan. Maybe they're wealthier than I give them credit for? -Paul
[2023-03-12 01:52:51] - a: Lots depends on the metrics you use, though. On my list Italy and Russia (not wealthier than the US, but I think generally considered to be more wealthier than not) are above the US. Yes, I'll grant that we are an outlier given our extreme wealth AND bad positioning... -Paul
[2023-03-11 20:38:15] - paul: "plenty of wealthier countries did poorly" zero wealthier countries did *as* poorly. here are the cumulative deaths per pop for all of the countries with a higher (and even a few lower) human development index: united kingdom is close and belgium is close, but most countries aren't. even. close. ~a
[2023-03-11 13:14:03] - a: Given our obesity issues, maybe we should expect the US to do poorly? Or the fact that we aren't an island? Or that we didn't previously have a culture of mask wearing? -Paul
[2023-03-11 13:12:31] - a: Because plenty of wealthier countries did poorly and plenty of less wealthy countries did fine. It's actually really hard based on that excess death data to figure out what factors lead to better outcomes. -Paul
[2023-03-11 13:11:02] - a: I started writing a response a few times but realized I wasn't sure how to phrase it. It was going to be around how the US performed worse than expected, but how would we base what those expectations on? -Paul
[2023-03-11 13:07:24] - mig: I still can't quite figure out why Congress is holding hearings about what these people are reporting. Is this supposed to be some national security issue or something? -Paul
[2023-03-10 18:45:30] - for context this is referring to Matt Tiabbi and some others I think for their testimony regarding the Twitter files. How merely writing about the internal workings of twitter pre-Musk is literally threatening to anyone is a mystery to me. - mig
[2023-03-10 18:44:25] - https://twitter.com/StaceyPlaskett/status/1633862375035240449 I'm baffled a bit over this statement. - mig
[2023-03-10 17:12:22] - paul: "Sounds like the answer is still hard to decipher" i agree. there are just too many variables. the US fucked up so. much. hypothetically maybe the US lock-downs could have just brought us back to baseline. so, if we had fucked up fewer things, and *not* did lockdowns, it would be the same as if he had fucked up everything, and did lockdowns? (all of this is based on the premise that lockdowns help) ~a
[2023-03-08 16:25:43] - It kind of seems like there are so many variables (masking, vaccine rollouts, risk factors of populations, etc) that we'll never really be able definitively pinpoint why some places (how was Japan's old population so resilient?) did well and other sucked. -Paul
[2023-03-08 16:22:58] - Sweden seems to have done much better in terms of excess deaths than the US and moderately better than places like France and Germany.... but less well than neighboring Norway. Still pretty surprising the discrepancies between countries. -Paul
[2023-03-08 16:21:12] - https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker With all the recent-ish news around things like mask mandates likely not making a difference and the lab leak theory maybe being true, I decided to revisit the Sweden question to see if our view of lockdowns should be updated. Do we know yet if Sweden was right or wrong? Sounds like the answer is still hard to decipher. -Paul
[2023-03-08 16:19:42] - Xpovos: Could be. I also imagine a lot of trans people feel more strongly about these issues than even the most passionate anti-trans person on the other side. -Paul
[2023-03-08 13:30:18] - Paul: I suspect some of this is just the nature of harmful things taking up a larger portion of our processing capacity than beneficial ones. It's our natural tendency to despondant for a month over losing $10, while feeling a few hours of elation over winning the same amount. "Democrats" are far more likely to feel harmed by these legislative actions. -- Xpovos
[2023-03-06 20:47:15] - Although I will point to this: "Republicans seemed less invested in transgender issues than their Democratic counterparts. Sixty-eight percent of conservative Republicans and Republican-leaning independents reported not following trans-related bills closely, while only 54 percent of liberal Democrats and Democrat leaners did." -Paul
[2023-03-06 20:46:33] - a: https://reason.com/2023/03/06/at-cpac-trans-issues-dominated-but-do-voters-care/ This kind of supports both of us. Republican politicians are making a big deal about transgender issues BUT Republican voters largely don't seem to think it's a big priority. -Paul
[2023-03-06 17:15:50] - a: In short, the Virginia governor's office doesn't seem like a complete shit-show that I might fear from a Trumpy Republican. I think he's honestly trying to mostly govern in a centrist way, except possibly outside of maybe education (and even there, I think Democrats have misjudged where the center is). -Paul
[2023-03-06 17:14:06] - a: My only point is that I thought that he was running as a non-Trumpy more old-school Republican who was going to be a little more centrist (although it's honestly hard to even define what that means with the parties getting all scrambled in terms of stances on the issues). The best way I can put it is that most of his actions seems at least close to reasonable (relative to Trump-era R's), even if I don't agree with all of them. -Paul
[2023-03-06 17:12:02] - a: Hmmmm. Maybe I misunderstood the phrase "right-of-center"? I'm saying yes, he is a Republican governor and generally governing in a conservative way. And I definitely agree that legislation should be crafted by the legislature and not executive branches, so in a case like this it's a bit questionable how much credit Youngkin should be given. -Paul
[2023-03-06 15:39:14] - paul: he's still a terrible governor, but i'll give him plenty of credit for this. ~a
[2023-03-06 15:38:46] - paul: "obviously he is governing from a right-of-center standpoint" let's not go that far. he didn't write the bill, work on the bill in a committee, or even vote on the bill. he . . . signed the bill, during a photo-op. but i'll still give him credit for those two things: he didn't have to do either. being friendly to the self employed is . . . bipartisan . . . or at least it should be? depends on who you talk to, i guess. ~a
[2023-03-05 02:43:31] - Obviously he is governing from a right-of-center standpoint, and I also obviously disagree with a fair amount of what he's done, but given the past 5 years or so of presidents and congressional clowns and whatnot... he seems like at least a reasonable adult. -Paul
