prev <-> next
[2023-05-30 17:12:13] - xpovos: i am very careful when using crosswalks, and i will never put myself in harms way. if someone wants to ignore my right of way, i won't ever put myself in the way of a car. but, if you ask me to take 30 extra seconds at every crosswalk, i will always ask you take 30 extra seconds at every crosswalk, first. ~a
[2023-05-30 17:08:34] - xpovos: asking the pedestrian and the cyclist and the public transportation user to be careful is redundant: he and she are usually already being careful. and always have the most to lose. instead ask the person chilling in their air-conditioned padded couch to be a bit more careful when crossing *literal crosswalks*. ~a
[2023-05-30 17:05:56] - xpovos: i'd instead ask paul to take an extra 300 milliseconds when crossing a crosswalk, for the safety of everyone else on the road. i mean what's 300 milliseconds compared to 30 seconds? 100x is a pretty big ratio. what benefit does that 300 milliseconds gain, and for what cost? impatience gets people killed. ~a
[2023-05-30 17:04:25] - ... when they've already chosen the transportation option that will take twice as long to get where they're going. What benefit does that thirty seconds save gain, and for what cost? I complain about drivers speeding often enough for the same reasons. Impatience gets people killed. Cyclists can have the same request for patience. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 17:03:12] - a: Make the impossible possible, this gets to another point I can make about the initial crosswalk incident. Cyclists are taking the route of inconvenience. They may do it because it's the only option, I recognize, so for those folks it's not inconvenience, but in reality, that doesn't describe most cyclists. For the crosswalk example, I'm asking that they take an extra 30 seconds when crossing an intersection, for their own safety, ...
[2023-05-30 17:00:33] - xpovos: "It's unsafe to such a large degree as to make it impossible, IMO" people who don't or can't use a car will always be forced to make the impossible possible. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:58:45] - (in fairfax county and arlington and dc, wide asphalt bike paths are a different story, especially if a yellow line is painted down the middle, implying it's a designated multi-use path. a person on a bike is not a guest there, they are peers with a pedestrian) ~a
[2023-05-30 16:56:41] - xpovos: i always consider myself a guest on the sidewalk. i even will (try but sometimes fail to) leave the sidewalk if i see a pedestrian in the distance. i sometimes ride in the grass and sometimes in the roadway if that's possible. i don't want to pass too closely to a pedestrian on a small sidewalk. i always try to say something nice to pedestrians who go out of their way to accommodate me. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:56:19] - a: I prefer universal solutions, but I'll acknowledge, biking anywhere suburban is a nightmare. It's unsafe to such a large degree as to make it impossible, IMO. I'm potentially OK with cyclists on sidewalks in those situations, as a lesser evil kind of thing, for sure. Those major thoroughfare sidewalks are often empty (see trail comment below) further reducing the risk. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:54:55] - xpovos: "you're trying to use the sidewalk to solve the car/bike problem" sorry if i misstated something, but i am not. i will bike on the sidewalk only in certain small situations and mostly in fairfax county. even then, not everywhere in fairfax county. but i do feel for kids who don't have the where-withall to bike anywhere but on a sidewalk in arlington: which is why it's legal in arglington. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:53:23] - xpovos: "that doesn't mean that those incidents are OK" i agree here, but to push the cyclists off the sidewalks in fairfax county will create MANY more incidents than it will reduce. cities like arlington and dc, are definitely a different story. push the bikes off the sidewalks there all you want. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:52:24] - a: The only reason I'm talking about this is because you're trying to use the sidewalk to solve the car/bike problem. I'm explaining why I feel that's a bad solution. I'm not trying to solve a non-existant problem. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:51:41] - a: On bicycle/pedestrian collosions, I have no data. I imagine there is no data. Such incidents are highly unlikely to be fatal, as you note. And in many cases, the injuries will not be severe. Scrapes/road rash, bruises, etc. But that doesn't mean that those incidents are OK. And I dunno, 6 million a year (I've no idea, I'm taking your number) seems like a TON! -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:49:48] - xpovos: cyclist and pedestrian interactions are almost always positive. negative interactions happen at a ridiculously small rate compared to negative interactions with cars. i feel like you're trying to solve a mostly non-problem? i'd love to try to solve the negative car interactions first. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:48:42] - An example of a "sidewalk" I have negligible issues with cyclists using include the "trail" sidewalks, like the one along the Prince William Parkway (local to me example). That trail is clearly designed for runners and cyclists first and foremost. It's not used by random people walking to and from places because there's nowhere to/from on the path. It's almost 11 clicks of nothing. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:48:01] - xpovos: "the danger to pedestrians ... still ends badly in the event of a collision" do you have any data on this? bicyclists kill about 0 people per year in the united states (i.e. not zero, but much less than one per year). compare that to car deaths that are about 40,000 per year in the us, and injuries are less than 6m/year, but i'm not sure the exact number. you want a thing because of a mostly nonexistent problem. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:47:07] - I was on a sidewalk recently an a cycler came up behind me. He announced himself and said, politely, "on your left" to ensure we were both safe. I hadn't heard him coming and was startled, and nearly jumped out of the way, directly into his path. Random example, and this is me as a competent, safety-minded, able-bodied adult. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:45:29] - My issues with bikes on sidewalks/crosswalks is the danger to pedestrians, which while substantially less critical than cars (to both parties) still ends badly in the event of a collision, which due to the lack of any established rules or precedent is going to be more common as well. Particularly if we're concerned about elderly (slow), disabled (needs potentially large support mechanisms), children (who listen to nothing), etc. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:43:42] - a: You're not wrong to hate the transportation system we have. I disagree with Paul on the bikes on the road item. I have no problem with it, but it's also a fairly rare occurence. I do find issue with bikes on sidewalks--some exceptions, which I'll get to shortly. IMO, Bikes are vehicles. If you want bikes off the roads, establish minimum speeds (e.g. some interstates). -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 16:38:34] - paul: i believe you want a world where there are two systems of paths: one for cars and one for everybody else, and never shall the two cross. this system seems very impossible to create. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:36:51] - paul: my alternate take is that cars shouldn't be on some roads because it's dangerous for everybody who's not in a car. what are your thoughts on having more roads for pedestrians/busses/bikes/scooters/emergency/etc road users? ~a
[2023-05-30 16:33:58] - paul: "It frankly doesn't seem like bicycles belong on roads for a bunch of reasons, including the interaction I had. It's dangerous for them!" you don't think pedestrians or bicycles should cross at crosswalks? i understand saying they shouldn't be on the road, but not even allowing them to cross seems like a position you're going to have a harder time defending. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:32:50] - paul: "There IS a crosswalk there, right?" yes, there is, for sure. there's a thing called "maxar" imagery, which is very very low-res but newer than most things. and i do see a crosswalk there. it is a new crosswalk because the street-view imagery that is a year old does not have it. ~a
