searchy searchy

---

'+daniel'

---

[2025-04-30 19:26:27] - paul:  you might actually *be* masters 3.  (i always saw you and daniel and mark as high-diamond).  losing to really good players doesn't matter, right?  i also have a strong feeling that the "match assignments" are bullshit and don't matter.  ~a

[2025-02-06 21:44:42] - paul/daniel:  vanguard has a feature i just found to convert your mutual funds to etfs.  (the conversion is not a taxable event, and your cost-basis information is kept intact).  i just converted ~25% of my liquid savings from mutual funds to etfs for free!  so, now i'm at 80% etfs, 5% mutual funds, and 15% other (the 15% other is pretty evenly:  cash, btc, and individual stocks).  ~a

[2024-12-11 22:20:46] - paul/daniel:  for reference i put money in both tip and spip hoping i'd see a roi on high-inflation years and was surprised by 2022!  ~a

[2024-12-11 22:08:58] - paul/daniel:  usd became worth less in 2022 (-8% due to inflation), and both funds are supposed to hold flat-ish during inflation (in real terms), so shouldn't both funds go UP by about 8% instead of DOWN by 17%???  the fact that both unrelated funds parroted each-other (17% down) means it wasn't just random noise, i assume?  ~a

[2024-12-11 22:06:24] - paul/daniel:  finance question about tips (treasury inflation-protected securities).  two real-world examples are tip (ishares tips bond etf) and spip (spdr portfolio tips etf).  inflation was *terrible* in 2022, i think we can all agree.  both funds dropped in 2022 by similar amounts.  apx -17% in both funds.  shouldn't the opposite happen?  ~a

[2024-11-22 22:06:24] - Daniel: I think DEI is the thought process that is used to justify anti-merit actions, but I more meant stuff like getting rid of gifted and talented programs and affirmative action programs run amok. -Paul

[2024-11-22 22:04:00] - Daniel: Or vilifying and demonizing the most wealthy and productive members of society. That latter part is part of what I mean by the anti-merit position. -Paul

[2024-11-22 22:02:19] - Daniel: I don't have much of a desire to defend Republican economic concepts, but exactly what good economic concepts to Democrats have? It seems to boil down to spending crap-tons of money on projects that will never get done (EV charging networks and rural high speed internet)... -Paul

[2024-11-20 19:44:27] - So I think the "what do D's offer?" is offset to me by my opinion that R's are actively and willfully harmful to the gov and the country in terms of healthcare, climate, taxes, economic inequality, working conditions, women's rights, worker's rights, international agreements, gerrymandering (both do but R's more extreme).  -Daniel

[2024-11-20 19:36:51] - I think I would agree that I want D's to offer more but I think the way we get that is voting all the R's out so that D's can split into Blue Dog vs Progressive and try to move that way.  When the country switches between D's and R's nothing can really get done and I think we end up boned to some degree. -Daniel

[2024-11-20 19:35:49] - I think R's have consistently moved towards being a party that is anti expertise and education and that is incredibly exmplified by Trump and several of his cabinet picks.  -Daniel

[2024-11-20 19:33:39] - "anti-merit" - I'm not sure what this means.  Is the idea here that DEI is inherently anti-merit?  Can both not exist?  -Daniel

[2024-11-20 19:32:57] - If the R's wanted a better gov instead of no gov I would be much more amenable to them.  I also think R's  plan for energy / climate change is very head in the sand.  I'm not sure the D's are amazing but I think they are looking the right way at least.  -Daniel

[2024-11-20 19:32:26] - I think for me R's economic concepts seem bunk and haven't changed since Bush Sr to anything other cut taxes! I personally like taxes and the things they pay for.  I wish everyone that could afford could pay more taxes so that we as a country could have nice things.  To that end I wish our gov was more efficient and better run.  I do not wish for it to be shut down and dismantled.  -Daniel

[2024-11-20 19:27:18] - I think I agree a primary would have been better if Biden decided not to run.  I'm not sure a June / July condensed primary would really work so I'm not sure what option there really is other than Harris at that point.  -Daniel

[2024-11-06 19:10:35] - mig: Do they think they will get better because of electing Trump? Thats what I don't get.  What they think he is going to do that impacts them in a positive way.  -Daniel

[2024-11-06 18:21:55] - daniel:  I’ll disagree in that I think the pocketbook stuff might have been a primary factor.  If you ask the electorate “are you better off now than you were four years ago”. I suspect the answer for most is no.  - mig

[2024-11-06 16:34:14] - Its so much more disheartening than 2016.  Like I'm grappling with legit worry about what this says about our country.  Fuck me if this is actually what a majority of people want.  -Daniel

[2024-11-06 16:33:25] - mig: Cruz winning doesn't shock me, the margins do a bit.  I mean the whole thing does a bit.  Like I have no concept on what the R party is offering people to expand the party to this degree.  People / media talk about 'pocketbook' voters but I'm not sure what policies R's are offereing to address that that people are buying into.  -Daniel

[2024-11-06 13:17:02] - daniel:  out of curiosity, did you feel like Cruz was in any particular danger this year?  Hindsight is 20/20, but the spending democrats made to try and flip Texas looks batshit insane now. - mig

[2024-11-06 08:22:46] - (haven't been on in awhile but stopped by just to say) Fuck.  -Daniel

[2024-09-05 14:28:51] - a: I enjoy Harstem's videos. Hadn't seen this one yet. I often wonder what it would take for me to beat a grandmaster. Could two of us (you, me, Daniel, Mark, Dewey) beat one? Could I do it with a one minute head start? -Paul

[2024-05-01 18:05:34] - a: I think its just any nexus needs energy for the overcharge.  Could test it against very easy ai or something though to be 100%.  -Daniel

[2024-04-24 04:38:08] - I  use chrono's on probes for like the first four? five? minutes then save (forget) about it until i need it for a battery overcharge.  Sometimes I chrono upgrades but mostly forget.    -Daniel

[2024-04-21 19:11:21] - Daniel: I definitely need to be smarter with choosing my upgrades. I still kind of mindlessly go for both attack and armor at the same time as if they are both equally important. I do tend to prioritize attack upgrades for Skytoss since I typically only have one cyber core and I know attack upgrades are important for carriers. -Paul

[2024-04-18 19:37:43] - Same thing on the flip side that the carrier with upgrades probably has interceptors that are like 100% better than the non upgraded since they start with such small damage so its a bigger percentage increase vs other units.  -Daniel

[2024-04-18 17:48:33] - Partly that is because armor upgrades matter so much against carriers because they rely on lots of small hits that don't do much damage.  So with armor you make all those small hits do almost nothing.  Its why with corrupters against carriers you always go armor upgrades first.  -Daniel

[2024-04-08 16:44:14] - a:Vote on SC2? -Daniel

[2024-03-26 19:03:04] - I mean once its not supported gravity goes to work real quick but still crazy to watch.  -Daniel

[2024-03-26 19:02:45] - -Daniel

[2024-03-04 21:05:36] - daniel:  yeah . . . i think so.  i'm going on travel this week and next week i'm on vacation.  the week of the 18th will be MUCH more quiet.  ~a

[2024-03-04 17:26:32] - a: You still out on SC2 for time being?  -Daniel

[2024-02-14 15:11:16] - Daniel: "IMO states should be able to decide who goes on or not", "I also don't think it would be that different than an electoral map" I think I agree with both of these, but I also think this would just pour gasoline on the partisanship and high stakes over the purple states. Instead of wondering who is going to win Ohio or Pennslyvania.... we wonder if the opposing candidate is going to even be on the ballot. -Paul

[2024-02-14 02:24:36] - a: We're playing tonight! -Daniel

[2024-02-13 16:05:04] - a: any votes on SC2 night?  -Daniel

[2024-02-13 01:40:24] - I guess it would enforce more partisanship since you wouldn't really be able to vote split  party tickets anymore if suddenly states were just removing candidates they didn't like.  -Daniel

[2024-02-13 01:39:33] - I'd have to check but how many states with their state house controlled by one party ended up going for the other party in the electoral college?  GA?  NV maybe? or AZ?  I guess those would have been enough to swing an election so its still 'important' but also only effecting three states out of the total makes it not as crazy.  -Daniel

[2024-02-13 01:38:06] - Yeah I think I mostly agree with Miguel's statement there.  IMO states should be able to decide who goes on or not cause like the age thing we already have them with the power to do so.  And while I'm not sure that its a good look for subjective reasons (ie insurrection without conviction) I also don't think it would be that different than an electoral map.  -Daniel

[2024-01-16 23:44:24] - a: Fair - I think there will always be some baseline but yeah for others  I could see things that influence the decision.  Without evidence or proof my hypothesis would be that the numbers are driven more by situations and context of what their home countries is like.  Or that those outweigh US policies at least.  -Daniel

[2024-01-16 19:24:42] - daniel:  "regardless of any security measures they will make the attempt" this fails to recognize the major change in 2021, though, right?  the graph i posted seemed to have a 4-5x change in the number of apprehensions.  no?  if regardless of any security measures, people will make the attempt, then why-for do we see so many more coming in 2021 than we did in (say) 2014 or 2018?  it's not a small change.  ~a

[2024-01-16 18:44:03] - I'd rather live in US than any other country south of it?  I think for a lot of people that is true as well and is true enough that regardless of any security measures they will make the attempt.  If you can get  your kids in here vs somewhere else people are willing to risk a lot (including death) for that shot.  -Daniel

[2024-01-09 22:12:55] - I'm similar enough to Adrian.  I think having a short term bucket that is invested in stocks is probably not how I would do it but depends I guess on risk tolerance and how badly you are chasing returns.  I think in general you seem pretty out on low return things I think?  So maybe a stock like verizon is better for a short term bucket than some startup.  -Daniel

[2023-12-22 21:30:45] - paul:  arkk has not.  the s&p500 has, the nasdaq has, the dow industrials average has, basically every broad based index investor in the united states is back to where they were when this all started.  they're even above where they were, if they held a healthy dose of bonds.  where are daniel & matt to preach the gospel . . .  ~a

[2023-12-14 17:04:04] - Daniel might be interested in this, but I've got some excess money outside of retirement funds where I want something a little safer and so I plopped it into Altria (MO) and Verizon (VZ) for those juicy yields. -Paul

[2023-12-06 15:24:44] - Daniel: Following up on my gripe with the redraft league last night: I drafted two QBs (Anthony Ricahrdson and Kirk Cousins) and in the weeks I had them available (weeks 1-8), my team went 6-2. In the weeks after, I went 1-4. So, yeah, my team wasn't great and likely wasn't going to win it all, but losing both my starting and backup QB just killed my team. -Paul

[2023-10-31 15:01:00] - "Attempting to educate consumers of the poor quality of their information intake is a very uphill battle. " - so true!    -Daniel

[2023-10-05 12:48:13] - daniel:  doubt?  Right now it's looking like it's Scalise or Jordan for the new speaker, who seem much more aligned with hard right.  On top of that, if I'm a moderate republican I don't know why I'd want to work with the Dem side after this either. - mig

[2023-10-05 04:45:10] - mig: I guess this is more facilitating your opponent hitting themselves?  I don't think the country is destroyed yet certainly and if the R's aren't able to form a majority within their party I do think it will be very interesting and perhaps better for D's whatever comes out of that.  -Daniel

[2023-10-04 20:55:29] - daniel:  “Otherwise just getting out of the way when your opponent wants to hit themselves?” Except that not what Ds did?  Gaetz’s rebellion goes nowhere without the help of House Ds, which they all happily gave. - mig

[2023-10-04 20:38:22] - mig: I don't know how it shakes out but if it eventually helps to convince R's to not cave to the furthest right members and instead seek alternatives (moderate D's somewhere on some policy) that could be a win?  But its probably to early to say if that actually has any merit.  Otherwise just getting out of the way when your opponent wants to hit themselves?  -Daniel

[2023-09-28 02:30:07] - daniel:  its less that than a) the trade that i thought would have processed post week 3 ended up for week 3 and b) one of the players i traded for is out for the season.  - mig

[2023-09-27 14:24:27] - mig: Also sorry about your redraft team score.  Thats some definite ouch.  -Daniel

[2023-09-27 14:23:04] - paul: Thanks - hopefully this next week goes much smoother.  -Daniel

[2023-09-26 19:25:52] - Daniel: Not sure if I'll be able to congratulate you at SC tonight, but congrats on squeaking out your victory in the keeper league! You had to have been sweating that. -Paul