[2023-03-05 02:41:43] - Re: Youngkin, I remember Matt Herndon trying to argue with me that a vote for Youngkin was effectively a vote for overthrowing the US government and for Trump and whatnot. I like to think that has been pretty definitively proven wrong. -Paul
[2023-03-05 02:40:40] - a: So, yeah, I did choose "whisper" and "might" for a reason, and I meant it that way. I think a lot of people might be uncomfortable with trans athletes in women's sports, but I think the majority of them are reticent to make a big deal of it. -Paul
[2023-03-05 02:38:48] - a: And that other 2% are people being like, "well, maybe we should hear her out and it's a complicated issue" -Paul
[2023-03-05 02:38:21] - a: I'll go back to JK Rowling. Do you honestly think the energy and passion around her is equal on both sides? 98% of what I hear is about how she's a terf and a transphobe and is literally putting trans lives in danger... -Paul
[2023-03-05 02:36:43] - a: I've seen far fewer be outspoken and impassioned about keeping trans athletes out of women's sports. The furthest most get are an uncomfortable: "well, this doesn't seem quite fair but..." -Paul
[2023-03-05 02:34:58] - a: I'm not talking about news anchors for MSNBC or Fox whose jobs are to raise a stink. I'm talking about normal Republican and Democratic voters. I've seen tons of examples of people on social media who are very animated and impassioned about trans rights... -Paul
[2023-03-04 16:28:09] - pandering to the . . . center?! i agree with youngkin on this. according to comments on the internet, this specific barbershop has lots of BLM and pro-obama memorabilia up in their store. ~a
[2023-03-03 15:10:10] - paul: also maybe a bit nit-picky, but even "might". like there's a chance they won't lose their shit? ~a
[2023-03-03 15:09:33] - paul: "then they might start whispering stuff" whispering? you seem so generous in your explanations. to the point of seeming biased. i at least would never claim anybody on msnbc is whispering about their thoughts on transgender issues. ~a
[2023-03-03 14:30:43] - a: I think far fewer liberals would be comfortable with an organization prohibiting trans athletes and would be far more animated and willing to be outspoken about their passion. -Paul
[2023-03-03 14:30:05] - a: You're right. I don't. But how do you think CNN / MSNBC / NPR / WaPo / Twitter / etc would treat those two? I think there's a sizeable percentage of people on the right who don't really care much about trans athletes in women's sports unless / until one starts dominating and then they might start whispering stuff about fairness to others. -Paul
[2023-03-02 18:30:07] - paul: depends entirely on specifics. you haven't been watching much fox news i don't think. ~a
[2023-03-02 17:39:52] - What is more likely to become a huge news story and provoke a protest or online mob? A school / organization allowing a trans student to compete against women? Or a school / organization banning a trans student from competing against women? -Paul
[2023-03-02 02:15:31] - a: I did a google search for "trans athletes in women's sports" and by my count 6 of the results on the first page are in favor of it, 1 might be against (behind a paywall), 1 is a new story on a protest against it, and the rest seemed informational only. -Paul
[2023-03-02 02:11:11] - a: And if women's basketball starts becoming a situation where one player totally and utterly dominates, it might have to be something that is considered. -Paul
[2023-03-02 02:09:55] - a: "sadly this obviously can't be the deciding factor on if it's permitted or not. right?" Maybe not, but it does lend credence to whether their complaint is legitimate or not. And it's not like this kind of segregation is totally out of bounds. Boxing has weight classes... -Paul
[2023-03-02 02:08:27] - a: "no way. you lost me here" Really? You haven't seen the firestorm of "you want trans people to die" whenever anybody suggests that maybe trans athletes don't belong in women's sports? -Paul
[2023-03-01 23:45:10] - https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan-china-intelligence/index.html speaking of tribalism the reaction to the developments here have been kind of disappointing. - mig
[2023-03-01 22:11:51] - paul: (as an example) the ioc uses some hard and fast rules, and i don't know what they all are, but i think when they transitioned relative to puberty is one of the deciding factors maybe? i don't know if (for example) the IOC would allow this play or not, but forfeiting for this reason seems unsportsmanlike imo. ~a
[2023-03-01 22:10:12] - paul: "Or somebody a foot taller and 50 lbs heavier than everybody else who averages 40 pts and 20 rebounds a game?" sadly this obviously can't be the deciding factor on if it's permitted or not. right? it's allowed until they're winning? how would that make any sense. ~a
[2023-03-01 21:27:24] - paul: "I've seen far more passion from the left on this issue" no way. you lost me here. ~a
[2023-03-01 20:47:02] - Also, I found this quote interesting: "The debate over the inclusion of transgender athletes, particularly women and girls, has become a political flashpoint in recent years, especially among conservatives." Curious how it was determined that the debate has been a flashpoint especially among conservatives. I've seen far more passion from the left on this issue. -Paul
[2023-03-01 20:46:10] - https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/01/sport/vermont-basketball-transgender-athlete-spt-intl/index.html I have lots of questions about this that the article doesn't get into. Is the transgender student a bench player that hardly plays? Or somebody a foot taller and 50 lbs heavier than everybody else who averages 40 pts and 20 rebounds a game? -Paul
[2023-03-01 20:42:28] - a: I'm not sure I follow? I guess I rely on people who think differently to offer a conjecture beyond "a bed person thinks that too". -Paul
[2023-03-01 16:36:49] - paul: using evidence is important. of course i agree on that. but before you find evidence you usually need to find a conjecture, right? how do you go about finding a conjecture? ~a
[2023-03-01 16:15:20] - I think it's interesting that Hitler was for gun control and the founder of planned parenthood was a supporter of the eugenics movement, but I don't think either is a strong argument against. A political viewpoint should stand on its own merits and not on who else believes in it. -Paul
[2023-03-01 16:01:43] - a: I'm all for questioning my own beliefs if I see good evidence against them. I don't think "a bad person also thinks this" is good evidence. -Paul