[2023-05-30 16:30:24] - xpovos: And I still nearly rammed into one when I was paying attention and could've broken his leg or worse. Bicycles usually don't go fast enough, and people are more fragile than cars. It seems like a bad combination. I get nervous and anxious every time I drive on a road and see a cyclist ahead. -Paul
[2023-05-30 16:29:07] - xpovos: "bicyclists trying to have it both ways--you're either a vehicle or you're not" This gets at the crux of my issue with bicycles and cars and pedestrians and how everything is set up (and sure, we can blame city planners or whatever). It frankly doesn't seem like bicycles belong on roads for a bunch of reasons, including the interaction I had. It's dangerous for them! I like to think I am a safe and good driver... -Paul
[2023-05-30 16:26:59] - a: "but this crosswalk is new" I noticed that too, when looking at streetview. There IS a crosswalk there, right? I was like 95% sure there was when the incident happened, but now I am not sure (and actually haven't driven that intersection since because my older kids have been out of town. -Paul
[2023-05-30 14:52:36] - they left out older people, disabled people, people who are parents of teenagers and a bunch of other smaller groups, but i do like to think we're all in this together: fuck cars. ~a
[2023-05-30 14:45:10] - xpovos: i think it is very logical as well: unless you're going to widen sidewalks and add a bunch of bike-facilities in the suburbs, you gotta give the pedestrians and people who use public transportation and people on bikes a fighting chance. or else you're just going to force people who can't drive (because they're too young, too old, or too disabled) to be home-bound or to be dependent on others. ~a
[2023-05-30 14:41:49] - xpovos: (too narrow for bikes and speeds in excess of 60, even though the speed limit is much lower) ~a
[2023-05-30 14:41:24] - xpovos: "you're either a vehicle or you're not" the people who wrote the virginia laws (and the people who wrote maryland laws and dc laws) disagree strongly with you on this point. you're a vehicle when you're in the road, and you're a pedestrian when you're on a sidewalk or crosswalk (ignoring exceptions). in this specific case i never ride in the lane, because west ox is a shit-show. ~a
[2023-05-30 14:38:39] - a: A part of this might be my own bias, against bicyclists trying to have it both ways--you're either a vehicle or you're not. If you're a vehicle, you don't get the crosswalk, you get the lane. If the cyclist had had been in the lane, it's much more likely Paul would have seen him. That brings additional/different risks, though, I know. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 13:27:32] - (it also might be totally derailing the conversation, but this crosswalk is new. the streetview images i've seen of this intersection has no crosswalk. it could be this is one of the things that threw paul off for a few extra milliseconds: he was used to having the right of way over pedestrians) ~a
[2023-05-30 13:25:22] - xpovos: back to the original example, of biking in the crosswalk, you said "he shouldn't have been in the crosswalk--which is for walking", i never ever ever see bikes dismount for a crosswalk. or almost hardly ever, but especially not in a city unless there's hundreds of pedestrians. so i'm not even sure this is a great example of "laws that people don't know about". ~a
[2023-05-30 13:21:37] - xpovos: it's also a totally biased argument: you don't apply that logic elsewhere. like ever. in a car, when the light turns green we look AND go (or at least 99% of us do). you don't wait for side-cars to all come to a stop. yes, dying sucks, and we should all try to avoid it, but there is *always* an end to what a rational being is willing to put up with. ~a
[2023-05-30 13:19:49] - xpovos: i really hate that argument because it really restricts the vulnerable road users to basically never going outside. i obviously never put myself in harms way, but i also refuse to assume i can't bike in a crosswalk: that would be so dumb! i bike in the crosswalk, and if a car decides they want to end my life because of inattention or misunderstanding, i'll definitely let them know about my displeasure. ~a
[2023-05-30 13:18:36] - A related example. A speed limit is a limit, legally. If I drive on the interestate (speed limit 55/65 mph) at 45mph, I am obeying the law. But in fact, the general assumption is that the speed of travel is the limit, plus 5-10mph, so my perfectly legal 45mph is de facto a road hazard as I am traveling at 15-20mph below the flow speed. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 13:17:13] - a: regarding the legality of the crosswalk thing, you are of course correct. The problem is that legalities matter a lot less on the road than they ought. What frequently matters is assumptions. Particularly with distracted drivers, assumptions are key. And what I stated is a common assumption of the law, even if it is wrong. I'd rather not have the law on my side and the driver of a 4000lb machine's assumptions on the other. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-30 13:12:34] - paul: source ~a
[2023-05-29 16:12:54] - paul: "'no turn on red' sign" after enough ratio of injury and destruction of property we eventually we might get to all red lights being no turn on red. so there won't be a sign. they'll all be no turn on red regardless of signs: many other countries work this way. i love the no turn on red when i'm on foot or when i'm on a bike because i get drivers trying to hit me way less often! ~a
[2023-05-29 16:11:59] - paul: yes, i knew what you meant about pentagon city / harris teeter. the underground area is distinctly not pentagon city (that's usually called crystal city, but i admit the names are mid-change). i mentioned it because . . . it's shopping and nearby. ~a
[2023-05-29 16:06:57] - a: Thanks for the info. Not entirely sure where the underground shopping area you are talking about is, but I am specifically talking about the shopping center right next to Pentagon City with the Harris Teeter. -Paul
[2023-05-29 16:03:06] - a: But legally can't because of a stupid red turn signal or "no turn on red" sign. -Paul
[2023-05-29 16:02:49] - a: I don't like the "no turn on red" as a solution, though, because I've had so many times where I am sitting at a location for minutes where I can very clearly safely go (ie, I can see no traffic is even remotely close)... -Paul
[2023-05-29 16:01:59] - a: I was actually taking a left, and the cyclist was coming from the left, but I've had what you've described be a problem as well where I want to take a right and start looking left for cars and miss pedestrians/cyclists on my right. -Paul
[2023-05-29 00:24:31] - Paul: I lived in crystal city for 6 months. I do like the pentagon row area from a bus/metro/pedestrian perspective. There is still more they can do for pedestrians and public transit, but I like how things are progressing. the shopping is fine too. Just stay away from the underground shopping (near Clark St probably), that place is kitchy but does not get much foot traffic. ~a
[2023-05-29 00:00:01] - Paul: (I know this isn't a signalized intersection, but) Arlington, dc, and Alexandria are slowly making many turns into no-right-on-red because drivers look left for cars instead of right for pedestrians. no-right-on-red is much safer and assuming you were turning right (and had it been signalized) would have aliviated this issue entirely. ~a
[2023-05-28 23:57:36] - Paul: I hate that intersection on a bike. I do not dismount obviously. I'm not sure the dangerousness of a median on a residential road but the median absolutely shouldn't extend into the interaction regardless. ~a
[2023-05-28 23:50:56] - xpovos: "He shouldn't have been in the crosswalk--which is for walking". *Hard* disagree. This is a misunderstanding of the laws regarding bicycles in a crosswalk. In Virginia and dc you need not dismount a bicycle in a crosswalk. Virginia is 46.2-904 and dc is 50-2201.28. ~a