[2023-09-20 19:10:36] - Daniel: I guess I don't have the optimism that things will get better. Every election (especially the past few) I tell myself that "it can't possibly get any worse than this", and it seems I keep getting proven wrong. It's not just for president, though. Have we had a sadder set of congress-people? Between radical cuckoos like MTG and AOC and Boebert and those with clear mental deficiencies.... -Paul

[2023-09-20 14:14:07] - daniel:  yeah i hope a lot more governors (and lesser-known senators/house-members) start running for president for 2028.  i think we agree that this election will be disappointing regardless of what happens, but i kinda think we felt that way in 2020 as well.  ~a

[2023-09-20 14:06:38] - Like if we end up with Ivanka Trump v Harris in 2028 that would be dissapointing.  However maybe its Repub Gov X and Dem Gov Y thats not so bad?  -Daniel

[2023-09-20 14:04:59] - So not sure who shows up after them.  -Daniel

[2023-09-07 15:27:18] - Daniel: Piggy backing on our post-SC2 discussion.... I just realized I have Dameon Pierce in all three leagues I am in. -Paul

[2023-08-28 16:17:32] - Paul: I don't have any emotional connection to the uncle (I have like one memory I think of him and its super random) but my mom was always much more sensitive to cyclists / bikers so I think it rubbed off some.  But like I've said I can't swear that I check every time either.  -Daniel

[2023-08-25 23:26:28] - Daniel: Yeesh, sorry to hear. I do my best to be as safe a driver as I can, but I have had at least two interactions in my life where I'm pretty sure a cyclist has thought I was being very irresponsible and I have to admit it was a dangerous situation. -paul

[2023-08-21 20:59:22] - a: sc2 night? -Daniel

[2023-08-21 19:28:23] - paul: I do try to check my sideview mirror (but I think that might be influenced by Adrian here) but I can't swear I do it everytime.  I also had an uncle killed (when I was like three) on a bike by a car so its always been a bit more of a thing in my family.  -Daniel

[2023-08-15 19:04:23] - daniel:  i finally bought a meme stock.  amc @ ~$3.5 (i did read that there is a reverse split in the works)  ~a

[2023-08-14 19:56:59] - a: Sc2 night? -Daniel

[2023-07-28 19:17:58] - daniel:  yeah, hedging against a us-only recession seems like part of it.  another scenario is the US has shitty growth compared to the world.  it could happen, but i'm not sure i have an idea how likely the scenario is.  ~a

[2023-07-28 18:54:11] - a: I've wondered that too (in regard to international vs us) Seems like a bit of a  hedge against a US based recession in some regards but since the US is such a global economic engine I don't know if the US would have a recession without impacting other things as well.  -Daniel

[2023-07-24 14:56:35] - Daniel: Yeah, Adrian nailed it. It was < $50, so possibly not worth the hassle, but now that I know the process, it's easier, It's barely anything in absolute terms, but it's better than nothing? -Paul

[2023-07-24 14:30:14] - daniel:  i've found just keeping a cash balance in my vanguard account nets me almost as much as the best cds or the best bonds.  ~a

[2023-07-24 14:28:24] - daniel:  yeah, i think we discussed that when we talked about this in may.  "$41" was the total with the math i came up with.  i told paul "i think you'll need way more time or way more money to get more returns"  ~a

[2023-07-24 14:24:35] - Paul: Was it enough money to actually generate a return in that month or two?  Sometimes I think about stuff like that but over two months it would just be like 25 dollars if that for the return and then I just can't be bothered.  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 21:14:25] - a: I think once you are retired you can just stay in vtinx or at that point it would depend on your withdrawal strategy probably and how much / often you were withdrawing and what specific big purchases did you antipicate at what point.  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 21:13:23] - a: I've started to buy I-Bonds directly as part of our retirement plan.  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 17:58:38] - daniel:  "people don't actually know the diff b/w a stock and a bond"  ugh, i wish i better understood why bond funds have been losing so much money over the past 2 years.  it makes me wonder if buying bonds directly and holding them isn't smarter?  i know paul was talking here about t-bills the other day.  ~a

[2023-07-21 17:56:44] - daniel:  my spending goals in retirement are to be the same as they are today (indexed against cpi-u).  if i buy a boat or whatever, it'll fit in those spending goals.  i'll try to amortize any big expenditures like that over 5 or 10 years.  ~a

[2023-07-21 17:55:08] - daniel:  target date index funds don't seem to work "in" retirement, though.  for instance, there is no longer a vanguard 2010 target date fund or 2015 target date fund.  those closed, ~5 years after the retirement dates past, and your money got automatically reinvested into vtinx.  ~a

[2023-07-21 17:53:21] - I always offer more in depth explanations, like most people don't actually know the diff b/w a stock and a bond and why those things make you money, but generally they don't really want that.  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 17:52:42] - Generally for my family and friends I just direct them towards whatever the age approriate target date fund is because if they are coming to me for advice it mostly means they don't want to have to think to much about it.  So easy / straightforward is generally the way to go.  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 17:51:52] - a: (i mean these roads are probably leading to target date index funds but...)  How long till you retire?  Spending goals in retirement?  Want to buy a boat or anything?  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 17:37:37] - daniel:  i want to retire, and spend it, a little bit of time, until i die.  capital preservation.  cyclocross / gravel trails / mtb.  ~a

[2023-07-21 17:36:56] - riding across town?  dirt trails?  racing?  neighborhood cruising?  -Daniel

[2023-07-21 17:36:22] - a: depends on what you want to do with it / what its for! -Daniel

[2023-07-21 16:11:23] - daniel:  where should i invest my money?  ~a

[2023-07-20 19:44:45] - a: I haven't seen it yet or paid much attention but I can imagine its a bit less of a happy place (puns!) -Daniel

[2023-07-20 19:28:08] - daniel:  if you were disappointed with the "fuck" profanity (fuckcars) last time . . .  i have bad news for you.  ~a

[2023-07-20 18:39:21] - Daniel: Possibility means 50/50. I think this qualifies! -Paul

[2023-07-20 16:05:42] - paul: You said Thursday was a possibility!  I feel betrayed.  -Daniel

[2023-07-20 16:03:48] - a: "r/place is only available on our mobile apps (iOS and Android) and new Reddit. " - its a popular thing and they want people to switch over to these tools.  I bet they thought what incentive can we give people to use these and came up with place.  -Daniel

[2023-07-20 14:28:17] - daniel:  why would reddit bring back place NOW.  of all times?  there's a 100% chance a good half of the themes will be how much people are pissed off at reddit.  you wanna bring back place, sure, but at least give it a few more months for things to cool off.  fuck.  ~a

[2023-07-18 20:14:28] - daniel:  no, you didn't compare them.  you did, however, complain that bitcoin was boiling the ocean (hyperbole).  and, i know you're pretty pro-EV even though cars kill millions of people every year worldwide.  ~a

[2023-07-18 20:12:30] - a: Did I compare electric cars to bitcoin?  I def don't remember doing that.  I would think that the better comparison would be to what their replacing?  So electric cars vs reg cars or even electric cars vs bikes for you!  Bitcoin vs money or credit card transactions?  Though I think that would also be tough to figure out?  -Daniel

[2023-07-18 20:07:39] - daniel:  5.  about 106 million people worldwide use bitcoin.  looks like electric cars use 4663 kWh/person/year (or 532 W/person).  and bitcoin users use 1198 kWh/person/year (or 137 W/person).  (13476/100*34.6e3 vs 127e12/106e6)  thoughts?  ~a

[2023-07-18 20:06:24] - daniel:  with a bunch of assumptions:  1. that the user of a car and the user of bitcoin are treated similarly (i get that a bitcoin user might not care about the output of their transactions compared to a transportation user's need to get where they're going).  2.  13476 miles per year driver per person avg.  3.  electric cars use 34.6 kWh per 100 miles (averaged over 231 EVs).  4.  bitcoin uses ~127 TWh/y (this is a noisy figure).  ~a

[2023-07-18 19:58:46] - daniel:  i did some envelope-math on a conversation we've had a few times but ties into a more recent conversation.  inspired by this meme:  https://i.redd.it/6tthx4p5vpbb1.jpg  ~a

[2023-07-17 18:02:55] - daniel:  every night, thanks!  ~a

[2023-07-17 18:02:33] - a:sc2 night preference? -Daniel

[2023-07-13 19:50:51] - paul: For SC2 I think it depends on Adrian - I thought he wasn't going to be able to do much on Monday but was trying to accomodate that.  I can try to get on for some too later in the evening if Adrian wants to?  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 19:11:56] - daniel:  yeah, i did post that.  and i didn't write it.  i prioritize public transportation and walking (instead of biking), especially outside of cities.  everything else you say i agree with.  i own two cars and use them regularly.  i just wish we had more situations where that wasn't my only fucking choice.  ~a

[2023-07-13 19:08:54] - -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:52:43] - daniel:  "How is biking more friendly for the disabled / elderly than driving?"  generally it's not.  but more specifically many disabled and elderly people cannot drive.  so public transit, walking, (and very rarely biking) are the only options for people that cannot drive.  "I would make public driving transportations options better"  yes, me too.  ~a

[2023-07-13 18:51:09] - daniel:  "you think living in a city makes cars not the optimal answer?"  that's right.  i'm not sure you ever lived and worked in dc, but unless you are in some edge case you're best off using a bus, using the metro, or actually walking (or fuck it, biking i guess)  "what counts as living in a city?"  i guess ask the census bureau, but i do agree this is a point of contention.  ~a

[2023-07-13 18:51:07] - a: How is biking more friendly for the disabled / elderly than driving?  I would make public driving transportations options better.  But that is still a driving thing not a biking thing.  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:49:21] - a: I'm not sure I get your point - you think living in a city makes cars not the optimal answer?  I think even living in a city I would still choose a car the vast majority of the time.  Also what counts as living in a city?  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:48:52] - daniel:  "I'm ok with minorities having their voice hear but"  some of these minorities are not proposing their preference, but they are proposing their predicament.  a good quarter to a third of america is either too young, too old, too poor, or two disabled to even make a choice about driving.  what do we do about them?  fuckem?  ~a

[2023-07-13 18:47:02] - daniel:  "Generally speaking I want the time and effort it takes to get from point A to point B to be some combination of fast and easy as possible"  generally speaking this applies well to you and most people who don't live in cities.  but people keep forgetting that the minority of people live outside of cities.  ~a

[2023-07-13 18:46:17] - daniel:  "I also would almost never choose one unless for the express purpose of exercise or having fun"  i'm totally fine with you doing that, of course, but not everybody has that choice.  also, even for those with that choice, it's not always the right choice.  tons of people bankrupt themselves making that choice and tons of governments bankrupt themselves setting up a system where there is no other choice.  ~a

[2023-07-13 18:44:37] - I think Pauls point to some degree is that voters mostly agree with this sentiment.  I'm ok with minorities having their voice hear but if the question is do we subsidize cars or bikes more propotionally I would also vote for the car platform 10 out 10 times.  I think this is overall your problem though with the voters / policy makers.  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:43:25] - Generally speaking I want the time and effort it takes to get from point A to point B to be some combination of fast and easy as possible.  If I have to go pick up my kids and it can take an hour round trip or 12 minutes round trip that 48 minutes mean I can sleep in later in the morning and still get my 8 hours of work in.  Or not have to use PTO for a lunch out.  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:41:20] - There are times and situations where bikes would be more efficient that you have pointed out but in my personal life I'm not sure I can think of a single instance where a bike is more time and effort efficient than using my car.  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:40:12] - Bikes have their place and I'm fine with people having a choice but I also would almost never choose one unless for the express purpose of exercise or having fun.  -Daniel

[2023-07-13 18:39:14] - -Daniel

[2023-07-10 19:08:07] - a: sc2 night?  -Daniel

[2023-07-05 19:51:45] - Paul: yeah i get they aren't the same situation. I just think in the general populace's eye's if the gov can make helping business's a priority and spend money on it why not making helping more individual people a priority.  I don't think its a totally equal thing just in my head I think a thing that has been building since 08 (maybe before but possible I didn't pay attention) with the to big to fail stuff.  -Daniel

[2023-07-05 14:45:48] - Daniel: So I guess if the government made being an engineer illegal, then maybe having student loan forgiveness for engineering majors might be similar to PPP loans... -Paul

[2023-07-05 14:45:00] - Daniel: I don't really get the comparison to PPP loans. I'll admit I don't fully understand the program, but I was under the impression that the method for forgiveness was baked into the program from the very beginning and thus it was more of a handout from the very start. Also, it was kind of a handout for forcibly locking down the whole economy. -Paul