[2023-03-01 15:59:49] - paul: anti-tribalist is one thing. i agree with anti-tribalism. but questioning your own beliefs shouldn't be shied away from. you seem to by shying away from it? ~a
[2023-03-01 00:51:06] - a: But I do think a lot of people who gravitate towards one of the two major parties have more tendency to think that if person A thinks something and person B thinks something, then there is more connecting them than simply sharing the same view on a single issue. -Paul
[2023-03-01 00:49:57] - a: Put another way, I don't see why there has to be any connection between, say, pro-life and anti-immigrant and for low taxes (or on the flip side, pro-choice and pro-gun control and pro-teacher's union). -Paul
[2023-03-01 00:48:27] - a: "i do reevaluate my feelings when extremists say pro-adrian things" I get the impulse, but I also think because I am almost reflexively anti-tribalist, it doesn't bother me when my views overlap with a bad person's views. -Paul
[2023-02-28 19:33:10] - https://i.redd.it/v2gc0gtxyxka1.png i don't know about those of you that this applies to, but this graph kinda speaks to me. i remember being a kid in the early 90s and feeling kinda like a borderline outcast. it wasn't ever terrible, but it was awkward at times. i don't feel that way today, i almost feel like i'm getting closer to being in the majority. ~a
[2023-02-28 18:11:55] - mig: i do reevaluate my feelings when extremists say pro-adrian things (especially if they're violent). but, honestly that doesn't happen very often, so i don't have to do it very often. also i don't think you necessarily need to do that. ~a
[2023-02-28 18:10:19] - mig: i wondered if you or paul or daniel or xpovos or whoever had any thoughts on stonetoss. it was interesting to me that a pro-14-words nazi, who's literal art is largely about how he doesn't like foreigners, or the lgbt, or women, or miscegenation, etc, was anti-15-minute-city. i didn't imply anything about how a bad person liking your stuff means anything specific though. ~a
[2023-02-28 17:59:43] - a: “that's not what i implied.“ Then why bring up stonetoss at all? - mig
[2023-02-27 23:25:32] - paul: "You didn't link any of his 'bad' comics, but I am also happy to assume they suck". See the "stonetoss" link but also the "source again" which was the source again but also the "also this thing" link, which was a second thing. ~a
[2023-02-27 22:40:18] - a: Or maybe Rowling is the more apt example. I'm perfectly fine enjoying Harry Potter no matter what Rowling says (or Dilbert regardless of what Scott Adams says). -Paul
[2023-02-27 22:39:34] - a: But, yeah, I generally tend to be in the "separate the art from the artist" kind of person. I don't think I like Kanye's music or... R Kelly?, but I would have no problem listening to it despite what the artists have done. -Paul
[2023-02-27 22:38:24] - a: I didn't think it was, but I also don't know what else to address. I don't know the guy. Happy to take your word that he's a bad racist white supremacist. You didn't link any of his "bad" comics, but I am also happy to assume they suck. -Paul
[2023-02-27 21:36:55] - daniel: sure! ~a
[2023-02-27 21:36:49] - i even was specific: "his art is pretty terrible if you look at the rest of the comics" ~a
[2023-02-27 21:35:59] - paul: "I just don't think a position is wrong just because some bad people believe it" that's not what i implied. ~a
[2023-02-27 19:01:59] - a: good for sc2 tonight? -Daniel
[2023-02-27 18:32:02] - a: Okay. Sounds like a bad dude. I guess I just don't think a position is wrong just because some bad people believe it. -Paul
[2023-02-27 03:05:08] - paul: ignoring who the author is and appreciating the art is one thing, but his art is pretty terrible if you look at the rest of the comics. ~a
[2023-02-27 03:04:41] - paul: i'm glad to hear this comic spoke to you. he has one about bitcoin that i also think is well done. but, the dude is a literal nazi, he hates jewish people with a passion, he finds women as a whole to be incompetent, dislikes lgbtq people, has nothing but bad things to say about black people, he denies the holocaust, but also somehow thinks a bunch more people were murdered in dresden, germany. ~a
[2023-02-26 21:43:24] - a: And yeah, I can hear cars driving right on the other side of the fence, and that's not ideal, but I would much rather walk around where I live than in DC or NYC or any of those kinds of walkable environments. -Paul
[2023-02-26 21:41:34] - a: versus the suburbs where I just went on a walk with my youngest through the neighborhood with trees all around and deer grazing on grass and I'm sitting in our driveway now with her asleep and appreciating the sun and trees and birds and squirrels. -Paul
[2023-02-26 21:40:00] - a: I will admit that "anti" comic hits home for me. It seems like a lot of the walkable communities that are supposed to be all awesome often seem super filthy and crowded and dystopian (all concrete and metal and little nature)... -Paul
[2023-02-26 21:34:38] - Maybe more than months, but I definitely recall a time when nobody famous or even remotely famous wanted to defend her at all. -Paul
[2023-02-26 21:33:55] - Just a few months ago, I feel like nobody would dare to want to even appear to defend her and her comments would be outright called "transphobic" instead of "comments on Twitter that many considered to be transphobic" -Paul
[2023-02-26 21:32:37] - https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/evanna-lynch-j-k-rowling-trans-controversy-1235334070/ Just an observation since we briefly discussed Rowling a few days ago: I feel like public perception is shifting some. -Paul
[2023-02-26 21:31:30] - a: I have never heard of stonetoss (honestly thought it was a new Protoss strategy until I saw you addressed Xpovos too). I can read up some, but I have no idea what pro-88 or pro-14-words even means so I feel completely lost right now. -Paul
[2023-02-25 20:52:49] - I won’t respond to any other questions for a week or so, but I’ll check back when I return. — Xpovos
[2023-02-25 20:52:04] - a: I have not heard of stonetoss. I’ll research some. But assuming he is actually pro-14 words, then I am anti-him. I do frequently get concerned when people who I disagree with vehemently get lumped in with me on any political issue. It is a source of opportunity for introspection: do I believe this for logical reasons? How can I differentiate those reasons from the problematic logical reasons? — Xpovos