[2023-05-28 23:46:01] - a: Any thoughts on the Pentagon Row shopping area in terms of if it's nice / popular / gets decent traffic? -Paul
[2023-05-28 23:45:13] - Xpovos: He was definitely riding it, and I'm pretty sure he was in the crosswalk? Otherwise I wasn't that close to him. It all happened kind of fast. -Paul
[2023-05-28 23:44:06] - a: I always thought it was a little strange, but also kind of pretty looking, that the intersection had that landscaped median at the entrance. Never occurred to me that it might be a hazard. Anyway, please apologize to your cyclist friend for me. -Paul
[2023-05-28 14:17:56] - Paul: If I'm understanding the scenario correctly, the biker was technically in the wrong. He shouldn't have been in the crosswalk--which is for walking. If he was walking the bike, then fine. But the sightlines are made expecting people moving at certain speeds, I guess. I'm sure it's still an actual hazard, and him being in the wrong won't make you feel better if you hit him. Bad situation. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-28 03:11:29] - paul: "If there is something better I should be doing I want to know it" if you is literally "you", then no, other than leaving your car at home you did everything right. vote for lawmakers and board members that will work on those shitty sight-lines (also that will build better intersections, and decenter car travel, etc). as a person on a bike I'm very often bothered by shitty sight-lines. ~a
[2023-05-28 00:27:50] - a: Obviously I am a biased witness here, but I wasn't distracted at the time and was paying attention and still genuinely didn't see the cyclist until he was literally right in front of me. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:22:29] - a: For the record, I don't think the current google street view does justice to the low visibility there now. Those beach grass things are taller now. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:20:46] - a: I don't often go this direction on Viking, but I'm very familiar with the intersection as it's on the way to my kids' school so I drive it probably 4-5 times a week. If there is something better I should be doing I want to know it. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:20:05] - a: But sometimes there is, and one or both of you has to abruptly stop and let the other go. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:19:33] - a: I actually went to a grocery store right after that and it reminds me of navigating intersections of aisles with shopping carts. You can't see easily if anybody is coming so you push out cautiously with the nose of your cart and hope nobody is there. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:18:01] - a: And I understand why, and I genuinely feel bad, but I'm also kind of wondering what I could've done better or what I did wrong? I probably had a fraction of a second where I might've been able to see him in my peripheral as he went between the trees and bushes as I was approaching the intersection to know he was there. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:16:14] - a: Anyway, I'm pretty sure was angry at me based on him staring me down as he passed, then turning around to look at me once he got to the sidewalk and then gesturing in my general direction with his arm. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:15:28] - a: So I drive to where the front of my car goes maybe halfway into crosswalk at maybe 5 mph? Maybe it was more. I don't really know. I suddenly see the cyclist as he passes right in front of me and I hit my brakes (wasn't dramatic, no screeching of tires or anything). -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:14:07] - a: But the arrangement of trees and bushes and whatnot also makes it tricky to see people using the crosswalk ahead of time. Anyway, I was driving up with NO idea a cyclist was about to cross (or in the process of crossing) the crosswalk. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:12:45] - a: I was driving on Viking and preparing to take a left turn onto West Ox. The way bushes and such are arranged, you pretty much HAVE to drive partially into the crosswalk in order to see if any cars are coming on the left. -Paul
[2023-05-28 00:11:35] - a: I've a question for you on a car / cyclist interaction. The incident happened at the intersection of Viking and West Ox, which I think is approximately at these coordinates: 38°55'08.4"N 77°22'33.4"W -Paul
[2023-05-26 15:01:45] - paul: No I don't think your car is a problem regardless. ~a
[2023-05-26 14:39:22] - a: Does it help if my car has a front camera than can show things in that cone of blindness? -Paul
[2023-05-26 14:38:37] - mig: Yeah, about the only thing more ridiculous than Democrats nominating Biden again is Republicans nominating Trump again. -Paul
[2023-05-25 22:57:14] - i mean there’s a nonzero chance that Trump is the gop nominee again, which is probably more unbelievable. - mig
[2023-05-25 18:45:28] - paul: "I still cannot believe Biden said he was going to run again" omg me neither. what a terrible, terrible move. i fucking hate biden for (among other things) running again. ~a
[2023-05-25 18:43:51] - paul: you can (must?) ignore the kids. the point of the kids, is that lots of kids can be in that triangle. it's the sight-distance that is (semi) scientific. ~a
[2023-05-25 18:42:10] - mig: Ugh, I refuse to believe that. Biden was a consistently awful gaffe machine who kept unsuccessfully running for President before he became VP to Obama. I think that's pretty much all he had going for him in the 2020 primaries. -Paul
[2023-05-25 18:17:02] - paul: well let’s be real even back in 2020 he was probably their best candidate and still currently is. - mig
[2023-05-25 17:18:18] - mig: Between Fetterman, Feinstein, and Biden all seemingly having some major mental issues.... it's not a good look for the Democratic Party. I still cannot believe Biden said he was going to run again. And some of the stories about Fetterman and how he hides in his office so he can wear his hoodie and gym shorts instead of a suit.... it's just kind of weird man. -Paul
[2023-05-25 17:14:55] - a: I hate that front-blindness chart. How am I supposed to compare things when the numbers are different for every example? Every one of those kids is a different height, as far as I can tell. -Paul
[2023-05-25 16:13:06] - https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2023-05-25/poll-should-diane-feinstein-resign-unfit-for-office-what-california-voters-say i’ve been pretty struck by the contrasting coverage between john fettermen’s struggles (super sympathetic) and feinstein’s (GTFO of the sentate) - mig
[2023-05-24 17:30:03] - any thoughts on front-blindness? obviously ignore that tank image, that's not really much of a thought-provoking exercise, but seeing the 18-wheeler truck have less "front-blindness" than other much smaller vehicles seems incredibly dumb and * short-sighted *. ~a
[2023-05-24 16:00:36] - yeah 500 per year is more respectable. you could also up the amount. i'm starting to keep more percent in cash than i did as a young adult. ~a
[2023-05-24 14:59:51] - a: Yeah, I get it, and if you annualize that out it becomes $500+, which is more respectable. It's just a lot of work for $41, which I can easily blow on a single meal out with the family. -Paul
[2023-05-24 14:24:46] - paul: yes. i got to $41. $41 makes sense for such a small amount of money and time: 5% is a pretty good rate. i think you'll need way more time or way more money to get more returns. ~a
[2023-05-23 19:42:14] - https://www.treasurydirect.gov/auctions/announcements-data-results/ According to this, I think I am getting 5.482% as my rate? Sounds pretty decent, although for a $10k purchase that seems to work out to about $42. Feels underwhelming, although I suppose it's pretty good for a nearly guaranteed return over 4 weeks. -Paul
[2023-05-23 19:40:51] - A follow-up to my tbill saga that I don't know if anybody here cares about: 10 days after I requested to purchase a 4 week tbill, it looks like the auction happened and went through today. -Paul
[2023-05-22 19:26:09] - Daniel: I'm out this week, thanks. I'm in Indiana until Thursday when I fly back to DC then back to Illinois (smh). ~a
[2023-05-22 18:11:22] - a: sc2 night? -Daniel