[2023-07-03 21:26:32] - Paul: I don't think there is a reason like fraud or anything involved.  Just a movement that a large swath of the middle class has a chunk of debt that is student loans and that if we are forgiving businesses loans for amounts of money why not people too?  I don't think there is a deeper justification.  Just that its something that could be done and that enough people like it as a concept that it might happen.  -Daniel

[2023-07-03 19:51:10] - Daniel: I think what (genuinely) baffles me is that the concept of "if you borrow money from somebody, you should pay it back" felt like it was one of those generally agreed upon aspects of modern life. Right up there with "don't kick kittens" or "don't push grandmas in wheelchairs off cliffs". No matter what political differences people might have, reasonable people should be able to at least agree on that. -Paul

[2023-07-03 19:27:52] - daniel: i'm out this week, thanks!  ~a

[2023-07-03 18:47:04] - a: thoughts on sc2 day? -Daniel

[2023-07-03 18:46:57] - "F those kids with student loan debt" - I'd agree thats a bad take but I imagine for a lot of people that is how it feels.  I do think if you don't have to make your payment for like a year or something and then its reinstated I'd probably feel that loss of the money in my monthly budget.  -Daniel

[2023-07-01 05:26:37] - mig:  i'm not sure chris, paul, daniel, or i were tying the finances of the students to whether biden was allowed to do what he did.  i agree, it's irrelevant, but i think you were the one that brought it up.  ~a

[2023-07-01 04:18:20] - I think the rationale isn't great for the forgiveness but I don't think its completely off the wall either.    But if like Congressional R's had sued that would have made more sense to me than states.  -Daniel

[2023-07-01 04:17:36] - mig: I think the question of standing is relevant / fair.  I'm not sure Missouri is really relevant to federal gov's relationship to federal loan borrowers.  -Daniel

[2023-06-30 21:34:08] - daniel:    i agree the timeline is relevant.  . . . what both sides agreed to, is relevant too.  i feel like the executive part of the government made a pretty solid agreement that they were forgiving certain loans, for better or worse.  ~a

[2023-06-30 21:32:07] - paul:  "are you part of the 66% or the 34%?"  you didn't answer this guy.  i feel like you're part of the 34% which is against the supreme court's take.  is that right?  i think maybe you also agree with daniel, but maybe not for the same reasons?  let me know if i misunderstood you.  ~a

[2023-06-30 20:49:16] - I think the time element is the main part.  If I give you money and one minute later take it away its not a big a deal as if I give you 250 bucks a month for a year then start to collect that 250 again.  -Daniel

[2023-06-30 20:32:25] - i agree with daniel's take.  it's not cut and dry either way.  if someone gives you money then takes it back, even if they shouldn't have given it to you in the first place, you'd have an unclear characterization of what they've done exactly.  ~a

[2023-06-30 20:14:49] - Paul: I mean if a bank manager tells you your credit card bill is forgiven and set to 0 and then several months later the bank president reinstates your bill I don't think its a bad characterization to say the president made you poorer.  Maybe its a long term net no change but its not like here today gone tomorrow situation either.  -Daniel

[2023-06-30 03:47:55] - Daniel: Yeah, as I understand it (which is very little, because I am obviously not a doctor), the consideration of downsides to intervention can sometimes be hard to gauge since complications like infections or other things are hard to predict. Good luck with whatever path you choose. Do your research! -Paul

[2023-06-30 01:38:10] - Paul: Both of mine are the specialist.  I think in my particular case there is maybe science that lends towards surgery but its pretty murky and there isn't great data and there are risks with surgery which leads other doctors to be like well maybe and there isn't a great concensus as they kind of try different approaches over time and see how things go.  -Daniel

[2023-06-30 00:47:33] - Daniel: Not sure if that helps at all. Good luck! -Paul

[2023-06-30 00:47:21] - Daniel: Because the general surgeon only did like a dozen surgeries of that type a year whereas a specialist might do hundreds and be more familiar with edge cases or potential pitfalls. -Paul

[2023-06-30 00:45:23] - Daniel: I remember seeing something on twitter (take it with a grain of salt, obviously) talking about the difference between a general surgeon and a specialist and how important it can be. -Paul

[2023-06-30 00:42:18] - Daniel: Yeah, that sucks. I definitely have gotten a little less trusting of the infallibility of doctors as I've gotten older. Some is from personal experience, but also a realization that doctors are human... -Paul

[2023-06-29 21:02:16] - daniel:  third opinion?  i know these opinions probably aren't cheap, but the risk is probably high to either course.  ~a

[2023-06-29 19:51:51] - On a more personal version - I got a second opinion from a surgeon recently on my stomach issues and he was like nah you don't need surgery.  So now I have two surgeons giving me directly opposing advice and I'm trying to do research to figure out what way to go.  So I definitely have sympathy for the concept of the medical professionals just saying "trust me" being insuffcient.  -Daniel

[2023-06-29 19:50:23] - But also - Trump is the one who was talking about injecting bleach so in that case one should definitely not just trust him and definitely do your own research to determine if thats a good plan.  -Daniel

[2023-06-29 19:49:33] - "take my word for it" but "I implore you to do your own research" - This is tricky cause I think it depends a lot on the context of things.  I feel like Covid showed that people (as a broad term) don't always have a full grasp of the scientific method and can translate from "this medicine might have some beneficial effects on X" to "The answer to covid is this medicine" and that those aren't the same statement.  -Daniel

[2023-06-28 15:24:13] - a: I'm in. I think Andrew sounded interested? Maybe Daniel and Miguel? The entire message board population? -Paul

[2023-06-26 20:28:30] - daniel:  oops.  tonight works, thanks.  ~a

[2023-06-26 20:16:45] - a: good for sc2 tonight? if not preferences?  -Daniel

[2023-06-22 18:21:45] - Which maybe sounds negative towards them but I think anyone with that option would be hard pressed to turn it down. -Daniel

[2023-06-22 18:21:13] - paul: I think its once they decide they want to head towards IPO.  In the begining its your project that you just want to be successful.  Eventually one decides that selling out and getting a shit ton of money is a nice option too.  -Daniel

[2023-06-22 18:18:06] - Daniel: Yeah, that sounds most reasonable to me. I think we are seeing that a bit with stuff like CNN and Vice Media and whatnot too. Lots of news and communications platforms are widely used and/or important.... but it's not clear the best way to monetize them. -Paul

[2023-06-22 17:20:45] - and the struggle between people who are used to / want free services or platforms and the people who have to figure out how to pay for them.  -Daniel

[2023-06-22 17:20:10] - paul: If there is a connection between Twitter / Reddit I would think that its the ongoing struggle to figure out how to monetize / IPO these platforms and products which are highly profitable but not really inherently money generating.  -Daniel

[2023-06-13 14:57:01] - daniel:  https://lemmy.world/ a decentralized reddit ( https://join-lemmy.org/ if you want to pick a server).  ~a

[2023-06-12 20:58:30] - Daniel: Yeah, I can see reddit as being generally more useful. I think they serve different purposes, though. For whatever reason, I just never got into reddit. I also thought Twitter was stupid worse Facebook for awhile when it first came out. -Paul

[2023-06-12 19:40:26] - daniel:  i don't know if i totally follow the recorded calling, but it was an interesting insight.  as far as i can peace together, reddit is losing money on users who use the api.  so they are trying to make the short-term decision instead of the long-term one.  ~a

[2023-06-12 19:32:08] - daniel:  mmmm, "they don't want people to use all their comments / posts for language processing"  i'm not sure that's the argument i've seen made anywhere.  this thread doesn't mention language processing.  maybe i don't know what you mean by language processing?  ~a

[2023-06-12 18:35:57] - paul: reddit is so much better than twitter imo.  -Daniel

[2023-06-12 18:35:35] - a: I get that they don't want people to use all their comments / posts for language processing but it seems there ought to be a way to fix that w/o killing 3rd party stuff?  /shrug.  I've never been totally sure how reddit would ever be profitable though I very much enjoy it as a service.  -Daniel

[2023-06-12 18:34:41] - a: I don't use any of the 3rd party apps so I'm not as invested in their success though I don't have anything against them.  I do wonder if there is a lot of difference between people natively making requests against reddit vs the api calls that come from a 3rd party.  If the ads or whatever are still there in the 3rd party version then I don't know what reddit's deal is.  -Daniel

[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

[2023-05-15 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

[2023-05-02 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

[2023-04-28 22:12:39] - a: Yup thats the guy.  I like most of his stuff but occassionally something is to dry even given thats generally his schtick.  I did like the dishwasher video though.  It made me think about my gas stove.  I haven't really seen / tried an induction stove but I'd look at one more seriously in the future now.  -Daniel

[2023-04-28 20:13:16] - I watched a whole like twenty minute video on heat pumps.  Andrea made fun of me for it  -Daniel

[2023-04-26 20:33:10] - a: Maybe if it ends up in the SC somehow and the SC goes in favor of Disney that would  be bad for him.  -Daniel

[2023-04-26 20:32:30] - a: I was trying to think, even if he loses is it bad?  Or does it just show how much harder R's need to fight against 'woke' companies etc?  -Daniel

[2023-04-26 20:20:17] - daniel:  depends on how the lawsuit turns out?  if he wins, probably neutral or good for him, if he loses, probably neutral or bad for him.  ~a

[2023-04-26 20:14:09] - Being sued by Disney - good or bad for DeSantis presidential bid?  -Daniel

[2023-04-20 14:41:50] - daniel:  this made me think of you.  someone's flair on fuckcars is "I found fuckcars on r/place"  ~a

[2023-04-11 14:10:47] - daniel:  i'd prefer tomorrow.  thanks!  ~a

[2023-04-11 14:09:04] - a: care about today / tomorrow for SC2?  -Daniel

[2023-04-10 18:53:03] - Daniel: Sure, and if we're talking about Al Capone that's probably fine. But doing that to the most prominent politician of the opposing political party.... That just opens the floodgates to going after Biden and his entire family for the tickiest tackiest things possible after this. -Paul

[2023-04-10 18:23:35] - daniel:  i think the issue with Trump is it’s questionable that the Stormy Daniels thing is a crime to begin with?  Like I said earlier the phrase “novel legal theory” comes up frequently when this is talked about in articles.  - mig

[2023-04-10 16:40:00] - I think Trump might be like Al Capone in that everyone is pretty sure he's done bad things but this payment to Stormy Daniels is where there is a paper trail and can be proven.  /shrug  Like Capone for tax evasion instead of all the other felonies everyone is pretty sure he was responsible for.  -Daniel

[2023-04-05 17:54:57] - daniel:  yet he is not being charged or indicted for any state election law violations.  If you are relying on his charges to be linked to an underlying crime, I think having being charged of those crimes would be kind of required. - mig

[2023-04-05 17:20:38] - a: I could steal Paul's car!  Thus making a Dem more likely to get elected?  And reducing cars on the road!  Fool proof.  -Daniel

[2023-04-05 17:18:07] - daniel:  when stealing the car, did you conspire with others to prevent any person from being elected to public office?  ~a

[2023-04-05 17:05:57] - mig: Thats an excerpt from an NYT article.  I haven't read through all the charges or anything and certainly not a legal expert but that sounded like there was at least something to try and prove.  I think almost all white collar crime gets muddy cause its less obvious and trickier to prove than something more straight forward like car jacking etc.  -Daniel

[2023-04-05 14:27:46] - a: Never heard of them - Dallas has a lot of contractors though so I can imagine lots of smaller companies can spring up as sub contractors to the big players (lockheed, northrop, siemens, etc) -Daniel

[2023-04-05 03:09:13] - daniel:  is arthur grand technologies a company people have heard of in your area?  looks like a pretty small company.  ~a

[2023-03-31 18:44:56] - Daniel: I've changed my mind a little bit over the past 8 years or so on prosecuting former presidents. I used to be of the opinion that they're not special. If they did something wrong, then they should be treated like anybody else. But after the whole "lock her up" thing before and now going after Trump for something so seemingly minor... I can see how these things can be politically motivated and very dangerous for a democracy. -Paul

[2023-03-31 13:27:32] - daniel:  I'm more curious about the actual charges.  If this is all related to the Stormy Daniels thing and relies on Michael Cohen's testimony it might all performative. - mig

[2023-03-31 00:14:57] - Trump indictment? I'm curious if it does to trial how he gets a fair jury.  -Daniel

[2023-03-29 15:40:43] - Daniel: I largely enjoyed the D4 beta.  My thoughts on the MMO-ness are much the same.  It wasn't as intrusive as I feared, and the architectural change to the game world resulted in it being able to feel much more alive (and I mean in the sense of NPCs and towns, not other players).  I'm less worried about mounts, currently, though longer term that will be an issue... -- Xpovos