[2023-02-25 20:52:03] - a: I have not heard of stonetoss. I’ll research some. But assuming he is actually pro-14 words, then I am anti-him. I do frequently get concerned when people who I disagree with vehemently get lumped in with me on any political issue. It is a source of opportunity for introspection: do I believe this for logical reasons? How can I differentiate those reasons from the problematic logical reasons? — Xpovos
[2023-02-25 20:49:17] - Obviously deleting spam is one of those nuances that I highlighted as being problematic and requiring nuance that two sentences could not provide. — Xpovos
[2023-02-25 20:48:25] - a: With the exception of deleting spam, you don’t promote or demote (or sort) in any way that I know of. —Xpovos
[2023-02-25 16:15:00] - but also he's clearly pro-88 pro-14-words (source again also this thing). so i think it's a mixed bag! the author maybe wrote another pro-88 comic called redpanels which had similar talking points. thoughts? ~a
[2023-02-25 16:14:58] - xpovos/paul: have you heard of stonetoss? he had a recent comic about the 15-minute city (anti) which is why i found it: it made me think maybe you have similar pro-car views? i do see the comic parrot a lot of talking points that i hear from you guys (bakers+gay weddings, lgbt/cancel culture/conservative talking points). ~a
[2023-02-24 16:27:27] - xpovos: worded differently, your promoting / demoting rule suggests that literally nobody will get 230 protections. the message board and rampant discourse included. lawsuits for everybody, right? i know i certainly can't afford that kind of liability with my zero dollars of revenue. ~a
[2023-02-24 03:43:22] - xpovos: how is sorting any different from promoting and demoting? ~a
[2023-02-24 01:41:10] - Here's my two sentence (therefore, lacking sufficient nuance, so there are obvious problems) solution to the Section 230 problem. If you are hosting content, you get Section 230 protections. If you are (algorithmically included) promoting (and demoting) certain types of speech, you are editorializing and no longer get Section 230 protections. -- Xpovos
[2023-02-23 19:33:16] - https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/opinion/do-mask-mandates-work.html Were the mask mandates effective? It'll be interesting to see how much retrospective analysis there is to the different responses to COVID (Australia vs Sweden vs US vs China vs others) and to see how much the media covers it. -Paul
[2023-02-23 19:30:33] - a: Maybe. But where would they go that would be better? Europe kind of infamously doesn't have the same free speech culture. -Paul
[2023-02-23 18:53:02] - paul: i also feel like you'd immediately have a huge surge of internet companies leaving the country. ~a
[2023-02-23 16:12:15] - a: From what I understand of it, section 230 seems pretty instrumental for maintaining much of the content on the internet as we know it. It seems like if we get rid of it, the entire internet becomes a cancellation free-for-all hellscape where everybody is trying to bully everybody else into getting rid of speech they don't like. -Paul
[2023-02-23 15:08:20] - what is your opinion on section 230? ~a
[2023-02-23 15:06:52] - paul: "What is your opinion on section 230?" i'm . . . not sure. i think i generally like it because it's very pro free-speech. the specifics of this case are uninteresting: about how the content gets sorted is what is under fire. if how the content gets sorted is unprotected, you're 100% definitely unprotecting all of the content, the law becomes meaningless. i'm totally sure the authors didn't intend to protect nothing. ~a
[2023-02-23 14:57:43] - a: "i hope they do wait on congress" Don't necessarily disagree, but if anybody is less of an internet expert than SCOTUS, wouldn't it be Congress? What is your opinion on section 230? -Paul
[2023-02-22 17:24:38] - deciding the future of the internet "The Supreme Court has shown unusual self-awareness in addressing Section 230"
"they aren't even close to being internet experts" it is unusual that they would recognize this, but some other quotes seem more concerning. i hope they do wait on congress. ~a[2023-02-22 16:27:43] - Daniel: But like you, I know very little about the whole controversy except what I hear second hand, which I don't trust much. -Paul
[2023-02-22 16:26:58] - Daniel: That's totally fair. I'm in a very similar position with the exception that I think I give her a little more of the benefit of the doubt because of some of the (very limited) things I know about what she has said and how they have been interpreted. Maybe she's an actual hateful bigot, but I have yet to see any evidence of that and most of the stuff I've seen her say has seemed... like an acceptable opinion. -Paul
[2023-02-21 23:10:32] - a: It's at least a non-moralistic starting position. But I'll admit it gets complicated fast. How are you to be excellent to someone trying to rob you, for example? Obviously that person is not being excellent to you; but does that excuse you from having to be excellent to them? If not, how do we succeed? -- Xpovos
[2023-02-21 21:18:37] - daniel: "broad philosphy of 'be excellent to each other'" i'm not sure i like that philosophy, because it's very nonspecific. it feels a lot like "do no evil". not everybody will agree on what is excellent or evil? at least the golden rule is more specific, even though i do respect that not everybody wants to be treated the same way. ~a
[2023-02-21 19:57:38] - paul: So in general under the broad philosphy of 'be excellent to each other' I don't think that would qualify and therefore "be problematic" but that also depends on how you define "be problematic". Like its not good. Is it a problem? Depends on if you see JK as yelling into the wind or swaying hearts and minds I guess? -Daniel
[2023-02-21 19:55:52] - paul: With the caveat that I personally pay very little attention to JK my understanding is that she's pretty openly anti trans? Which doesn't seem like a nice thing. But I don't think I have a great nuanced understanding of her beliefs really either. -Daniel
[2023-02-21 19:42:40] - title: Thanks! -Paul
[2023-02-21 19:26:09] - Daniel: Do you think Rowling's views are problematic and WOULD be an issue if you weren't into separating art from artist? -Paul
[2023-02-21 19:25:18] - a: (I haven't forgotten about your last points, sorry. I have been trying to read up on the topic and read your citations). -Paul
[2023-02-21 19:24:48] - It's funny you mention this, because I just started listening to a podcast about the controversy around Rowling: https://www.thefp.com/witchtrials -Paul