[2023-05-22 18:11:17] - Paul: i haven't heard of the Durham report yet. -Daniel
[2023-05-16 18:02:24] - it was released yesterday, that's when i heard about it. ~a
[2023-05-16 17:02:11] - Anybody here knowledgeable about this Durham report? Today is the first I've heard of it, but it sounds like it's pretty damning of the FBI investigation into links between Trump and Russia? -Paul
[2023-05-15 18:28:28] - daniel: sure, tonight works for me. monday, tuesday, wednesday work. i also emailed you thanks! ~a
[2023-05-15 18:26:24] - a: thoughts on sc2 day? tonight work? -Daniel
[2023-05-14 20:40:56] - The only name mentioned that I know is Hung Cao, and he was on the victim list. I don't know if they're well known, though. But does perhaps show how badly the (sorry for the word choice here) discourse in this country has fallen apart all over the place. Death threats are just now a normal part of the rhetorical canon. -- Xpovos
[2023-05-14 13:56:08] - i've never heard of this group. are they well known? ~a
[2023-05-13 16:27:35] - https://wjla.com/amp/news/local/loudoun-county-cornerstone-chapel-church-leesburg-virginia-target-hit-list-love-warriors-facebook-group-gary-hamrick-hung-cao-kr of some local interest and … thats a yikes from me dog. - mig
[2023-05-13 03:16:05] - yeah i've only ever bought ee bonds and ibonds. i never read about t bills. ~a
[2023-05-13 03:15:24] - a: Oh, wow. I find that surprising considering how big of a proponent you have been for bonds. -Paul
[2023-05-12 20:49:42] - paul: i've never bought a t-bill, sorry. ~a
[2023-05-12 20:46:22] - To completely change topics to another message board favorite: If I had a decent-ish chunk of cash (let's say $10k-$15k) that I wanted to park somewhere for maximum guaranteed return but also would likely want to access it within the next twelve months.... are t-bills the way to go? 4-week maturity ones have a rate of 5.5%? Can I buy through something like Merrill or do I have to use Treasury Direct? -Paul
[2023-05-12 19:47:25] - a: "you seem to state that there were no rules" I only state this because that's basically what has been laid out in all the articles I read about this. There is almost always some variation of: "This does not technically break any rules, because there kind of are none". -Paul
[2023-05-12 19:20:22] - that being said, i understand, that justice thomas isn't a federal worker under the executive branch, so the rules for the judicial system will be different. i just don't know what they are. you seem to state that there were no rules (other than those set in the constitution). ~a
[2023-05-12 19:19:25] - "I get that rules need to be set and they need to be binary and people are always going to push up against those lines" ok, this is my stance as well. if the rules we set forth for normal federal workers applied to justice thomas, then justice thomas would be in violation. and his punishment would extend to at *least* paying back the price of the vacation. ~a
[2023-05-12 18:58:38] - a: But I get that rules need to be set and they need to be binary and people are always going to push up against those lines. -Paul
[2023-05-12 18:57:43] - a: Inviting him to hang out on your yacht because you're genuinely friends and there is no quid pro quo? I'm mostly okay with (despite obviously admitting the optics are bad). I think Kagan would be safe with those bagels too. -Paul
[2023-05-12 18:56:38] - a: Sorry, I wasn't trying to be combative or blame you or even question that you're right. It's more general libertarian ranting of "How can the government think they can reasonably tax / regulate this?" Regardless of the official tax / ethics rules, I personally feel like this isn't a super binary thing. Giving Justice Thomas a Tesla with a clear quid pro quo ask? Clearly corrupt and bad... -Paul
[2023-05-12 18:12:10] - paul: "it just feels like enforcing that latter example is tough" i don't think it's tough, but i also never really got close to the line, so it hasn't affected me directly. ~a
[2023-05-12 18:11:21] - paul: "politicians or for anybody" anybody. ~a
[2023-05-12 18:11:07] - paul: "Do I?" there is also a lifetime exception. "how exactly do you value riding on a million dollar yacht for a few weeks" you keep asking me like it's my fault our tax law is written this way. it IS written this way, and always has been. don't blame me. you use the "value": i haven't read the law because i've never gotten close to 17k before. ~a
[2023-05-12 18:09:27] - a: Regardless of what the official rules are for politicians in general or SCOTUS specifically, it just feels like enforcing that latter example is tough. In a way, it almost forces people to keep friends of similar economic levels. -Paul
[2023-05-12 18:08:21] - a: I read the links, but I guess a big part of my hold-up is what counts as a gift. Obviously if I say, "Here, Justice Thomas, here is a brand new Tesla. I hope you like it". That's a clear physical gift with definite value. But if you and I are friends, and you invite me to spend the month on your yacht to visit Australia and play Starcraft 2.... is that a gift or just two people hanging out? -Paul
[2023-05-12 18:04:22] - a: Is this just for politicians or for anybody? Like, if some day I take my kids on some month long European vacation that I pay for and it totals $20k, do they have to pay taxes on that? Do I? At least in that case there are receipts so we know how much it cost, but how exactly do you value riding on a million dollar yacht for a few weeks? -Paul
[2023-05-12 13:54:11] - paul: "they get messy really quickly and have to eventually come around to some sense of quid pro quo" not exactly. basically you CAN'T receive gifts from certain people. there's no quid pro quo if there are no gifts! of course, there are exceptions, but i linked the link. did you read the link? ~a
[2023-05-12 13:52:06] - paul: "then either they or I have to pay taxes on that because its a gift" yes, but that's literally how all gift taxes have always worked. you give someone a gift (17k+) you pay the gift tax. if you think this is a weird situation, i don't know what to say other than TONS of stuff works exactly like this. political donations. in-kind donations. services of any kind that are given for free from anyone to anyone where there are taxes. ~a
[2023-05-12 13:41:21] - a: "the federal government has clear and firm guidelines so there is no malfeasance and so there are no questions about what is allowed and what is not." What are those rules? Because I have to imagine they get messy really quickly and have to eventually come around to some sense of quid pro quo. I mean, so many politicians are millionaires so it would make sense they have other rich friends that they might often hang out with. -Paul
[2023-05-12 13:38:15] - a: "you can literally look at the tax assessment of a thing online" Yeah, but aren't some of the big things like trips on yachts? So you're saying if I take a yacht out on a worldwide your by myself, there's no taxes, but if I take a friend along, then either they or I have to pay taxes on that because its a gift? -Paul
[2023-05-11 16:11:39] - paul: "Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan once turned down a care package of bagels and lox" maybe the rules aren't different? i guess we'll see . . . when we find out what happens to thomas and crow. ~a
[2023-05-11 16:05:04] - paul: "how do you differentiate between a politician / judge having a wealthy friend and bribery?" the federal government has clear and firm guidelines so there is no malfeasance and so there are no questions about what is allowed and what is not. why the supreme court justices are not subject to those rules does seem weird, but . . . i guess they are a different branch. ~a
[2023-05-11 14:20:52] - paul: "Seems like it would be hard to enforce" nah, this seems like it's one of the least-hard things to enforce in our tax code because you can literally look at the tax assessment of a thing online or you can google online for a fair market value for a thing. these are some of the least-difficult things to enforce. taxing all wealth of a billionaire, on the other hand, that would be very hard to enforce. ~a
[2023-05-11 13:33:22] - a: "i'm not sure that's how our tax code ... violations work. did crow break any non-tax-code laws? maybe, or probably not." Yeah, I think I have been very clear: I have no idea if there are tax violations. Maybe. Seems like it would be hard to enforce, but that hasn't stopped the IRS in the past. -Paul