[2023-03-28 21:03:34] - I wonder a bit about a bigger overworld with mounts.  I recently played through Elden Ring and the game gives you a mount early in that game and I ended up just riding past everything that wasn't my immediate goal.  -Daniel

[2023-03-28 21:01:37] - xpovos: What did you think of the D4 beta?  I played a druid to 25 and a necro to 20.  I had fun with it but wasn't blown away or anything.  I didn't mind the MMO-ness as much as I thought I might.  I generally only saw people in town or at the various event things.  Anytime else is was very rare to see someone.  -Daniel

[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 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 14:05:24] - 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

[2023-03-20 18:37:55] - a: care about sc2 day?  -Daniel

[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

[2023-03-13 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

[2023-02-28 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

[2023-02-27 21:36:55] - daniel:  sure!  ~a

[2023-02-27 19:01:59] - a: good for sc2 tonight?  -Daniel

[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 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 19:26:09] - 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 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

[2023-02-20 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 16:02:13] - 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 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

[2023-02-15 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

[2023-02-13 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 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 20:42:53] - 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 20:41:50] - 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

[2023-02-10 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 15:38:22] - Daniel: But either way, the fact that it's politics and two different political parties means you (the generic you, in this case) are almost always going to agree with the reasons given by your side and not agree with the reasons given by the other side. At some point you (again, universal you) need to agree on some common agreed upon frameworks on how to govern that doesn't always involve politics. -Paul

[2023-02-10 15:36:24] - Daniel: "equating supporting Jan 6th to impeaching Trump seems dumb" I'm not entirely sure what you mean by this? Did MTG support Jan 6th or something? Didn't more than those two vote to impeach Trump? The reason I saw for kicking MTG off was that she threatened a fellow politician and the reasons for kicking Schiff and Swalwell off seemed linked to leaking info and possibly being compromised by a spy. -Paul

[2023-02-08 15:42:17] - Paul: Fine in what regard?  I mean they are allowed to do it but equating supporting Jan 6th to impeaching Trump seems dumb to me but also pretty representative of where the R party is at now adays.  So I'm not sure I'd call it fine but I would call it normal and expected for the R party.  -Daniel

[2023-02-06 20:15:12] - a: You care about SC2 day?  -Daniel

[2023-02-02 14:30:50] - https://paulvsthemarket.com/fantasy-investing-2023/ I think I see Daniel's entry, but in case anybody else wanted to play... -Paul

[2023-01-30 17:12:00] - a / paul: Tonight work for SC2 for yall?  -Daniel

[2023-01-24 18:56:09] - paul: I haven't read the details of that promo in particular but when I tried online poker waay back it had stuff like that a lot but the catch was always that you couldn't cash out the free money until you had made x amount of bets or added y amount of your own money or something.  I assume somewhere there is a catch like that here.  -Daniel

[2023-01-23 22:50:04] - daniel:  yeah, i hear you.  most people consider biking to be a kid-only activity:  you are definitely in the majority.  one day i decided that cars eat away at my soul.  but i hear that this doesn't happen to everybody.  i think kids like it because its basically the only way they can have any sense of autonomy.  ~a

[2023-01-23 19:01:32] - a: Not sure I totally understand it but I think biking has more appeal to me as an activity to do with my kids than by myself?  Maybe if I lived in VA still I'd bike with you (though I'd be baby rider compared to you).  Maybe just better as a social thing for me?  -Daniel

[2023-01-23 18:55:33] - a: Oo I mapped it and was off.  2 miles each way!  -Daniel

[2023-01-23 18:51:48] - a: I took Alex bike riding last week and we rode about 1.25 miles each way on a greenway to playground that she played at for awhile.  Just thought that would be a fun anecdote for you  -Daniel

[2023-01-23 18:50:35] - a: pref for sc2 night? -Daniel

[2023-01-20 15:02:17] - daniel:  the more i think about it the more i disagree.  victim blaming is lame, and i'm not sure when it stops being "what's wrong with you" and starts become dumb victim blaming.  "how much effort the baddie had to put in to do something" is a terrible metric if you were talking about rape or something.  ~a

[2023-01-18 15:46:40] - -Daniel

[2023-01-18 00:13:37] - Daniel: Totally agree that it's easier said than done, but it did make me realize that the answer isn't always "different unit comp". As usual, I was probably too quick to engage and probably should've tried backing up and re-positioning my units some. -Paul

[2023-01-17 20:13:32] - paul: Its so simple - just get a surround and presto!  Easy peasy.  -Daniel

[2023-01-17 14:38:59] - Daniel: https://www.reddit.com/r/allthingszerg/comments/d109jn/what_is_the_compositional_counter_to/ Re: hellion / cyclone. The first response sounds like the best option (two groups, cut off retreat and surround), but the infestor / fungal growth path also sounds like a solid option. -Paul

[2023-01-12 21:26:47] - Paul: depends? I saw the story title somewhere that he had left some behind somewhere after traveling and it was reported?  I would probably label that a small deal.  Is he storing lots of classified docs in boxes in an unsecured garage?  Bigger deal.  -Daniel

[2023-01-10 16:50:34] - Paul: I guess I get the company wouldn't want that but as a consumer I do want to know what companies are mod unfriendly and would give preference to mod friendly brands / companies.  -Daniel

[2023-01-10 15:58:29] - Daniel: In theory it would be on the consumer, sure, until they start complaining to Apple about "why did your patch break my phone?" and giving negative reviews. I mean, I agree with you and am mostly trying to steel-man the John Deere argument, but I can see why companies would find it annoying even beyond just "we want more money" reasons. -Paul

[2023-01-10 15:18:17] - My guess is that allowing people to do their own thing actually ends up leading to more innovation?  Not 100% but I bet more experimentation gets done that way and then people share what works and eventually companies could pull that in too.  I know in video games that happens a lot where a company will end up incorporating really popular mods (weird example but I think might apply a little).  -Daniel

[2023-01-10 15:16:38] - If you are going to muck around with your 100k tractor you best be careful / know what you are doing whether its tweaking some software to change the rotation rate of a screw vs pulling out a spark plug to put a new one in.  -Daniel

[2023-01-10 15:15:44] - Isn't that just on the consumer then for messing with their device?  /shrug  -Daniel

[2023-01-09 22:21:23] - daniel:  it didn't prevent them from functioning, no.  but were they harmed by this self repair?  could they have provided a better product to the consumers without it?  i'm not sure i could say for sure either way.  what's more, electric cars and john deer tractors are unarguably much more complicated.  and their maintenance decisions don't necessarily need to follow the same model.  ~a

[2023-01-09 22:15:41] - a: but did it prevent all the car companies for functioning for the last 100 years? -Daniel

[2023-01-09 21:55:51] - daniel:  i did consider that as my first example (car hoods).  if i'm entirely playing devil's advocate, i'd say yes:  opening up the hood of a car (and actually going into the engine parts) will become more and more uncommon as time goes on.  actually we're already there basically with electric cars.  ~a

[2023-01-09 21:53:35] - a: Does opening a car's hood open up their trade secrets and ip?  -Daniel

[2023-01-09 21:41:47] - daniel:  uhh ok, maybe i want to argue the side! audrey brought up some stuff i didn't consider.  does (giving the legal right to be) repairing a john deer tractor open up their trade secrets and intellectual property?  obviously someone who ignores the law can open up a tractor and learn their trade secrets and intellectual property, but someone following the law would potentially not be able to if we (as we often do) make that illegal.  ~a

[2023-01-09 21:22:45] - a: I mean its entirely possible I'm living in my self selected bubble but I don't think I've ever heard anyone argue on John Deere's side on this issue.  -Daniel

[2023-01-09 21:04:04] - a: Did you book at the hotel?  If you are going to the superbowl is there housing for not crazy pricing?  -Daniel

[2023-01-06 19:27:04] - paul: It would be nice for some kind of compromise candidate but I think with gerry mandering its in a place where if you do something like it guarantees a primary challenge and makes it a lot harder to win re election.  Which is ultimately what they care about (re-election).  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 21:31:43] - paul/daniel:  i think the biggest problem for our cause is the tired excuse any skeptic has heard before:  "it's not working because you don't believe" (or something similar involving negative energies)  ~a

[2023-01-03 21:26:16] - paul: Yeah I think the asking for a demo in person will be something I mention along the way in the process.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 21:25:24] - a:  cause i'm bad at video editing  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 21:24:37] - Daniel: I know I'm not a true believer, but it doesn't seem like a big ask for an example of real magic in person and not on YouTube. Presumably Alex has seen movies and understands they're not real and so you can fake stuff on TV? -Paul

[2023-01-03 21:23:50] - daniel:  of course you can.  but can you record your own videos of earth elementals, please?  if not, why not?  ~a

[2023-01-03 21:23:04] - Daniel: "Who would yall rather bet on to be the next speaker of the house?  McCarthy or the field?" Yeah, a little surprised we haven't been talking about this more, although honestly the news kinda snuck up on me. This seems like a decently big deal. My money is still on McCarthy because I figure the opposition will fold, but I can't think of anything I want more right now than Justin Amash. -Paul

[2023-01-03 21:21:38] - Daniel: "what are you going to do with the championship games in the FF leagues?  Crazy situation." No idea. Hopefully yahoo will figure it out. We still seem to be in the "it's offensive to talk about football when a man's life hangs in the balance" stage so I think the NFL is terrified of any announcement of when the next game will be played. -Paul

[2023-01-03 21:20:00] - Daniel: I know I'm a bit of a troll sometimes, but... maybe the best action is let her teach Alex "magic"? And then maybe suggest something like "hey, why don't you turn this water to wine?" or "can you float that book over to me?" Seems like nothing would disabuse somebody of the realness of magic quicker than seeing somebody try, and fail, in action. -Paul

[2023-01-03 21:06:26] - a: Sure but for things like are ghosts real or is an earth elemental real or whatever you can find video's of those things on the internet.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 21:02:39] - daniel:  "I feel like it gets tricky as well in terms of evidence now though as well in the land of photoshop, video editing, and deep fakes"  well sorta.  in paul's example he was like "you do this thing", not "please find me a thing on the internet".  ~a

[2023-01-03 20:55:22] - Who would yall rather bet on to be the next speaker of the house?  McCarthy or the field?  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 20:53:44] - a: I feel like it gets tricky as well in terms of evidence now though as well in the land of photoshop, video editing, and deep fakes.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 20:53:03] - a: Maybe? Hopefully?  Clearly I need Paul to write another children's book here.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 20:52:30] - paul: what are you going to do with the championship games in the FF leagues?  Crazy situation. -Daniel

[2023-01-03 20:48:54] - a: Lets say the please don't talk about this to my child approach didn't go well so now I'm moving on to plan B.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 20:48:24] - paul/xpovos: yeah largely thats the goal and where I was trying to slowly trying to go with my kids over time.  However apparently my MIL is telling alex that everyone can learn magic they just need to apply themselves and that she (MIL) has done magical things and can help Alex learn.  Which Alex apparently was interested in (what kid doesn't want to have a magic grandmother teach them magic).  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 20:25:03] - Daniel: Yes. The stock market challenge was BRUTAL last year. Let us never speak of it again. -Paul

[2023-01-03 20:24:35] - Daniel: Theoretically, if I wanted to try to show appropriate skepticism of something, I guess I would try to ask for repeatable evidence of the existence of the thing. Like, "you see a ghost every night, huh? take a picture for me" -Paul

[2023-01-03 20:23:23] - Daniel: Honestly, I think my kids are still at the age where they believe pretty much any adult about anything, so any kind of skepticism might be hard. -Paul

[2023-01-03 20:21:45] - Daniel: Not sure I have any good answers for you. Interestingly enough, paranormal things hasn't been a big issue for us. Even nightmares and stuff tend to be rooted in real animals and not things like ghosts. We've had cases where friends from school have almost certainly been telling them wrong things, but it's more like scientifically wrong than stuff like "ghosts are real". -Paul

[2023-01-03 19:57:30] - a/daniel: Tough question.  A lot is going to depend on the age of the child, his ability to rationalize independently, and the level of normal engagement with the grandparent.  My MIL has some strange beliefs that she likes to chat about, but doesn't try to force on the kids.  She's highly engaged in the kids lives.  So our conversations have tended towards {...} -- Xpovos

[2023-01-03 19:25:46] - a: /shrug  - Andrea's mom.  Its been a whole thing but the resolution seems to be that I need to be more active in teaching Alex to know how to ask skepitcal questions and look for evidence before believeing things even from people who otherwise you would / should trust.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 19:01:08] - daniel:  "that were being presented to the child as real"  by whom?  you don't have to give me like a name or even any specifics, but like, someone they're related to?  or someone at school/daycare?  or like something on tv or in movies?  ~a