[2023-02-21 15:22:29] - mig: I haven't played it but probably will at some point. I get the theory of why people who choose not to don't play it but I think everyone draws the line of separating artist from art differently and in this case I don't think I think there is enough separation b/w the game and JK that it doesn't bother me. I do have a cousin though who is out on the game and /shrug that doesn't bother me either. -Daniel
[2023-02-21 11:44:58] - mig: It’s possible, but unlikely. The world is very popular and the game is exceeding expectations. It’s not perfect of course, but it’s a remarkably good single-player experience in a market that is really missing quality SP-only games. It’s a good game filling a nice niche in a popular universe without “tie-in” limitations. — Xpovos
[2023-02-21 02:25:58] - I wonder if the negative reactors have created a streisand effect that led to its supposed success. I know I would have probably not have heard of the game if not for the negative screed articles on it. - mig
[2023-02-21 02:23:14] - https://www.pcgamer.com/the-worlds-biggest-charity-speedrunning-event-just-banned-hogwarts-legacy/ I’m kind of surprised but also not surprised this new harry potter game has caused quite a stir. - mig
[2023-02-20 19:25:57] - sure thanks for the info! ~a
[2023-02-20 17:19:20] - a: SC2 tonight work for you? -Daniel
[2023-02-17 16:12:49] - Paul: I agree some but probably with some slight differences in opinions. I think its a prisoners dilemma situation where neither side has any real reason to trust the other. I think R's don't even really pretend to want to act cooperatively though? I still think that in general the 'best' way to go about things would be Dem concepts implemented by R's (who weren't undercutting / starving the beast). -Daniel
[2023-02-17 16:06:25] - paul: "if people keep wanting more of something, why is it so wrong to deny it to them?" you haven't shown me that they want it. i drive in a car very often. am i counted in this list of people that keep wanting more of something? ~a
[2023-02-17 16:04:35] - my complaint about the href had a herf error
~a[2023-02-17 16:04:03] - paul: example 7 example 8 <a herf="https://freakonomics.com/2011/05/does-destroying-highways-solve-urban-traffic-congestion/">example 9 links to three studies, but one of the href links is broken</a> ~a
[2023-02-17 16:02:29] - paul: example 4 example 5 example 6 ~a
[2023-02-17 16:02:13] - Daniel: "However given the nature of the system and the state of voters I'm not sure there is a lot to do about it in the short term (sadly)" I agree, but where I suspect we disagree is that I see both sides as part of the problem. Both are breaking with previously established traditions to try to consolidate power and both are saying they are justified because the other side started it and neither will stop escalating. -Paul
[2023-02-17 16:01:07] - paul: example 1 example 2 example 3 wikipedia article ~a
[2023-02-17 16:00:33] - a: "if it's just unmet demand, does it matter that traffic congestion will rise to meet the capacity?" No? Again, if people keep wanting more of something, why is it so wrong to deny it to them? It's not like this is infinite. Obviously if you produce too much then eventually supply will outstrip demand. -Paul
[2023-02-17 15:59:10] - paul: "It sounds like you're arguing we need to build fewer roads to FORCE people to take public transit, which is something they wouldn't otherwise do." i am not arguing this no. i'm arguing that building roads often makes public transit and walking more difficult because you have to get around the traffic somehow. when there are fewer roads, and less traffic, it is easier to walk to where you want to go. or take public transit/bike. ~a
[2023-02-17 15:59:02] - a: "building fewer roads did beat traffic" I'm going to need to see these studies. I can find evidence that building more roads doesn't ease traffic congestion, but haven't seen evidence that eliminating roads inherently makes traffic better. -Paul
[2023-02-17 15:57:30] - a: "often you driving is stopping others from taking public transit IF you driving translates to building more roads" You're going to need to explain this to me like I'm 5. How does building more roads prevent people from being able to take public transit? It sounds like you're arguing we need to build fewer roads to FORCE people to take public transit, which is something they wouldn't otherwise do. -Paul
[2023-02-17 15:57:20] - paul: unlike your internet example, people have done studies of locations that built fewer roads. spoiler warning: building fewer roads did beat traffic. ~a
[2023-02-17 15:55:50] - a: "we tried to beat traffic by building more roads, have we tried building fewer roads?" I'm open to the idea that this could work, but I see it as very unlikely and equivalent to saying something like, "We keep making more internet connected devices and people keep buying more, which is a problem. Should we consider making fewer?" -Paul
[2023-02-17 15:55:33] - Paul: "can we also agree that maybe constantly one-upping the breaking of norms when you are in power and then feigning outrage when the other side does it too (or even escalates) is a bad " - 100% yes. However given the nature of the system and the state of voters I'm not sure there is a lot to do about it in the short term (sadly). -Daniel
[2023-02-17 15:54:16] - a: "we've made it illegal to build walkable neighborhoods" Sure, but I'm saying HOAs might make it not permissible to dry your clothes without a dryer. It's the same argument, just at a different level. -Paul
[2023-02-16 22:17:56] - paul: "isn't that a sign of unmet demand?" the law of congestion states that "peak-hour traffic congestion rises to meet maximum capacity". if it's just unmet demand, does it matter that traffic congestion will rise to meet the capacity? ~a
[2023-02-16 20:55:00] - paul: all the people who want to be vegetarian, and all the people who want to wash their own clothes, and all the people who want to walk to work, and all of the people who don't want to do those things, will all be happy? "me driving isn't stopping others from taking public transit if they want" this is where we differ. often you driving is stopping others from taking public transit IF you driving translates to building more roads. ~a
[2023-02-16 20:52:15] - paul: "HOAs might make rules against it arguing that it's unsightly and you should just use a dryer" this isn't an HOA problem, it is a problem at a much higher level: we've made it illegal to build walkable neighborhoods. zoning and parking minimums make creating a walkable neighborhood literally illegal regardless of the unmet demand. we tried to beat traffic by building more roads, have we tried building fewer roads? ~a