[2023-05-11 13:31:52] - And just to be clear, I think both are unseemly looking, but I also don't know how or where one would draw lines. Unless there is clear evidence of quid pro quo, how do you differentiate between a politician / judge having a wealthy friend and bribery? -Paul
[2023-05-11 13:30:56] - paul: "quid pro quo allegations...pretty vague" i'm not sure that's how our tax code or (non-supreme-court) ethics violations work. did crow break any non-tax-code laws? maybe, or probably not. but *normal* ethics guidelines do prevent obviously problematic situations like this one. ~a
[2023-05-11 13:30:51] - And while there are allegations of influence peddling, there is no clear evidence. All of that could be written about the Thomas situation too! -Paul
[2023-05-11 13:30:22] - https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/house-republicans-attack-biden-family-alleging-foreign-business-rcna83693 I have been trying to avoid bringing this up because I don't want it to seem like I am trying to do whataboutism, but the similarities are too striking not to at least mention. The Biden family got lavished with money, but none of it seems specifically illegal. -Paul
[2023-05-11 13:26:55] - a: I see lots of evidence that Crow has been giving lavishly to Thomas, but the only thing I see approaching addressing some sort of quid pro quo allegations is: "Allegations have risen that Crow has been "subsidizing the lifestyle of Thomas and his wife" as Thomas continued to support conservative causes on the Supreme Court." Which is pretty vague. -Paul
[2023-05-11 13:25:31] - mig: I was just about the ask about that! I was shocked to see the news he was on CNN last night. I swear we're just a few months removed from pearl clutching over Musk allowing Trump back on twitter and how it signaled he was a far-right extremist and now everyone seems fine with Trump on CNN? And why was he on CNN? Are they doing one for Desantis and Nikki Haley too? -Paul
[2023-05-11 12:01:22] - speaking of trump, if he is the greatest threat to democracy and everything decent, what is CNN doing giving him a free publicity appearance on what looked basically like a MAGA rally? - mig
[2023-05-10 21:18:36] - a: is it? anything that lessens the chance of trump being the nominee can be read as good news for the gop. - mig
[2023-05-10 17:01:47] - paul: "is there any evidence" Harlan Crow#Gifts to Clarence Thomas looks to have butt-tons of evidence, yes. ~a
[2023-05-10 16:53:47] - trump found guilty of sexual abuse followed by charges of wire fraud, money laundering, theft of public funds, and two counts of lying to the House of Representatives" for santos. it's a bad 24 hours for republicans. ~a
[2023-05-10 16:45:19] - a: But it's another thing if this dude has a super cool yacht that he wants to use with friends and he likes hanging out with Thomas. -Paul
[2023-05-10 16:44:20] - a: I'll repeat that I know very little about this, so this is an honest question and not some sort of gotcha, but is there any evidence of impropriety beyond Thomas having a wealthy friend who he does super expensive things with (on the friend's tab)? Like, if he was ruling on Crow v the United States and during that time Crow took him on a worldwide yacht tour that is one thing... -Paul
[2023-05-10 16:42:21] - a: "it does seem like you're trying to play both sides of the argument here" I wasn't trying to play both sides. Almost the opposite. I was trying to highlight the difference between something being specifically outlawed by name versus not being specifically outlawed by name, but maybe still isn't right. -Paul
[2023-05-10 16:40:10] - a: "you're referring specifically to supreme court rules i assume?" Yes, that's what I meant. As I said before: "I'm hardly knowledgeable about my own taxes, let alone those of a Supreme Court Justice" Is it a tax violation? I have no idea. On the surface, it seems hard to enforce letting a friend take a trip on your yacht, no matter how nice it is. -Paul
[2023-05-10 16:21:26] - every once and a while i hear mention of a "trillion-dollar coin". this gets discussed seriously in the news on occasion, but also we basically DID something similar in 2008 (with congress). when this discussion happens, i have no clue why currency markets don't freak the fuck out. if i was trading jpy and usd (or precious metals) i'd be watching *very* closely to changes in supply. i feel like a trillion dollar coin qualifies! ~a
[2023-05-10 13:17:33] - paul: "technically the President can pack the court whenever he wants too since that's not against the rules or something" it does seem like you're trying to play both sides of the argument here. almost like you're saying "there are no rules specifically against it, so who cares?" with the thomas situation and "there are no rules specifically against it, but i still don't like it" with the packing-the-courts situation. ~a
[2023-05-10 13:12:32] - paul: "there is nothing stating you can't take super expensive trips on a friend's yacht and not report it" careful with your words here. you're referring specifically to supreme court rules i assume? because if not, there ARE definitely rules against this in the federal tax code, as we discussed yesterday. the IRS will definitely be on your case if those super expensive yacht trips are over 17k per person. ~a
[2023-05-10 13:00:53] - a: So.... it goes back to what I originally said: Maybe this is wrong. Maybe it looks bad. Maybe there should be consequences.... but it doesn't appear to be breaking any established rules. -Paul
[2023-05-10 13:00:05] - a: But there is nothing stating you can't take super expensive trips on a friend's yacht and not report it. But there ARE specific rules stating that has to be reported (or isn't allowed) for other positions. -Paul
[2023-05-10 12:59:30] - a: Sure, and I suppose technically the President can pack the court whenever he wants too since that's not against the rules or something. We could also remove Thomas for eating pizza with a fork and knife. -Paul
[2023-05-10 12:55:43] - paul: ("an outright bribe", an aside, but bribery is literally called out in the constitution in that section) ~a
[2023-05-10 12:54:21] - paul: which rules? i've looked at the constitution and it outright states a supreme court justice *can* be removed for "misdemeanors", which literally means "a minor wrongdoing"
i assume you don't mean the constitution though. ~a[2023-05-10 12:53:17] - https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/09/media/tucker-carlson-twitter/index.html I often have trouble telling the difference, but is this supposed to be an editorial? Or a news story? -Paul
[2023-05-10 12:52:41] - a: But every article I read on this seems to talk about how it looks bad, but that technically it's not breaking any rules. -Paul
[2023-05-10 12:51:56] - a: Uh... it wasn't intended to be a lie of omission. Are there no ethical limits at all? I have to assume an outright bribe (vote this way and I pay you) is still a violation. Like I said, I don't know much about the ethical / tax rules of SCOTUS. -Paul
[2023-05-10 01:06:41] - mig: weird? ~a
[2023-05-09 23:59:19] - https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/04/politics/sonia-sotomayor-neil-gorsuch-book-recusal-supreme-court-cases/index.html other scotus folks have had eyebrow raising arrangements but everyone seems very fixated on the black man. weird. - mig
[2023-05-09 21:31:37] - paul: the truth is a supreme court justice can be impeached and removed by congress for "other high crimes and misdemeanors". ~a
[2023-05-09 19:47:36] - paul: "this seems within ethical limits"
saying something is within limits that do not exist seems like a lie by omission? ~a[2023-05-09 18:12:46] - a: All over? Your article touches on it later: "The high court currently doesn’t have a mandatory code of ethics, even though lower court judges are expected to avoid impropriety or do business with anyone who may come before the bench." -Paul
[2023-05-09 18:03:52] - paul: "everything I've read indicates this seems within ethical limits" what did you read that suggested this? ~a
[2023-05-09 17:40:36] - a: I'm hardly knowledgeable about my own taxes, let alone those of a Supreme Court Justice.