[2023-01-03 17:42:04] - 2022 Stock Challenge:  Oof at the numbers there.  All of them are pretty rough for a year's return.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 17:40:59] - I'm looking into that and coming up with ideas but figured I'd see if you had any good / better ideas than mine so far.  -Daniel

[2023-01-03 17:40:28] - paul: random question but if you wanted to teach your kids (continue?) to be skeptical of paranormal things (ghosts / spirits / faith healing etc) that were being presented to the child as real any thoughts on how you'd go about that?  -Daniel

[2022-12-21 15:38:20] - paul: Yeah I think I've heard npr use 7% as the number for inflation as well.  -Daniel

[2022-12-19 21:50:31] - a: I saw that and while on one hand isn't a good look, its hard to know everyone who wants a selfie.  If putin's right hand man or top general wanted to take a selfie with me I wouldn't know what they looked like to say no thank you.  -Daniel

[2022-12-15 15:48:30] - paul/daniel:  wash-sale rule question.  so i understand the rule, i think:  you sell at a loss, and you buy within 30 days (before or after).  welllllll, what about the *simplest* loss example:  i buy 1 share on january 1st, and sell at a loss on january 15th.  is that a wash-sale?  i mean, i DID buy less than 30 days before.  i've looked at some definitions and they didn't seem to preclude the "replacement stock" being the only stock.  ~a

[2022-12-02 20:13:53] - daniel:  you'll also have my respect and admiration.  ~a

[2022-12-02 19:21:41] - I don't know that its tarnished but certainly not ideal, lol  -Daniel

[2022-12-02 19:01:52] - Daniel: Congrats! Does it tarnish the win at all that it comes during the worst investing year in like a decade plus? -Paul

[2022-12-02 18:40:47] - Oh yeah I fine not being part of the bet - mostly just drawing attention to my potential first "win".  -Daniel

[2022-12-02 18:09:14] - daniel:  "daniel and andrew are exempt from terms and can't win"  ~a

[2022-12-02 18:07:23] - daniel:  we've always specified that the wager is "between paul and adrian", or even "only paul and adrian can win money", or similar, to avoid this eventuality.  if you want to play, you have to specify that in january, not december  ~a

[2022-12-02 17:47:08] - Daniel: My respect and admiration? I think Adrian and I usually put like $20 on the outcome but not sure you have participated in the past. -Paul

[2022-12-02 17:25:36] - Do I get any prizes if I hold on and "win" the stock challenge?  I think it will be the first time for me (assuming I hold on).  -Daniel

[2022-12-02 16:49:07] - apparently Kayne got kicked off Twitter so even Elon has limits somewhere too.  -Daniel

[2022-12-02 16:48:26] - a: Yeah I'm with paul - 'use' is a tricky word there.  I can imagine 17% somehow own some.  I would find it harder to believe that 17% of people paid for non crypto  goods and services with crypto in the last few years.  -Daniel

[2022-12-02 14:48:40] - daniel/paul:  apparently 17% of americans use bitcoin?  i didn't realize it was that high, but i guess it makes sense.  ~a

[2022-11-30 19:48:30] - paul/daniel:  so another thing to notice about with bonds:  don't overthink it.  bonds historically have gotten ~1% over inflation (probably closer to ~1.5% over inflation).  so, when interest rates go up and when interest rates go down, you're still beating inflation in the long-term.  ~a

[2022-11-30 19:38:05] - Daniel: I tend to dismiss that argument as a way to take away a person's right to negotiate, but it is kind of an interesting thought experiment. What if all doctors went on strike? It's interesting we worry about monopolies when it comes to companies but not when it comes to labor. -Paul

[2022-11-30 19:31:35] - paul: Yeah people are worried a rail strike would mess up the economy at large.  -Daniel

[2022-11-30 19:26:02] - Daniel: Is there a reason the Federal government has to be involved and it can't just be the workers negotiating with the employers? I guess because a strike could be a national security issue or something? -Paul

[2022-11-30 19:25:16] - Daniel: I know next to nothing about the rail strike news except that it is happening. With the caveat that I know nothing about it, my biggest worry is that Biden (being a democrat who I assume tends to side with unions) is going to force a resolution that gives the workers way too much. -Paul

[2022-11-30 19:11:18] - paul:  i'm with daniel, 1. what daniel said.  2.  i'm pretty sure you're confusing the primary bond market with the secondary market.  the secondary market works more like a stock market, with bids and asks, and really it prices itself like stocks do (or doesn't just like when stocks don't?).  ~a

[2022-11-30 19:10:25] - a: There isn't one but there is a lot of worry about a potential one as soon as like next week or the week after.  -Daniel

[2022-11-30 19:10:02] - Also I'm not sure I get how congress can stop a strike?  How are people compelled to work?  I'm confused on the details there.  -Daniel

[2022-11-30 19:09:18] - daniel:  there's a rail strike?  one of the bad things about using public transportation to get to work is i am not (forced into) listening to NPR as much anymore.  ~a

[2022-11-30 19:08:44] - If I were Biden I'd be all about supporting the striking workers and calling out the companies for not figuring out a way to have workers with paid sick time.  -Daniel

[2022-11-30 19:08:01] - Have any of you been paying attention to the rail strike stuff?  NPR has done a few stories on it and I'm pretty peeved that I think congress (dems) might  push through a resolution to head off a strike that doesn't get the workers what they want.  I'm not  down for that.  I get not wanting a strike but if they want 4 sick days (up from 0) they should be able to fight for that.  -Daniel

[2022-11-30 19:06:53] - paul: Is that like asking what the current overall market rate is before deciding how much should be in stocks?  -Daniel

[2022-11-22 18:25:26] - I think twitter banning / removing hate speech is an example of not being tolerated.  Kayne being dropped by Adidas.  -Daniel

[2022-11-22 18:06:47] - daniel/paul:  can you give an example of it being tolerated vs not tolerated?  maybe a concrete example of twitter?  what should twitter do when there is hate-speech?  ~a

[2022-11-22 17:05:56] - I guess I would strengthen that to say hate speech shouldn't be illegal.  However I still don't know that means it needs to be tolerated.  -Daniel

[2022-11-22 16:56:24] - I'm not sure  that hate speech should be illegal but I'm also not sure that hate speech should be tolerated by society.  -Daniel

[2022-11-22 06:49:20] - Daniel: I think if an employee wants to talk about his same sex spouse or a twitter user wants to say that Elliott Page was Ellen Page or somebody wants to do a book review of Mein Kampf in a library then we're all better off generally tolerating that than banning it all even if it's legally allowed. -Paul

[2022-11-22 06:45:10] - Daniel: Like Adrian said, a culture of free speech is the tolerance for speech that goes outside what is legally required. It's society's tolerance for speech. So even if platform X is legally allowed to ban all discussion of Jesus or homosexuality or abortion or whatever, a culture of free speech would mean most platforms generally tend to be less censorious than more. -Paul

[2022-11-22 01:43:16] - mig: Gotcha and I'm pro trying to get companies to have "the right" moderation policies as well but that is hard to define and I don't think its a free speech issue.  -Daniel

[2022-11-21 23:30:16] - daniel:  I'm not sure anyone is arguing that twitter should be obligated legally to pursue a 1st amendment brand of free speech.  My argument has always been that it would be a more ideal platform if it does, and it should be up for criticism for what I would consider bad moderation policies. - mig

[2022-11-21 17:04:48] - I think the idea of free speech means speech without ramifications is wrong.  Twitter doesn't have to host stuff they don't want to.  Is there some part of "free speech" that should obligate twitter (or other social media site) to just host arbitrary content of whatever type?  -Daniel

[2022-11-21 16:57:20] - daniel:  i think i disagree.  "free speech" is a superset of the free speech parts of the 1st amendment.  in other words, free speech has a lot of parts to it, i think, and you're only highlighting the 1st amendment or maybe just highlighting the governmental parts of free speech?  ~a

[2022-11-21 16:54:28] - I don't think just because some social media service becomes popular means it suddenly can't moderate / regulate in order to satisfy a free speech requirement.  -Daniel

[2022-11-21 16:53:50] - Paul: I'm not sure what a cultural concept of free speech means.  I think twitter is not relevant to the concept of free speech in my head.  What gets regulated by any particular service or platform doesn't seem to impact someone's free speech?  I think this goes back to the Twitter != "public square" idea where maybe I remember we viewed it differently.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 17:45:27] - daniel:  alternatively anybody can edit anybody else's posts.  it's not like you can't already impersonate anybody you want.  ~a

[2022-11-18 17:22:14] - I think we can live without an edit button, it was just a series of terrible posts by me  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 16:09:33] - I need to edit so I can hide my shame! -Daniel

[2022-11-18 16:09:17] - omg my grammer.  did find?  just found?  oof for me.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 16:09:00] - The TSA did found something!  https://www.tomshardware.com/news/airport-tsa-knife-hidden-gaming-laptop  Just noting since I think many of us think the TSA doesn't actually do much.  Random win for them.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 16:00:52] - last time i brought this up you and daniel were both like "i'm unaffected by this".  ~a

[2022-11-18 15:56:52] - daniel:  "sell and immediately rebuy" yes, but you can already do that.  using the method you suggest in your second post.  you can usually sell and immediately rebuy something that is basically the same thing.  ~a

[2022-11-18 15:54:37] - a: Yeah so maybe using slightly different things that essentially achieve the same goal would work?  Something like ETF's vs funds or some meta fund vs the actual peices?  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:53:55] - a: If you get rid of wash sales wouldn't the optimal strategy always be to sell and immediately rebuy when a stock goes down to lock in losses to offset any gains?  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:53:35] - daniel:  i don't know.  i'm not a tax accountant, but i've never worried about wash sales in those cases.  slightly more relevant:  vanguard has never labeled those as wash sales.  ~a

[2022-11-18 15:52:00] - How do wash sales handle meta funds type things?  Like if you have Target Date Retirement Fund 2070 (or whatever) in your soon bucket and just straight VT etf in your later bucket do those trigger? -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:50:32] - Yeah I guess I don't have now or soon buckets invested in the stock market.    Only later.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:49:36] - I have some money in savings accounts outside the market that we can use if we have to do things like buy new AC for the house or fix car in emergency etc type stuff.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:49:26] - daniel:  if i want to ADD to the later bucket and SUBTRACT from the soon bucket, i basically can't unless:  1.  i carefully avoid using the same types of stocks (like VT).  or 2.  just not care that there are wash sales.  ~a

[2022-11-18 15:49:05] - a: If I'm using my investments to buy things it would either be pre retirment and not often or during retirement where I'm not really buying new stocks.  I get how it could be annoying - I just don't think there will be a big overlap when I'm both buying and selling stocks.  This might be partly because I don't use the market as a savings account which I think I remember that you do?  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:48:11] - daniel:  my retirement planner suggested i create three buckets of money:  "NOW" "SOON" and "LATER".  the now bucket is mostly cash, the soon bucket is safe things that have gains (20% stocks, 80% bonds, for me), and the later bucket is mostly volatile things (80% stocks, 20% bonds, for me).  the later bucket is by far the biggest in size.  ~a

[2022-11-18 15:40:33] - daniel:  "my investments just sit there and I add to them occassionally / regularly"  this is me generally too, but hypothetically you might eventually . . . need money?  to buy things?  that's not me today, but i do worry that once i get to that point it'll be too late to fix it because of large gains that would get taxed.  ~a

[2022-11-18 15:29:44] - I can't remember the last time I sold anything like VTI or VT or stuff like that.  I just buy.  I can see how if you are active with things it would be annoying but generally my investments just sit there and I add to them occassionally / regularly.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:17:48] - I already don't use twitter for anything so I don't think I will be affected or care how Twitter goes.  Though I do see twitter links on reddit  - mainly in sports and political subs - so maybe other people will have to change which will then change what I see as a secondary effect.  -Daniel

[2022-11-18 15:16:03] - a: didn't know that about wash sales but also have never had an issue with it.  Never thought to mess with it that way.  But I can see the theory of why the rule exists.  -Daniel

[2022-11-17 21:49:08] - paul/daniel:  "According to Revenue Ruling 2008-5, IRA transactions can also trigger the wash-sale rule. When shares are sold in a non-retirement account and substantially identical shares are purchased in an IRA within 30 days, the investor cannot claim tax losses for the sale"  ugh.  did you know this?  what a pain in the ass.  i assume this doesn't apply to 401k, but jfc.  ~a

[2022-11-11 16:52:14] - a: Apparently some exchange(FTX) went under (is going under?) and is causing waves.  -Daniel