[2023-02-16 20:02:53] - a: I think it's safe to say most people have decided cars are a significant enough improvement over horses / walking / biking / public transit / whatever that they have decided to adopt it. As somebody who counts himself among those ranks, I think that's okay. -Paul
[2023-02-16 20:01:44] - a: And didn't need to pay a bunch of money for a fancy machine AND then pay recurring costs for electricity and whatnot. Note: I think it was a serious video and not a parody, although it was honestly hard to tell. So, yeah, modern conveniences are hardly ever and improvement in every single way. But if their pros outweigh their cons, then I think most people will adopt it. -Paul
[2023-02-16 20:00:20] - a: My point is just that I don't see cars as much different from any other modern convenience: largely an improvement from what came before but with a few (in my opinion) minor things which are worse than what came before. I actually recently saw a video arguing against washing machines (which is likely why it is top of mind for me) because they were saying people could wash their clothes for free before... -Paul
[2023-02-16 19:58:10] - a: So it seems like both of those impact you. And me driving isn't stopping others from taking public transit if they want, right? -Paul
[2023-02-16 19:57:41] - a: I mean, if we want to use your logic, then my using a washing machine could certainly prevent you from at least drying your own clothes on a clothes line. HOAs might make rules against it arguing that it's unsightly and you should just use a dryer. Aren't animal farts a leading contributor to climate change? -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:54:19] - paul: "I would agree trade-offs need to be considered" you using a washing machine and consuming cattle don't keep me from washing my own clothes or being a vegetarian. i also don't have to choke down the fumes of your bad choices when you use a washing machine or consume cattle. at least you say that trade-offs need to be considered: i guess that is a start. ~a
[2023-02-16 15:45:31] - a: But gosh, some people just like the convenience of a washing machine and dryer. I think that's okay. -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:45:10] - a: And I think personal preference counts for something here too. Even if I grant you that public transit or walking or whatever is more efficient or cheap or whatever, a sizeable portion of people prefer driving because it is often more convenient. Maybe I should be using a washing machine as an example? Like, washing machines and dryers are expensive and use more energy than a river and clothesline... -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:43:34] - a: "terribly inefficient: they cost a much more money per passenger mile traveled, and are terrible for the environment. they're bad for the environment, they're bad for physical health, they take up more space, they cost much more money" But most of those things apply to steak over lentils too, right? Bad for environment. Expensive. Inefficient. But there we can acknowledge personal preference counts for something. -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:42:55] - paul: "I would agree trade-offs need to be considered" perfect. that was my one and only point. ~a
[2023-02-16 15:42:27] - a: And so I would agree trade-offs need to be considered. I'm not saying blindly just build roads anywhere. I am just skeptical of this idea that it's useless to build more roads because more people are just going to drive anyway. -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:42:24] - paul: we've gotten to the point where meeting the *induced* demand of car users makes non-car users unable to get to work. ~a
[2023-02-16 15:41:04] - paul: "I don't know why we would single out roads as some odd exception" there's nothing odd about it, we would single them out because they're terribly inefficient: they cost a much more money per passenger mile traveled, and are terrible for the environment. they're bad for the environment, they're bad for physical health, they take up more space, they cost much more money. there are dozens of reasons why we should single them out. ~a
[2023-02-16 15:41:01] - a: To shun more road construction when there is clearly demand for more and instead tell people to use public transit or bike or walk or whatever, seems like the equivalent of putting caps on steak sales and telling people to eat lentils instead. Or capping new home sales and telling people to rent instead. Maybe there are good reasons for it (ie, lentils likely healthier than steak and more environmentally friendly)... -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:37:47] - a: "this seems like an oversimplification" I don't think it's an oversimplification. If, when more supply is provided, then it is immediately all consumed, wouldn't we assume that is a sign even more supply should be created in any other market? To your other point, that doesn't mean we should do anything and everything to create that supply, but I don't know why we would single out roads as some odd exception. -Paul
[2023-02-16 15:35:52] - https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/15/politics/matt-gaetz-justice-department/index.html So.... I guess we stop calling Gaetz a pedophile now? -Paul
[2023-02-15 21:35:46] - a: a reduction in malnutrition simply points to a more nuanced answer to the overall problem. Something I think we can agree upon in both examples. And possibly on the apples example. I’m not sure about the child wives, etc. example. There probably isn’t room for nuance there. — Xpovos
[2023-02-15 17:47:32] - paul: as a more benign example, though: consider something more neutral. like . . . unmet demand for apples. should we ruin our landscape to meet that demand? or should we consider the downside to meeting a demand. ~a
[2023-02-15 17:10:02] - paul: (ignore that it looks like i'm starting a numbered list
i changed my mind on number two, and i'm going to stop there) ~a[2023-02-15 17:07:08] - paul: "isn't that a sign of unmet demand?" this seems like an oversimplification. 1. meeting some demands without considering the side effects seems like a big problem! for instance if there was an unmet demand for something troubling like child porn, (or kids to have sex with, or nuclear weapons, or nooses, or child wives, or something like that) i'm not sure we should stop everything, and go way out of way to meet that demand. ~a