The short answer is: I don't know the rules, but everything I've read indicates this seems within ethical limits, but maybe it shouldn't be? -Paul[2023-05-09 16:53:03] - also a second btw, my 11k number is at least a few years out of date. it's up to 17k now (per person). ~a
[2023-05-09 16:51:35] - paul: btw, inviting someone over to your pool for a week will not hit 11k even if its a really nice pool. ~a
[2023-05-09 16:51:06] - paul: not your taxes, but his. yes, if it's over 11k, that's 100% how the tax system works and we usually don't care or pay attention to it because we're not typically giving or getting 11k gifts. people who throw around 11k gifts usually pay a tax accountant that would definitely go to jail if they intentionally left that shit out of their clients' taxes. ~a
[2023-05-09 16:45:08] - a: Like, if I had a super rich friend who invited me over to swim in his pool and whatever a couple times a year... I wouldn't think that was something that would need to be reported on taxes. -Paul
[2023-05-09 16:44:33] - a: I know very little about this, but as I understand it, many of these "gifts" were trips on his yacht and whatnot, right? Are those things stuff a friend would typically charge for which have some sort of taxable value? -Paul
[2023-05-09 16:09:06] - its my understanding that these gifts are required to be reported? if so, and they went unreported, i wonder if they also were also illegally un-taxed? on the other hand, that seems like something thomas's tax advisor would have caught though, right? ~a
[2023-05-09 13:53:58] - a: Uh.... I don't know how to answer if Brian Feroldi is a sycophant. Obviously I don't think so, but I do believe he's a Tesla investor and if I had to guess, he probably admires Musk as an entrepreneur. So maybe you might think so? -Paul
[2023-05-08 22:42:50] - agreed. also that musk is doing this *because* of the npr spat. and brianferoldi is a sycophant? ~a
[2023-05-08 21:41:45] - person's "threatening and angry". At least half kidding, I know Musk's email to NPR was almost certainly singling them out and at best was trolling them. -Paul
[2023-05-08 21:41:01] - a: is another
[2023-05-08 21:40:57] - a: https://twitter.com/BrianFeroldi/status/1655669850302193668 I found this exchange amusing, considering our discussion over NPR previously. One person's "good way to turn inactive accounts back into active ones"... -Paul
[2023-05-05 20:16:15] - i got it. ~a
[2023-05-05 20:16:07] - (That was supposed to be two fingers very close to each other). -Paul
[2023-05-05 20:15:50] - a: I do care. Just about this much: ||
-Paul[2023-05-05 20:15:18] - a: Like, the previous twitter administration would routinely lock people out of accounts they were very actively using (or outright ban people) if they said things twitter didn't like. So it's hard for me to get too worked up over the current admin asking about (or even threatening, if we take NPR at its word) taking back an account that NPR itself has been saying they have no intent to use. -Paul
[2023-05-05 20:14:49] - paul: just because other things matter more doesn't mean that this doesn't matter. but i get it, you don't care. i'm just glad that musk paid me 54.20 per share before he decided to . . . be terrible as the twitter ceo. ~a
[2023-05-05 20:11:44] - a: I care probably 10X more about the twitter file stuff about how the government colluded with twitter to suppress speech that the government didn't like. I care maybe 100X more than the social media companies apparently colluded to suppress legitimate news about a presidential candidate right before an election. This feels like such an insignificant thing to me. -Paul
[2023-05-05 20:10:50] - paul: "A dangerous threat to a free press that I should worry about" i also don't think it's this. i think they are terrible decisions made by a terrible ceo. ~a
[2023-05-05 20:07:24] - mig: sorry, i didn't realize that you weren't paul.
i meant to send those last to to you. ~a[2023-05-05 20:07:23] - a: "why do it now?" I already admitted it was almost certainly a troll by Musk, who is specifically targeting NPR because they have been involved in a spat for weeks now. Petty? Sure. Just as petty as NPR picking up its bags and going home after getting an accurate "government funded media" label. A dangerous threat to a free press that I should worry about? No. -Paul
[2023-05-05 20:05:46] - a: "potentially be used by someone who wouldn't immediately be confused with you" You keep coming back to this, and I keep responding with twitter's impersonation rules (https://help.twitter.com/en/safety-and-security/report-twitter-impersonation). Yes, Musk can always change then, but he could also just outright take NPR's handle without asking too, which would make this whole convo moot. -Paul
[2023-05-05 19:12:08] - paul: he's not free to do whatever he wants and . . . we are forced to keep doing business with him. that's not what you mean i assume. ~a
[2023-05-05 19:11:17] - paul: can't they both be true? he can do what he wants with his private company: *and* people can decide they don't want to do business with said private company because of the terrible direction he's taken it. ~a
[2023-05-05 19:09:45] - I’ll say again its weird how the reactions from twitter have gone from “it’s private company they can do whatevah neener neener neener!” (pre-musk) to “this musk guy is a threat to the entire universe for doing what he wants with his private company” - mig
[2023-05-05 16:25:45] - paul: an idiot, or more likely he wanted it to seem threatening. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:24:52] - paul: "reach out and see if they intend to use it or if you can free it up for some other user" this is a * very * generous summary of what you think happened, but EVEN if that were the case: why do it now? why not wait for a cooling off period. he didn't wait because he's an idiot. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:23:22] - paul: squatting on it only makes sense as an argument if it *could* potentially be used by someone who wouldn't immediately be confused with you. if this was the @happy handle or @love or @word or @excel or something like that, i'd understand. these are english words that (some of them are companies or brands) but very general concepts. @npr is national public radio in the united states. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:23:01] - a: I don't think it's the end of the world to reach out and see if they intend to use it or if you can free it up for some other user. I totally get NPR was singled out by Musk to troll them, and that's not good, but it just seems like an overreaction from NPR who seems to think they are entitled to own a specific handle on a website they have publicly said they don't intend to use. -Paul
[2023-05-05 16:21:10] - a: "who could potentially impersonate you" Not according to current twitter policies (although I grant those are subject to change by Musk). The Amazon comparison falls apart because there is no concept of a handle. There can be multiple authors with the same name. A twitter handle DOES in theory have value, though. And if somebody is squatting on it with no intention of using it.... -Paul
[2023-05-05 16:10:58] - i mean . . . fuck cars. but that's a different argument. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:10:14] - paul: i haven't denied that tesla is an amazing company. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:09:08] - "and it didn't really go anywhere" i'm not sure that's true. they built a company that musk was able to turn into a pretty successful car company. would they have been able to do that without musk: *today* i'm starting to think that they fucking could have super easily. i didn't always believe that but i do now. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:07:48] - paul: "why wouldn't I let him have it?" i mean i was joking, but you know that's not how it went down. in this situation bezos sends you a threatening email (npr's words) that they will give it to another person with your name (who could potentially impersonate you) if you don't write them more books and make them more money. ~a
[2023-05-05 16:04:14] - a: Like, I'm honestly trying to understand how somebody can still look at Musk and think he's a mediocre businessman (or even con artist as some people say) or doesn't do incredible things and I just don't understand. It's like saying Apple isn't an incredible company. I don't quite understand WHY Apple is an incredible company, but I can accept that it is. -Paul