[2022-11-11 16:38:15] - daniel:  random fluctuations in my opinion.  bitcoin is notoriously volatile.  20k -> 16k doesn't pique my interest.  maybe if it hits 10k i'll start buying again?  ~a

[2022-11-11 16:35:56] - a: I check bitcoin prices occasionally just to see where its at.  What made it drop down recently to 16k?  It had been steady at 20k for quite awhile? Anything specific or just random flucuations?  -Daniel

[2022-11-03 21:53:25] - "petroleum geologist" seems like someone daniel probably works with.  ~a

[2022-10-27 14:01:09] - though maybe i'm overestimating people...  -Daniel

[2022-10-27 14:01:01] - Zuck trying to do Meta seems crazy to me in some ways because I feel like in terms of data people aren't in the same place as they were in the early 2000's where they would just share / put whatever on Facebook. People don't trust him so why would they give him more info in a whole new system?  -Daniel

[2022-10-27 13:59:33] - Xpovos: Yeah we looked at some sort of EV last time we were buying a new car (pre pandemic) but ended up getting ICE due to cost / features / maintenance concerns.  Hopefully the next time around some of those issues go away or are better.  -Daniel

[2022-10-24 16:52:56] - a: vote for sc2 night?  -Daniel

[2022-10-11 01:07:50] - a: any vote on sc2 this week?  -Daniel

[2022-10-06 19:41:18] - xpovos:  nah, we all said he'd be terrible.  everyone except daniel maybe.  i assume you're referring to the pardons (which is surprising and amazing, i agree).  ~a

[2022-09-30 13:51:54] - Daniel: Have a guess? Also, I appreciate that the way Adrian decided to phrase his guess for my deepest, darkest desire as "eliminate a service" instead of maybe saving taxpayers some money. -Paul

[2022-09-29 20:21:09] - paul: what would be your "main issue"?  -Daniel

[2022-09-29 17:56:33] - paul: Safe choice just to beat Trump.  /shrug.  I don't think he is great / amazing or any of that but I can see the appeal of "safe" when Trump is running. -Daniel

[2022-09-26 18:49:15] - a: votes on SC2? -Daniel

[2022-09-26 14:58:48] - Daniel: From what I can tell, it's a joke that some people are taking at least half seriously. But I agree, seems more a joke than anything else. -Paul

[2022-09-26 14:21:30] - paul: I heard the beads theory but never as more than a joke.  -Daniel

[2022-09-21 13:46:59] - a: I do listen to NPR and saw some stuff about the chess things on reddit as well.  I don't really have a strong opinion based on what I know.  People seemed to have the vague assumption that the guy cheated somehow but that no one currently knows how so can't be totally sure.  -Daniel

[2022-09-21 03:52:08] - I heard about that on NPR just now.  I don't!  It seems like magnus wouldn't have taken such a drastic action on a hunch, but who knows.  I think Ill wait to learn more before judging.  xpovos and Paul also play.  Daniel do you play chess?  or listen to npr?  ~a

[2022-09-20 10:40:09] - daniel:  immigrants are generally told to ask for asylum as refugees since its easier to get in that way than jus saying “i want a job.” - mig

[2022-09-20 00:56:26] - a: Yeah I'd want more info before saying they were lied to.  I think that pamphlet is tricky because it probably depends on you being a refugee which I think is a legal designation you have to apply for.  So might be one of those not a lie but still misleading things.  -Daniel

[2022-09-19 20:13:49] - more regulations! more bikes!  Only allowing certain investments in 401k's!  -Daniel

[2022-09-16 17:20:36] - a: "Hey want to go to New England where they have declared themselves a sanctuary city and might help you more?"  "Sure!".  I can see that being the conversation that was had.  I don't think it has to be complicated and I imagine they could find volunteers to go north?  -Daniel

[2022-09-16 16:57:51] - mig/paul/xpovos/daniel:  sorry i've been away all day!  i'll try to get to some of the things.  "I have not seen evidence that they were lied to, no"  neither have i  "A lot of how I feel about this begins with that"  me too.  "Was it at gunpoint?" no "Were they lied to?"  i don't know.  i'd have a hard time understanding the scenario where they weren't lied to though.  what's YOUR theory of how it played out if they weren't lied to?  ~a

[2022-09-16 15:59:55] - Paul: I tend to think so as well but I guess we'll see in the next week. I have to imagine reporters are checking on that. -Daniel

[2022-09-16 15:57:46] - Daniel: It's a little telling to me that we haven't heard much from the migrants themselves. At least I haven't seen anything in the coverage I've read. I feel like if they were coerced in some way we would be seeing reporting of that. -Paul

[2022-09-16 15:57:33] - I get also that maybe transporting undocumented immigrants is an illegal thing but I do think its different for people sneaking illegal migrants around vs governors distributing migrants to alleviate overwhelmed systems.  Again this would be better coordinated and if people are being forced I think it changes the story.  -Daniel

[2022-09-16 15:55:35] - I'm generally pro distributing migrants to various places especially if everyone is on board and its being coordinated to some degree.  I think them just showing in MV or wherever isn't a disaster or anything but certainly would be better if they had a heads up they were coming.  I have trouble believing they were coerced / forced to go until something comes out to prove that.  -Daniel

[2022-09-13 18:06:10] - paul: sames - retirement I think.  They are in theory supposed to be part of a cash cushion for the years between retirement and 59.5 when ira /401k options open up.  -Daniel

[2022-09-12 18:02:48] - paul: yes! sent out an email - sorry it was late.  -Daniel

[2022-09-12 17:37:10] - Daniel: Is there sc2 this week? I think I can play! -Paul

[2022-09-08 20:41:39] - paul:  what daniel said.  100% VTTSX if they're planning on retiring between 2058 and 2062.  100% VLXVX if they're planning on retiring between 2063 and 2067.  ~a

[2022-09-08 20:03:40] - Paul: Target Retirment 20XX fund where the XX  fits their age?  -Daniel

[2022-09-08 16:03:24] - I don't know the specifics of oathkeepers either but I think in general most organizations try to sell you on the easily approachable ideals then move onto the more specifics / hardcore of their ideals later on.  I think that is shared across orgs from like Scientology to Al-Queda to Dems/Repubs.  -Daniel

[2022-09-07 17:19:41] - Daniel: Ranked choice voting or having a viable third (or fourth or more) party would greatly help, but I have been pounding that drum for a long time. -Paul

[2022-09-07 15:33:44] - daniel:  mostly yes.  I'm harder on dems usually on this issue, because I dunno, I kind of expected better from them. - mig

[2022-09-07 15:30:28] - mig: Do you think the same of R's?  Just checking if think that is unique to D's or just currently relevant given the composition.  -Daniel

[2022-09-07 15:27:54] - daniel:  https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/senators-collins-and-murkowski-introduce-bill-to-codify-supreme-court-decisions-on-reproductive-rights_roe-v-wade-and-pl some R's are willing to cross, but there's too many democrats who want to act like they are a supermajority when they're not. - mig

[2022-09-07 14:37:27] - mig: I don't think there is a lot of choice in governing style if R's pretty much never cross the aisle on big things.  (which again I think can be blamed in large part to the threat of being primaried) -Daniel

[2022-09-07 14:36:00] - paul: Polarization of primaries makes it hard to sell crossing the aisle as a good thing.  Ranked choice voting might help with this (see recent Alaska election) but will have to get adopted more around the country.  -Daniel

[2022-09-02 13:49:58] - I didn't - saw a few headlines.  -Daniel

[2022-09-01 15:13:13] - paul: Yeah depends on who they are but I would press for the answers to "Is it for retirement? yes/no  Do you know approximately when you want to spend it? Answer in years is fine.  I think without those its hard to give an appropriate answer  Which doesn't always make people happy but there it is.  -Daniel

[2022-09-01 01:28:41] - Daniel: They want to be told what to invest in and be done with it, not have to answer a bunch of questions. Problem is, I feel like knowing how close they are to retirement is too important. -Paul

[2022-09-01 01:27:39] - Daniel: Yeah, that's the dilemma I am facing now. the TLDR is I am pondering what kind of well-diversified basket would be reasonable to present to somebody who is likely to be the type of person who doesn't want to think about investing. -Paul

[2022-08-31 20:44:05] - I mean if you ask me with zero context what to invest in.....  But sure total market index is perfectly viable choice.  -Daniel

[2022-08-31 20:32:04] - daniel is always pushing the large-cap.  ~a

[2022-08-31 20:05:17] - My family asks me a lot what they should do with their money and then I ask what the money is for and they get annoyed that I'm asking them questions cause then they have to think and figure stuff out but yeah pretty much there are some basics you need to know.  -Daniel

[2022-08-31 20:04:22] - I mean....  You could just do a fifty fifty split between 500 index fund and total bond market?  But obviously knowing things like "its for retirement" or "its to buy a boat next year" would make a big difference.  -Daniel

[2022-08-31 16:21:11] - Daniel: I agree (heck, Kamala was a prosecutor, so even if she said things to the contrary, I was always suspicious). To your second point, though, it's a little weird because he addressed that in some comments too: https://www.axios.com/2022/08/30/biden-speech-wilkes-barre-pennsylvania-midterms "We expect [police] to do everything. We expect them to protect us, to be psychologist to be sociologists,"  -Paul

[2022-08-31 16:08:02] - -Daniel

[2022-08-29 21:11:10] - paul: But only because you told me I wouldn't guess him and normally I wouldn't guess him because I don't actually think he wouldn't get them in.  -Daniel

[2022-08-29 21:10:46] - paul: Dave.  -Daniel

[2022-08-29 20:42:35] - Daniel: Waiting on one person.... can you guess who? I'll bet you won't get it right with your first guess (hint?) -Paul

[2022-08-29 20:14:19] - paul: did you get all the keepers yet?  I'm being impatient to see who actually kept who!  -Daniel

[2022-08-29 18:08:05] - a: good for sc2 tonight? -Daniel

[2022-08-26 19:47:45] - Daniel: my lawn uses literally zero water. -- Xpovos

[2022-08-26 18:45:55] - paul/daniel:  what are your thoughts on mixed-density?  whenever communities talk about mixed-density everybody's nimby alarms go off, so if we could instead, look at a mixed-use neighborhood in a vacuum and ignore how it got there:  do you like the idea of multi-family (2-plex) homes and sfh on the same street?  paul, if you have your huge all-grass lawn, but down the street somebody instead has two families on the same plot, is that ok? ~a

[2022-08-26 18:42:27] - daniel:  being in the outdoors is good for the soul, i don't think it's oregon trail alone!  in nova, if you want hiking, or camping, or the great outdoors, you will probably be looking for (at best) mixed-density.  lots of that mixed-density is along the c&o canal though, so i still often use a non-car.  i'm going to just start calling it my non-car.  ~a

[2022-08-26 18:36:28] - a: Same idea though I think yeah more people in mixed / high density area's would lead to less cars but wondering what could lead to more people choosing that other than just $ factors.  -Daniel

[2022-08-26 18:35:18] - Like does learning about the Oregon Trail and the wild west and shit like that when we are super young ingrain in our minds as a general populace a desire for open space and thus single family housing?  Do single family homes by nature of being more expensive than apartments / condos / etc have more aspirational and thus fall more into the dream category?  Ranomd thoughts.  -Daniel

[2022-08-26 18:32:54] - daniel:  i don't want to promote bikes.  i just want to get people out of cars.  (not even exclusively, just like out of cars . . . some.  like, for context, i own two cars)  i agree higher density would help get people out of cars.  ~a

[2022-08-26 18:32:15] - a: I don't super care about lawns specifically either (though they do use a shit ton of water) but in general just wondering about the root causes for why we don't have more high density / mixed use areas and what could be done on those fronts to ultimately lead to more bikes.  -Daniel

[2022-08-26 18:31:08] - paul/daniel:  ok.  i don't actually care about lawns, i was kidding.  ~a

[2022-08-26 18:30:17] - .. a pro bike position than before.  -Daniel

[2022-08-26 17:52:45] - "everybody DOES want to live in a walkable neighborhood" - I think I would challenge this some too.  I think there are people that do choose high density but I think the stereotypical "American Dream" is still the single family house with a yard and that as more people get that it inevitably becomes lower density.  -Daniel

[2022-08-26 17:35:52] - daniel:  a bit of a quibble, but i usually try to say "fuck bikes" and focus on people on foot, and public transportation, and scooters.  but, this time i quoted a conservative commentator that was focusing on bikes, so i guess, my bad.  ~a

[2022-08-26 17:34:32] - daniel:  "zoning and multi use district advocates as an extreme example would that end up netting more bikers in the end?", eh it depends.  you can have shitty unusable car-friendly high-density areas too.  it's a shame, but they exist.  ~a