[2023-02-15 15:06:51] - Daniel: Agreed on the very nature of politics being a large part of the problem, but can we also agree that maybe constantly one-upping the breaking of norms when you are in power and then feigning outrage when the other side does it too (or even escalates) is a bad idea that will likely lead to non-stop escalation of badness? -Paul
[2023-02-15 15:04:43] - title: Does that logic work in other places too? We keep training more doctors and people keep using more medical care. We keep making more computers and more people keep using them. Like, isn't that a sign of unmet demand? -Paul
[2023-02-15 13:16:47] - xpovos: that's too bad, i haven't noticed a smell on the metro. i'm fine discussing the downsides of public transit, i have live with plenty of downsides: i just usually like to compare it to the downsides of driving in cars. the smell of exhaust i live with every day is a pretty bad odor, and some days it's really bad. ~a
[2023-02-15 13:14:17] - xpovos: "for generations we’ve tried to beat malnutrition by growing more food. That hasn’t worked either" this is incorrect. the share of the population worldwide that is undernourished has dropped from 13% in 2001 to 9% in 2019. that 4% isn't noise: as changes similar to this can be seen in every continent. also it's not small: 4% of the world population is the same size as the united states population. ~a
[2023-02-15 12:03:13] - Another knock on public transit. This morning my red line train positively reeks of urine. There’s often an odor, but some days it’s really bad. — Xpovos
[2023-02-15 11:16:03] - Title: for generations we’ve tried to beat malnutrition by growing more food. That hasn’t worked either. — Xpovos
[2023-02-13 19:07:01] - paul: "with no awareness of it biting them in the ass" - I don't think they don't have the awareness just that the calculus prioritizes re-election / getting through primaries / getting donations over sensible political action. So I think long term moving away from first past the post and getting more voters involved in primaries ought to be able to help with those (I think). And trying to have better less gerrymandered maps. -Daniel
[2023-02-12 21:12:14] - paul: "I also don't think anybody out there is starving because they don't have a car. Right?" in the real world (tm) it's that people are putting themselves into debt buying cars where it makes no financial sense. which is how i get the "life of debt and misery". ~a
[2023-02-12 20:54:24] - a: I know you don't need them for groceries, but you do need them for lots of stuff. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:53:47] - a: But I also don't think anybody out there is starving because they don't have a car. Right? We're talking about somebody being inconvenienced by not having a car. That seems fine to me because, as I've noted many times... a car is convenient. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:50:48] - paul: you don't need a credit card to use a grocery store. you don't need a smartphone. you don't need a computer. you do typically need a car. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:50:44] - a: We have stuff like door dash. Is that okay? -paul
[2023-02-12 20:50:25] - a: I guess my question is: what is the cost of supporting people who don't have cars? Like, what is the proposed solution in the suburbs where I live of making sure somebody without a car can get groceries? -paul
[2023-02-12 20:49:27] - a: As somebody who is typically on board with modern conveniences, I don't worry much about those questions, but I understand it's a concern for others. Where is the balance? I don't know. -paul
[2023-02-12 20:48:20] - a: "is this acceptable?" I don't know. It's a good question. How much should modern conveniences be required? Is it okay for some places to require credit cards and not take cash? Or for some things to require a computer or smart phone? -paul
[2023-02-12 20:44:43] - Daniel: So instead of compromise and checks and balances, we get an increasingly powerful and less respectful majority relentlessly punishing the other side for what happened in previous years. -paul
[2023-02-12 20:43:50] - Daniel: With both sides accusing the other of unprecedented actions. As somebody removed from both parties, it's frustrating to see whoever is in power keep punishing the minority party with no awareness of it biting them in the ass once they lose power. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:42:58] - i shouldn't *need* to use a car to get groceries 100% of the time. maybe that should be my only argument. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:42:53] - Daniel: don't add SCOTUS justices to pack your side of the court, don't keep flip flopping on the filibuster depending on who is in power, etc). Otherwise it's just an endless stream of changes in the political system.. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:41:59] - paul: shouldn't a certain level of flexibility be a good thing? it's groceries, it's not something that should be hard. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:41:50] - Daniel: "I think at that level everything always involves politics" It seems like it, and I think that's really bad. It seems helpful to have a common set of standards (let the parties pick their committee members, don't refuse to consider a SCOTUS nominee... -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:38:48] - paul: "I would argue a car is a tool that is neither inherently good or bad" i would strongly agree with you here! what are your thoughts on locations where not using a car to, say, get the groceries is impossible (or very very hard): is this acceptable? if you consider the car just a tool like any other, shouldn't *not* using the tool to, say, get groceries be at least a reasonable thing to expect? ~a