[2023-05-05 16:02:26] - a: "would tesla or another ev company have gone further or done better without musk heading up tesla?" Well, somebody else WAS heading up Tesla before Musk and it didn't really go anywhere. I'm also not sure we've seen such a meteoric rise of a car manufacturer or as big a disruptor of the auto space as Tesla has done in many decades. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:59:59] - a: Not sure there's an equivalent of a "handle" for amazon marketplace, but if decided I would no longer publish books and there was another author named Paul Essen who wanted the handle.... why wouldn't I let him have it? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:55:00] - paul: "wouldn't be where it was today if he was more of a full-cocked kind of guy" i'm not sure if i believe that as much as i once did. here's an alternate take: would tesla or another ev company have gone further or done better without musk heading up tesla? spacex is losing money hand over fist, and i've never been less interested at being a spacex investor as i am today. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:51:16] - i don't see any new books i think bezos needs to send you a half-cocked email about how that handle will need to be used for someone else with that name? /j ~a
[2023-05-05 15:48:41] - a: I suspect Tesla and SpaceX and everything else wouldn't be where it was today if he was more of a full-cocked kind of guy. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:48:09] - a: Uh.... it's complicated? I don't have personal experience, but I've heard from people who do that entrepreneurship is pretty much all about going off half-cocked because otherwise you don't get stuff done. I will say, despite the chaos and backtracking and everything else with twitter under Musk, the product has actually improved in terms of new functionality more in his short reign than it did in the years before. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:44:20] - paul: ok, then i'm happy with our agreement. how about this: going off half-cocked is . . . bad . . . right? ~a
[2023-05-05 15:43:44] - a: "this is the epitome of going off half-cocked" On this we 100% agree. Musk is 100% half cocked at all times. Maybe even less than half cocked. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:43:01] - a: Sure. But then couldn't Musk just take NPR's handle without asking? I guess I just don't get the outrage here. NPR doesn't want to use twitter. They want everybody to know they don't want to use twitter. Twitter says fine, can we take this handle back? And NPR is freaking out now. Whatever. This seems like the smallest of concerns to me. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:42:31] - this is the epitome of going off half-cocked. any pr department would have told him: this is terrible pr. (and also what's not said: you will kill your brand, you are becoming / you have become a terrible ceo) is that what you want? ~a
[2023-05-05 15:39:24] - paul: "Doesn't twitter already have policies in place against impersonating others?" musk seems to be changing and ignoring all kinds of twitter policy. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:38:14] - a: Furthermore, if NPR has "effectively quit" twitter like they claimed, why do they even care? Like, this is just so petty and trolling of them. Doesn't twitter already have policies in place against impersonating others? NPR listeners apparently already know all about how they quit twitter. Free up the handle and let Neil Patrick Rarris have it. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:35:45] - "Calling a one sentence question 'angry' and 'threatening' and then refusing to release any more evidence" i address this a bit in my last message. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:35:09] - paul: "There's no reason not to. Why do they have to wait until he refutes it?" it's private communication: i generally won't out a private communication, that's kinda the point of private communication. but, i can AND WILL tell everybody that i was threatened in private communication, and if the other party denies it then i have the right/duty to out the private communication. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:35:06] - a: "i believe this less and less every day" This is so bonkers to me as I think it's becoming less and less possible to not believe that every day. "i'm not sure what they've done that's anything but objective in this case" Calling a one sentence question "angry" and "threatening" and then refusing to release any more evidence? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:33:11] - a: "no, it's not the one quote" Then I repeat: Show the rest. There's no reason not to. Why do they have to wait until he refutes it? What kind of weird psychological game is that? Like they're trying to lay some sort of trap? What if I said I had evidence Trump was a tax cheat but I won't release it until he refutes that he cheats on taxes? Doesn't that seem odd? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:32:09] - paul: "happens to do amazing things" i believe this less and less every day. "objective news organization" i'm not sure what they've done that's anything but objective in this case. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:31:09] - a: NPR looks just as trolling as Musk in this story to me, which I think is pretty damning for NPR. One has always been a trolling man-child who also happens to do amazing things. The other is supposed to be some sort of objective news organization. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:30:38] - paul: "series of emails". no, it's not the one quote. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:30:03] - a: Like, if all NPR has for this story is that one quote? That's the weakest of sauce and sure, maybe technically Musk shouldn't have sent that, but I think it reflects poorly on NPR to be trying to make a big deal about this. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:29:28] - paul: this isn't a he-said-she-said. it's a he-email-she-emailed. if you wanna deny any of it, go ahead. then we'll all get to see the emails. if you don't want to deny it because it's fucking true, you get to decide. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:28:48] - paul: yes he can refute any of it. any of it that he denies. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:28:15] - a: "they haven't released the transcript of the emails because musk hasn't refuted the statements" What is he supposed to refute? That he sent them an email? Or that it was angry? Threatening? It's so obviously something that is going to get judged differently depending on your viewpoint. Musk supporters will say he was asking a question of usage. NPR defenders will say it's an angry and threatening attack on the press. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:27:40] - i guess it would technically be "i didn't email that" my bad. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:27:05] - paul: he can refute it easily. he can literally tweet "i didn't say that". done. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:26:13] - a: Especially with something like this where if this happened, it's the easiest thing in the world to show the emails. But they haven't yet. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:26:00] - paul: "Should National Public Radio always and forever own it?" no. but until the "national potato resellers" becomes a huge thing, musk should not have sent this kind of threatening message. it's. terrible. policy. and really horrible pr. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:25:43] - a: Oh, I was absolutely serious with my question. I think it's ridiculous to say that if anybody makes any accusation against you, then if you can't (or won't) prove it wrong then you are guilty of it. I don't care if it's a court of law or not, if you are going to accuse somebody of something, I think the burden is on YOU to show evidence of the wrong doing. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:24:56] - paul: "transcript" they haven't released the transcript of the emails because musk hasn't refuted the statements. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:24:23] - a: But if NPR isn't ever going to tweet again, and then National Potato Resellers becomes big and people suddenly know about them and they want the handle.... Should National Public Radio always and forever own it? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:23:54] - paul: i'm not sure if the beating your wife question was meant to be serious or not. if it was . . . your example is bad because this npr/musk statement was made seriously and was meant to be taken seriously. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:23:21] - https://www.npr.org/2023/05/02/1173422311/elon-musk-npr-twitter-reassign The only transcript of the "angry, threatening email" I have been able to find so far is this: "So is NPR going to start posting on Twitter again, or should we reassign @NPR to another company?" Which, sure, is trolling, but sorry if I don't get too worked up about it. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:22:32] - paul: ok. i don't think your npr example fits with the zm vs zoom because there's not an example like that with npr. there just isn't a huge high-profile company or person that is associated with "npr" in the united states that's anywhere near as notable as "npr". ~a