[2022-08-26 17:32:51] - daniel:  "which I think you do - but maybe less than biking"  yes.  both.  "w/o high density living going straight to advocating for bikes seems like a tough sell?"  yes, true.  ~a

[2022-08-26 17:31:05] - a: Life if all biking advocacy groups just dropped "bikes" from their platform and became zoning and multi use district advocates as an extreme example would that end up netting more bikers in the end?  -Daniel

[2022-08-26 17:30:16] - a: I'm not 100% but as an idea would it make more sense to advocate for higher desnity living spaces (which I think you do - but maybe less than biking) more than biking since I think more biking would follow from more high density living but w/o high density living going straight to advocating for bikes seems like a tough sell?  -Daniel

[2022-08-22 17:25:47] - daniel:  sure.  ~a

[2022-08-22 17:25:39] - a: good for sc2 tonight? -Daniel

[2022-08-19 17:15:49] - paul: Pretty sure my college roommate first year was / is R.  We got along ok.  I don't think it would be an issue for the most part.  Probably honestly better to make people talk in a situation where they can't just leave and also don't have to be besties.  -Daniel

[2022-08-18 14:51:06] - Daniel: I lost like 3 annoying ranked 1v1s in a row last night after you left, but I won a game where the protoss got his late gam colossus / stalker by using lurkers / hydra! I think they screwed up their micro some, but I was still very happy. -Paul

[2022-08-17 05:13:04] - Greatest is a very broad category (see all my rando nominations earlier).  Even at greatest CEO I'd probably go Gates over Musk.  Though I would admit I'd probably need to do some research to feel better about nominating anyone to that title.  -Daniel

[2022-08-17 02:29:42] - Daniel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0C6hnkwcpg How about this? -Paul

[2022-08-16 17:14:57] - a: Though I say that but like do hydras change appearance for their upgrades?  If so I've never noticed so maybe not all units?  -Daniel

[2022-08-16 17:14:17] - a: phoenix range is purple instead of blue.  I think most units have a visual cue somehow if you know what to look for.  -Daniel

[2022-08-16 17:13:44] - paul: Need one of those 4 colussus vs 10 lurker videos to see who wins.  Just cause they have longer range doesn't mean they win.  -Daniel

[2022-08-16 17:09:08] - Daniel: TIL that upgraded Lurkers have longer range than upgraded Colossi... -Paul

[2022-08-15 14:55:16] - daniel:  they go to the same same place, and neither of them have "notifications".  i do get notifications for here though!    i don't reply because i hardly ever check my email.  even my work email often gets ignored now that everybody is on slack (slack gives me notifications on my phone and computer).  ~a

[2022-08-15 14:53:01] - a: I put two different emails on the sc2 email cause I noticed I had two.  Do they end up in the same place or do you get notifications for both?  Sometimes you don't reply so I wasn't sure if maybe I had been using a "wrong" one.  -Daniel

[2022-08-15 00:20:56] - Daniel: But obviously this is something people can and do disagree on. I just don't quite get it. I hate most Apple products but I still can appreciate just how incredibly successful Jobs was and how he changed so much about American life. -Paul

[2022-08-15 00:17:28] - Daniel: I was mostly thinking of business people, but even still.... I don't disagree that strong arguments can be made for people like Rowling or Bogle or Feige. How about Norman Borlaug? I'm sure we could brainstorm lots of worthy individuals. I just think that it's really hard for me the accept any argument that Musk isn't up there. I think he has been just as instrumental in creating a transformative... -Paul

[2022-08-13 14:20:35] - paul/daniel:  i feel like musk is kinda some good and some bad.  his cars are heavy, his FSD doesn't/can't work, his starlink will never turn a profit.  but he also has spacex, and electric cars have some potential for good.  it's kinda like how jeff bezos has some good stuff about his inventions (aws) and some bad stuff (shitty labor/etc practices).  and mark zuckerberg, and the waltons, and steve jobs, and walt disney, etc.  ~a

[2022-08-13 05:57:53] - Reading that back looks like I thought Kevin Feige invented E-Trade.  I don't think that but was just continuing my brainstorming  -Daniel

[2022-08-13 05:55:40] - LeBron?  Trying to even think of other candidates and thinking outside the box of just shareholder / stock performance.  Honestly maybe John Bogle for inventing /  popularizing the index funds?  Who invented E-Trade? Kevin Feige?  Its hard to judge "successful and accomplished" across different careers.  Like does Putin deserve to be on the list?  Perhaps?  -Daniel

[2022-08-12 19:19:54] - Yeah I'm with miguel, that seems more like a tweet than what I would normally think of as a press release.  -Daniel

[2022-08-11 15:14:07] - Daniel: Thanks! I hear this is the way to win. -Paul

[2022-08-10 20:06:51] - paul: Also welcome to the two picks in the first round club.  Not many others have worked to join me here.   -Daniel

[2022-08-10 20:04:29] - Paul: Pretty sure it was Zeke who you needed the one last yard / touchdown to beat me.  -Daniel

[2022-08-10 18:45:11] - a: And it's not like I am doing well. Daniel was bragging recently about how he was kicking my ass in the fantasy league and I can't even really dispute that other than complain about stupid Devante Parker and... was it Zeke the other time? Or Alfred Morris? -Paul

[2022-08-10 18:26:40] - Daniel: Agreed. It's why I was in favor of the deal. -Paul

[2022-08-10 18:19:44] - Paul: sure - I don't think the trade is that crazy on its own but generally speaking trading into the first round requires a premium because it being in the first round opens up more options than a 2nd round pick.  -Daniel

[2022-08-10 18:15:13] - Daniel: I can tell you what I told Tim: Between the other picks Henry has, he is basically moving down a single spot with the 1st -> 2nd move. The 14th -> 15th move also helps him as he has two 15th round keepers. So from his standpoint, he is moving down one spot overall from the 10th pick and getting upgrades in the 5th and... 11th? rounds. -Paul

[2022-08-10 18:05:36] - a: Paul made a trade in our Fantasy League.  It raised my eyebrow but isn't anything crazy but Tim was casting aspersions on it.  -Daniel

[2022-08-10 17:36:04] - paul: I'm not Tim but I was also surprised at how little you had to trade to move up into the first round - though I get its only like three actual picks higher there is generally a premium for those first round picks.  -Daniel

[2022-08-05 14:41:46] - Daniel: Watching some Pig videos, eh? I saw that one yesterday I think. -Paul

[2022-08-04 18:05:00] - a:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZDwjDR8dF8 some D against cannon rushes.  Its hard to say if it would work exactly the same on multiplayer maps cause the ramps / enterances etc are different.  Howver you can see in the first game how he pulls a probe to just patrol / block where he knows printf wants to put the cannon stuff eventually.  Things like that are hard though.    -Daniel

[2022-08-03 20:40:50] - I'm rooting for the Dem's but I don't agree with stuff like this.  I think Pauls point below is true that its a bummer when stuff like this is incentivized.  -Daniel

[2022-07-26 14:53:02] - daniel:  Everyone does seem convinced the DCCC are doing these ads for Gibb's (maga guy) benefit. - mig

[2022-07-26 14:49:04] - daniel:  The intention appears to be to boost Gibb's name recognition within the state to get him competitive w/ Meijir.  These ad's audience are GOP primary voters, so the "too conservative" and "trump-y" is seen as a plus for those voters (in theory). - mig

[2022-07-26 14:45:12] - mig: I agree with the principle of what you are saying.  I'm confused by the article though since it says the DCCC ad says the maga candidate is to conservative for the district?  I didn't watch the ad but the characterization in the article makes it seem negative towards the maga candidate?  -Daniel

[2022-07-26 13:47:19] - Daniel: Sometimes. Secret negotiations behind people's backs. Knowing I will disappoint at least one person I am talking to when I go with another offer.... Thanks. It hurts to lose Kupp, but I feel like this helps diversify my talent while giving me some potential in the draft that I didn't necessarily have before. -Paul

[2022-07-25 21:18:23] - paul: Do Fantasy Football trades ever remind you of Diplomacy?  Not a bad overall haul for you.  -Daniel

[2022-07-18 18:33:05] - daniel:  "account for the Alamo and other historical sites around town"  accounting for it is fine, but limiting the height of all the buildings is just crazy.  ~a

[2022-07-18 18:28:12] - apparently San Antonio has a simliar-ish rule where buildings have to account for the Alamo and other historical sites around town.  I kind of get it but also it seems limiting to forever box yourself in too.  -Daniel

[2022-07-18 17:39:18] - daniel:  yeah it's a pretty small city, to be honest.  thanks to more federal overreach if you ask me.  ~a

[2022-07-18 17:09:13] - a: Moderately surprised, Nova does have a lot of people living there and a lot going on.  I am mildly surprised that DC doesn't even have 1mil in terms of pop though.  -Daniel

[2022-07-15 16:27:00] - daniel:  is it surprising that r/nova is bigger than r/washingtondc ?  in terms of active users, and posts, and comments, etc.  i figured it would be the other way around.  population wise / area wise, obviously nova is bigger.  (fuck, even fairfax county > washington dc, in population and area.  wow!)  ~a

[2022-07-08 16:46:04] - daniel:  "I'd also point out that 'beating the market' isn't always a goal"  yeah, i agree with this a lot.  but i'm not talking about volatility as paul mentions.  more like:  how much less money will i make if i don't have to invest in companies that will likely destroy the earth if they had their way.  0.1%/year?  more?  less?  ~a

[2022-07-08 15:33:57] - Daniel: Yeah. Good point. I'm still in "beat the market" age, but some day I'll likely be in "less volatility than the market" age. -Paul

[2022-07-08 13:42:00] - I'd also point out that "beating the market" isn't always a goal.  I'm very pro index fund and they don't have a goal of beating the market.  -Daniel

[2022-07-07 15:28:28] - a: I'm familiar with socially conscience aware investing yeah (assuming thats what those funds are).  -Daniel

[2022-07-07 15:08:32] - paul:  maybe?  the focus on making money at the expense of literally everything else is something that i've grown to dislike more and more over time.  i'm happy that some investors are coming to be more conciensious of what things they invest in.  the fact that vanguard has ESGV and blackrock has CRBN is kinda neat imo.  daniel, have you heard of esgv or crbn?  ~a

[2022-07-05 14:21:11] - Daniel: Watched the SC2 stalker video. Well played by Reynor, obviously, but I can't help but think if I tried any of those aggressive blink forwards then it wouldn't work out nearly so well for me. Every time I try them, I end up losing all my stalkers and killing virtually nothing. Seems odd Skillous didn't build a few more immortals to wipe out the stalkers. Seems like a more surefire bet than carriers. -Paul

[2022-06-25 02:52:50] - Daniel: I'm on vacation, so it's hard for me to watch that video, but I'm making a mental note to check it out when I get back! -Paul

[2022-06-24 16:58:13] - Also Roe finally happened.  -Daniel

[2022-06-24 16:57:58] - paul: More pro stalker propaganda.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGk9JgpLVAw  -Daniel

[2022-06-22 22:13:10] - a: Engine size maybe?  Don't know for sure either though.  -Daniel

[2022-06-22 15:45:10] - Daniel: "doesn't this make you unhappy?" Yes. I mean, it's tough being both in favor of responsible finances (ie, not spending more than you make) and also wanting smaller government. I want taxes lower AND lower spending. But is lower taxes without lower spending good? I guess not? It's a weird situation where compromise doesn't really work well. -Paul

[2022-06-22 15:42:36] - paul: "already doesn't pay for lots of things with taxes since it keeps spending more than it makes anyway" - doesn't this make you unhappy?  Wouldn't getting rid of a tax make that worse?  I do agree that EV's will change the situation / require some potential new tax in the future.  -Daniel

[2022-06-22 15:37:55] - paul: What pays for roads if we get rid of gas tax?  -Daniel

[2022-06-17 16:25:46] - Daniel: Yeah, I'm torn. The shell is pretty gnarly now and I imagine the hinge is going to be problematic going forward. But the screen was somehow not shattered. So I'm super annoyed it got dropped and broken, but it could've been far worse. -Paul

[2022-06-17 15:42:59] - Everytime I've had a drop bad enough to dent / break the shell the screen has also broken so its not come up for me before.  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 20:46:01] - I wonder why I didn't pick in 2019.  Hmm  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 19:43:16] - like, there's no way daniel would have put in tmfc and vgt  ~a

[2022-06-16 19:41:54] - daniel didn't technically enter in 2019.  i just meant "the market"  ~a