[2023-02-12 20:36:38] - a: Sure, we can focus on those people, but I do think that "people living somewhere they don't want to and being unable to afford to move" is a completely different issue than "cars bad and suburbs bad" -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:35:56] - a: "i'd argue that car dominance is actively bad" And I would argue a car is a tool that is neither inherently good or bad, but can be useful at times and not useful in others. In a city? Sure. Probably not as useful. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:35:33] - paul: "not possible for everybody" i'd like to focus the conversation on these people if we can. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:35:10] - a: I know it's kind of a jerk answer and not possible for everybody, but moving is an option. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:34:28] - paul: i'd argue that car dominance is actively bad. bad for cities especially. there are too many places where getting around *without* a car is impossible, and that this is very bad. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:34:26] - a: Is it bad if people don't like the suburbs and live there? I guess, but it's also bad if people hate the city and live there or hate rural areas and live there. It sucks to live someplace you don't like. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:33:33] - a: I honestly don't know what larger issue you're trying to argue here. That the suburbs are bad? Like, why can't you just let people who hate cities and don't mind driving places have a place of their own? -paul
[2023-02-12 20:33:04] - paul: ok. a lot of people who aren't you feel isolated in the suburbs. i'm surprised you haven't heard people say this. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:32:29] - a: All of this without having hundreds of people living in the same block as me. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:32:23] - paul: "Weren't you JUST arguing that you don't need a car in the suburbs to get around?" i hopefully have never argued this. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:32:18] - a: (4) How does living in the suburbs imply isolation? I go on walks and see my neighbors on a constant basis. I see other parents during swim classes and dance classes. I hang out with friends fine. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:30:48] - paul: no cars, paul. cars are worse for the environment. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:30:40] - a: "requiring that people be saddled with a car loan and car insurance to get a job is a problem" These seems like a circular argument. Weren't you JUST arguing that you don't need a car in the suburbs to get around? -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:29:58] - a: (3) You're going to have to expand on this. Is the argument that cities are better for the environment than the suburbs? I suppose that could be true, but I've never been to a city and thought to myself that it was an environmentally friendlier place. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:28:45] - paul: for #2, see the title, services for rural areas are harder to sustain especially when you account for long-term maintenance. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:27:46] - a: I'm sure rural areas are tax inefficient too, but we kind of need them to provide food. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:27:30] - a: (the real 2 this time) Not sure I agree that the suburbs aren't sustainable. I understand your reasoning behind this and how population dense areas provide a better tax base, but I think it's okay that some areas provide higher tax revenue than others. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:27:26] - paul: well if it matters, i don't follow the first argument either. requiring that people be saddled with a car loan and car insurance to get a job is a problem: that other problems also exist seems border-line whataboutism. ~a
[2023-02-12 20:25:42] - a: Sorry ignore that last comment. I wildly screwed up in reading something. -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:24:59] - a: (2) Again, seems like a separate and larger issue, although if neither city nor suburban life is sustainable... what is your proposed solution? Rural life? -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:24:15] - a: Are people compelled to have air conditioning? Washer/dryers? Also, the flip side is true. What about a person who loves to drive cars who grows up in a city and such an activity is prohibitively expensive? -Paul
[2023-02-12 20:23:12] - a: (1) This, I feel, is a different (and larger) issue. The same could be said of housing (do people feel forced to buy real estate which they are priced out of?) or schooling or any number of things. -Paul
[2023-02-11 16:43:56] - And if I did want to be around people, there are many social options. Yes, they're all a car's drive away. But that isn't so bad because it ensures that the people I interact with are not just the ones that happen by coincidence to live next to me, but maybe ones I actually have something in common with. -- Xpovos
[2023-02-11 16:43:00] - a: 1) Being poor in the city isn't any better than being poor in the suburbs. 2) Suburban life is probably not sustainable under the current model. But neither is city life. 3) Governments going into debt doesn't follow from suburban choices (IMO, though I can understand your logic, it's not a requirement--see other Libertarian arguments) 4) Strongly disagree on many levels. I don't want to be around people. That's why I'm here. -- Xpovos
[2023-02-10 16:43:28] - Paul: "that doesn't always involve politics" - this would be nice but I think at that level everything always involves politics. Its all about getting re-elected and if kicking Schiff off a committee gives you a 10% less chance of being primaried or whatever then they take it cause primary voters have gotten increasingly rabid. -Daniel
[2023-02-10 15:53:07] - paul: there are 4 problems with your summary: 1. many people are forced to live in these neighborhoods because they're too poor to move and you are saddling them with a life of debt and misery. 2. the neighborhoods themselves are not sustainable: the governments are going into debt and aren't able to climb out. 3. gestures wildly at the environment. 4. we are a social people: being secluded from eachother creates mental issues. ~a
[2023-02-10 15:50:59] - a: And for those people, a car is almost always a better option than public transit or bikes or walking or whatever. For people who don't want cars or want to live in a walkable environment, I salute you! It's fine to have different preferences. Enjoy living in NYC or DC or wherever where subways and biking and walking are better options than cars. -Paul
[2023-02-10 15:48:46] - a: Anyway, I don't need to repeat myself for the millionth time on our never-ending debate over cars. I'll just try to sum up my position as simply as possible: Some people (like me) don't want to live in a city and aren't interested in the trade-offs necessary to live in a walkable or public transit friendly environment. They like backyards and larger living spaces an having some distance from other people. -Paul
prev <-> next