[2023-05-05 15:21:07] - paul: i would never stop. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:20:06] - a: "npr made a public statement, now it's up to musk to refute it or it fucking stands" So when did you stop beating your wife? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:19:43] - a: "nobody (in the US) is going to associate "npr" with anything but national public radio" Sure, but lots of edge cases aren't that simple. When the Zoom video conferencing software got popular during COVID, tons of people unknowingly bought ticker ZOOM (should've been ZM). Nobody in the US associated whatever the hell company had ZOOM with whatever company it was, but that shouldn't mean Zoom gets to steal the ticker. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:17:15] - paul: "You're basically saying Musk is guilty until proven innocent" that's right. npr made a public statement, now it's up to musk to refute it or it fucking stands. this isn't a court of law. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:16:30] - a: That's a weirdly slanted way to look at it. If the accusation is true, why wouldn't NPR release the email transcripts? You're basically saying Musk is guilty until proven innocent. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:16:12] - paul: "they should be within their rights to take them back at some point" that was my point. this in NPR deciding not to use their *own* handle. nobody (in the US) is going to associate "npr" with anything but national public radio. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:15:00] - paul: "So somehow NOT paying for something gives you more of a right to it?" no i think you need a better example. you need to look at what wikipedia does with usernames (they're free). or what reddit does with usernames. or what . . . facebook does with . . . company names? ~a
[2023-05-05 15:14:57] - a: Seems like if I went on Mastodon and created handles for ABC and CBS and NPR and Fox and MSNBC and never Mastodoned from them.... they should be within their rights to take them back at some point. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:13:37] - paul: "Do I also believe NPR could be completely lying about it?" they're a news agency. if they're lying then musk could (would/will) out them. and then they'd produce the full transcript of the email. but none of that will happen because they're not lying? ~a
[2023-05-05 15:13:30] - a: Right. So somehow NOT paying for something gives you more of a right to it? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:12:18] - paul: you don't pay for a twitter handle. even in the example of blue or checkmarks or whatever, you still don't have to pay for a twitter handle. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:11:40] - a: So, wait, if I stop paying for Paulvsthemarket, you're saying it won't get tossed back into a bucket that somebody else could register? -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:11:13] - paul: cybersquatting is a thing in tons of . . . worlds. but this is the worst example of cybersquatting (in favor of npr) you could have possibly come up with. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:11:10] - a: Honestly? Without further info, I'm willing to believe the worst of both sides. Musk has certainly acted like a petty jerk a bunch of different times, but pretty much all the major news orgs have also (not to mention there have been a TON of outright lies published by the media around Musk as well). Do I believe Musk might've sent angry emails threatening NPR? Yes. Do I also believe NPR could be completely lying about it? Also yes. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:09:43] - "isn't that kind of how internet domains work?" definitely no. you can come up with some examples, sure, but internet domains do not work like that. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:08:42] - a: "this sounds like *horrible* policy to me" I dunno, isn't that kind of how internet domains work? I get that that is a little different, and I would hope twitter would do something like purge all followers or something, but it doesn't seem overly outrageous as a general policy. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:05:46] - paul: cybersquatting usually requires you to be sitting on a general name not a specific one. if you're sitting on your own specific name and not using it, i'm like super sure it's in everyone's best interest that you keep doing that. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:04:17] - a: (2) Depends on the context I laid out in (1). Probably not the best use of time for Musk to be personally handling something like this. Wouldn't be good if he was singling out NPR and breaking policy. But we (or I) know nothing of the details around it. -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:04:09] - paul: "scenario where Twitter ... freeing up twitter handles" hmmm, this sounds like *horrible* policy to me. every time i've seen a policy even vaguely similar to that, it's usually prefaced with: the handle has to have *never* been used or it has to not be named after the real person or company not using it. all kinds of things like that. ~a
[2023-05-05 15:02:24] - a: But, yeah, it wouldn't surprise me at all if there was some correspondence and I'm sure some somebody who isn't a fan of Musk could see it as angry and threatening. Or maybe it is actually angry and threatening. *Shrug* -Paul
[2023-05-05 15:01:31] - a: (1) I believe Musk probably sent some sort of communication to NPR around their twitter handle. It's pretty easy for me to see a scenario where Twitter has a policy of deleting inactive accounts and freeing up twitter handles. Seems like "angry" and "threatening" are obviously in the eye of the beholder. I have no idea if NPR has been inactive or anything around twitter policy. -Paul
[2023-05-04 16:28:21] - paul: 1. do you believe the claims made in this tweet? 2. regardless to your answer in #1, do you think this is acceptable behavior? i.e. IF musk sent a message like this to NPR, do you think he SHOULD have sent a message like that to NPR? i know you're mad at NPR for taking their ball and going home, but this seems roughly 1000x worse? NPR doing what it did seems trivial by comparison. ~a
[2023-05-03 20:50:31] - paul: for non ibonds, these rates are decided by the markets: buyers and sellers. for ibonds, maybe they start with the fed interest rate and do something to that number. ~a
[2023-05-03 20:49:53] - paul: "I thought the fixed rate was always supposed to be set to 0?" what? no
the fixed rate is usually not 0. interest rates define the fixed rate. probably the federal fund interest rate is what decides this rate, but i think it's not a direct translation. ~a[2023-05-03 20:47:07] - a: Yeah, I saw the fixed rate had gone up, which was baffling to me. I thought the fixed rate was always supposed to be set to 0? What controls the fixed rate? -Paul
[2023-05-03 18:19:59] - paul: regarding the ibonds conversation from last week. the inflation-rate might be falling, but i feel like the fixed rate may be rising. not as quickly, but it is rising. it's 0.9% now and that fixed rate will be the fixed rate for the entire history of the bond. (and semi-related, the federal fund interest rate is still increasing) ~a
[2023-05-02 21:17:16] - paul: I got a mechanical keyboard and don't think it affected my typing at all. Maybe yours is just wack. Also I don't notice your keys except maybe during the first 90 seconds cause there isn't a lot going on. After that I don't notice at all. Andrea was not a huge fan of my keyboard when I first got it because it was louder though. -Daniel
[2023-05-01 14:27:00] - paul: "Does it really annoy people in SC" no no no, i usually mention it because i think it's funny but also because it's almost always private-information. if you're clicking a bunch or typing around the 3-5 minute mark it's always because troops are moving or about to move. ~a
[2023-05-01 14:26:02] - a: The problem is the sunk cost fallacy for me where I spent money on this so I want it to be better.
-Paul[2023-05-01 14:25:41] - a: "i mean this could be your problem?" Yeah, it absolutely could be. I might not strike the keys hard enough or have hands that are too small. I can't talk to who told me it was better because the person was the internet. The noise.... does take some getting used to. Does it really annoy people in SC? -Paul
[2023-05-01 14:23:20] - paul: "fancy mechanical one because I heard it was better" i mean this could be your problem? talk to whoever told you it was better, maybe. for what it's worth, i've always hated the loud giant mechanical keyboards but maybe i'm in the minority of computer-nerds. ~a
[2023-05-01 14:21:50] - a: I feel like I type worse on my desktop than I do on my chromebook, which shouldn't be the case. -Paul
[2023-05-01 14:21:12] - a: Constant typos. The "e" key doesn't seem to get registered like 10% of the time (maybe a slight exaggeration, but it's a lot. Maybe once a message board post). Sometimes I miss and hit like three keys at once. -Paul
[2023-05-01 14:20:16] - a: "i expressed that there were non-political reasons to mask" And there's no non-political reasons to pay for Twitter blue or for the badge? That's the crazy thing. Half of people are insisting they didn't pay, while another half are going crazy because they think the world is going to end if they don't have their badge. -Paul
prev <-> next