[2022-06-16 19:41:36] - a: Ah, maybe. The format changed a bit for 2019 so I just glossed over it. Was Daniel just VTI? -Paul

[2022-06-16 19:08:01] - Obviously my portfolio has been devastated over the past year or so. Out of curiosity, I went back to check the old Stock Market Challenge spreadsheets, wondering if it has been so bad that now those old portfolios were losing to Daniel / index funds. I was relieved to find that most (I think all of mine) still are winning. Then I realized that some of them even had unaccounted for stock splits for AMZN and TSLA and were still winning! -Paul

[2022-06-16 17:54:42] - I had a rough go with the first shot but mild on the boosters.  Also never gotten it that I'm aware of.  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 14:50:35] - Daniel: Yeah, I guess it's the "provide immunity" part that throws me. To me, immunity has meant you can't catch something, but apparently it just means "the ability of an organism to resist a particular infection". -Paul

[2022-06-16 14:20:21] - So I don't think its ever about making it impossible to catch the disease but rather preparing your body to deal with a disease ahead of time.  I think the theory is once you vaccinate enough people for a given disease you can essentially wipe it out but I think its always a risk to come back.  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 00:31:01] - Would I have sent the tweet as worded by Biden?  Probably not.  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 00:30:09] - Does it seem in line with how politicians just throw out stats that have some study behind them that require you to actually pay attention and dig to figure out the context for what it actually means?  Yes.  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 00:29:43] - No I would be like thats crazy / weird.  Which it is weird and very abnormal that they are counting unrealized gains.  Bidens tweet should probably have an asterisk or something on it but I think almost all tweets that contains stats should probably have that.  So I think I agree that its weird.  Is it misleading?  Maaaaaayyyyyyyybeee.  -Daniel

[2022-06-16 00:17:58] - Daniel: And if you found out I was doing something crazy like ignoring federal taxes you would just shrug and say, "to each their own"? -Paul

[2022-06-15 21:57:44] - Paul: I would assume your situation was more complicated in some way where an accountant helped  you jump through some hoops to have a low tax rate, but I wouldn't know how or why till I asked / found out more details. -Daniel

[2022-06-15 21:28:11] - Daniel: "I would dispute it have a pretty set meaning" Huh. So if I said my tax rate was 1% last year, you wouldn't think I was a tax cheat or had some amazing accountant, but would just assume I was counting my tax rate differently (like, maybe only counting state taxes paid or sales tax paid or something)? -Paul

[2022-06-15 21:12:56] - paul: I take the point that 'tax rate' does not normally accoutn for unrealized stock gains but I would dispute it have a pretty set meaning.  I think the amount of crap that determines someones tax rate is large and varies and is in no way set (except by the tax code which is huge / bonkers).  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 21:06:45] - Daniel: I agree that they cleverly left out the word "income" to make it less wrong, but I still think it's pretty misleading. "Tax rate" has a pretty set meaning, and while it isn't all income, it's definitely not unrealized stock gains either. I would assume "tax rate" referred to our current tax system and not some made-up one that somebody wishes we taxed people on. -Paul

[2022-06-15 21:02:06] - Lies, damn lies, and statistics.  You always have to figure out what any statistic means.  So in that regard yes I agree but also I don't think its paricularly stands out to me in the world of stats used by politicians.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 21:00:58] - I guess I wouldn't assume it was strictly referring to tax on their income.  With all super rich people I think taxes get all sorts of weird with deductions and exemptions and carry over's and who knows what else so I would assume there is a lot going on there.  I wouldn't have assumed unrealized gains either at first but I also wouldn't have assumed anything simple either.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:59:31] - You aren't only taxed on income though?  He didn't say income tax rate just tax rate?  I'm all for more clarity in things and part  of why twitter sucks for things like this.  I think part of that magic phrase is that it implies a way that people are using unrealized gains as a proxy for income in some way that isn't being taxed.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:55:31] - daniel:  we've never considered change in wealth = income.  they're . . . like different words.  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:51:54] - Which is why I think the new key phrase is "Like all other forms of income, unrealized capital gains income can be tapped to finance consumption and can improve financial wellbeing."  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:51:21] - If they avoid taxes by taking loans and transferring stock to pay off the loans and it doesn't incur taxes that would seem to make it more legit?  I don't actually know though how that works.  Again not up on my super rich accounting.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:49:56] - daniel:  so to get to $1.82e12 they add their total change in wealth to their state and local taxes paid.  yes, they're including unrealized stock gains.  i agree with paul now.  8% is a total bullshit number.  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:48:42] - Which I think could be true I'd probably want spelled out better for me, but also I'm not sure I want to google / research that currently either.  So......... yeah.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:47:52] - It didn't go into why unrealized gains were included other than "Like all other forms of income, unrealized capital gains income can be tapped to finance consumption and can improve financial wellbeing."  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:47:51] - daniel:  i found it, thanks!  $149e9 / $1.82e12 = 8%  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:47:15] - I didn't read it super carefully but trying to do some speed reading my take aways are that yes they are including unrealized gains in determing the 8% number but not suggesting those be taxed.  Rather that stepped  up basis upon inheritance and low capital gains are places policy could change.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:45:59] - https://www.whitehouse.gov/cea/written-materials/2021/09/23/what-is-the-average-federal-individual-income-tax-rate-on-the-wealthiest-americans/  Thats the actual whole article thing on the white house site.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:37:52] - daniel:  that's fair.  and for what it's worth i agree with you anyways.  the highlighted section could be literally anything.  and how we get to 8% is still tbd.  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:37:40] - I think someone following up with WH / that study and asking 'what does this mean?' would be a good question though .  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:36:53] - a: I don't think I would assume that no.  I don't know what it would mean but I think with weird accounting there are weird possibilties (like the loan shenanigans).  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:35:17] - daniel:  income from "unsold stock" could only possibly mean dividends or unrealized gains.  right?  and i'm pretty sure it means both.  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:33:38] - The sentence from her screenshot with highlighting is "comprehensive measure of their income that includes income from unsold stock".  I'm not sure what that means but it seems like she is assuming it means stock appreciation.  Which I'm less sure of.    I don't see a screenshot that says 'unrealized stock gains'?  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:29:12] - daniel:  i don't think it's about *taxing* unrealized stock gains, but using unrealized stock gains to determine tax rates.  which is dumb if that's what the potus is doing.  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:28:44] - daniel:  in the next few tweets they highlight "unrealized stock gains" in a document.  i'm just not sure how we get from that highlighted section to 8%.  we can't know that 8% includes unrealized stock gains.  ~a

[2022-06-15 20:28:27] - But yeah I think taxing unrealized stock gains seems like a bad plan given how volatile stuff is.  Stock worth X on any given day is almost guaranteed to not be worth X the next day.  -Daniel

[2022-06-15 20:27:20] - I mean reading through it seems like she is assuming its unrealized stock gains?  I'm not sure what it is but I've also heard about trying to figure out taxing on loans taken with stock as collateral or something?  I'm not up on my mega rich accounting but I think its possible its something other than just unrealized stock gains.  -Daniel

[2022-06-14 20:13:25] - Yeah I wouldn't put my emergency fund in IBonds either.  Just if you have some other cash portion of savings it still seems like a reasonable thing to have it in.  -Daniel

[2022-06-14 19:48:01] - Daniel: I mostly agree, but the one thing cash is better at is liquidity. Companies are starting to do layoffs and lots of people are talking recession. If I recall, you can't sell iBonds within the first few months at all, and then there is the penalty if sold within 5 years, so if I suddenly need the money within the next few months that could be problematic. -Paul

[2022-06-14 19:34:56] - daniel:  paul is something like 100% in equities and crypto?  and he's like 40?  my guess is that any advisor would say, you need something else.  ~a

[2022-06-14 19:32:43] - not Adrian, but I think they are still solid in terms of being part of the 'cash' portion of an overall portfolio.  If you have a savings account getting ~1% some of that being in IBonds seems good.  I wouldn't say IBonds over stocks for a longer term growth though.  -Daniel

[2022-06-14 14:01:27] - Daniel: Are they mutually exclusive? You are saying this is evidence of the latter instead of the former? That's fair. Do you think he didn't believe what he was saying? Because I kinda still think he did. -Paul

[2022-06-14 13:53:19] - Paul: I think the question is idiot vs malicious actor.  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 16:16:54] - paul/daniel:  i like humble.  they often make a lot of games available for linux, and in the distant past they allowed payment with bitcoin.  ~a

[2022-06-13 16:16:11] - Yeah humble is legit.  I've gotten things from there before.  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 16:15:30] - Daniel: Not yet, but I thought about giving it a try since it looks on sale here. Humble is legit, right? https://www.humblebundle.com/store/inscryption -Paul

[2022-06-13 16:14:40] - Paul: Yeah I think Inscryption is a good game.  Did  you try it?  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 16:01:52] - Daniel: Was Inscryption the game you highly recommended before? -Paul

[2022-06-13 15:54:50] - daniel:  i can play every day.  thanks!  ~a

[2022-06-13 15:46:17] - a: You have an answer for sc2 email since you didn't get to play last week?  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 15:45:48] - a: I'd probably need to brush up on history to give an accurate ranking?  I wouldn't dismiss a both 25% ranking out of hand though?  I feel like its possible he floats up towards to below average once I went through reviewing old school presidents.    Maybe that isn't a lot of distinction though.  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 15:40:58] - paul:  "I really honestly do think he's more than a little senile at this point too"  i've been saying this since before he was elected.  you're also 100% about the gaffs.  that also started well before his election and inauguration.  . . . i'd put him in the bottom quartile and i assume you agree to that.  daniel?  ~a

[2022-06-13 15:33:41] - daniel:  like the inflation thing still feels like a major fuck up to me.  Inflation happening in the first place isn't his fault, but the year long denialism (which certainly made it worse) absolutely is. - mig

[2022-06-13 15:32:01] - yeah I don't think I can blame covid death's on Biden.  I think maybe R politicians didn't come out hard enough in support of measures / masks but even then I'm not really sure.  McConnell was pro mask I'm pretty sure.  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 15:30:28] - paul: Oh yeah Afghanistan (which is a ridiculous statement in some ways).  I think its hard for me to say how much was his fault but yeah happened under his watch so I can get that.  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 15:29:27] - Daniel: Border issues with kids in cages, massive COVID deaths (more than during Trump's admin), Ukraine war. It's just been non-stop badness during his admin, both in terms of things pretty directly his fault and also things it's hard to blame him for (but which will go down in history as happening on his watch). Fair or not, that's what happens with Presidents. -Paul

[2022-06-13 15:25:54] - Daniel: The market going south is going to sink his approval ratings and his chances at re-election, but I think his awfulness goes well beyond that. He remains an epic gaffe machine and the administration keeps having to walk back statements he makes. I really honestly do think he's more than a little senile at this point too. Afghanistan was an epic disaster even if I applaud him making the right decision. -Paul

[2022-06-13 15:16:19] - Is Biden all time bad or just there?  I get that Biden doesn't have a ton of feathers in his hat and I wouldn't call him great or anything obviously but is it all time bad just cause the market went south?  -Daniel

[2022-06-13 15:14:49] - paul: Insurer's I would totally get wanting to know current gender and/or gender at birth for actuarial ($) reasons.  Employers might depend on the work.  Does gender matter for a pilot or software engineer?  But maybe some other job its more relevant.  -Daniel

[2022-06-12 04:05:54] - a: harstem vs rotterdam definitely is a bit confusing.  Also odd that in two dutch SC2 people are so prominent in the community.  -Daniel

[2022-06-10 17:10:42] - mig:  that's paul, not daniel.  ~a

[2022-06-10 17:09:34] - daniel:  sure it's a bigger story if he was more serious about carrying out the threat.  The problem though, is this still is pretty grave on its own.  If SCOTUS justices end up changing their mind on Dobbs from what are currently people expecting, the perception is that mob rule will get you what you want when it comes to any big SCOTUS ruling. That's like a BFD. - mig

[2022-06-10 14:46:44] - daniel:  i'd change C57 to =3334.34/20 (leaving the equation in the cell so the context and history is correctly preserved).  ~a

[2022-06-10 14:45:13] - daniel:  yes, paul needs to fix gurkie's amazon row manually.  (also, it's not a 2-1 split)  ~a

[2022-06-10 14:44:25] - a: Does an amazon stock split mean that Gurkie's fantasy investing thing is off?  If the stock went down some but you have twice as much?  -Daniel

[2022-06-10 13:55:32] - mig: I think if the attempt had been more of actual attempt with shots fired or trying to break into the house or something like that my guess is it might be a bigger story.  But I agree with Adrian that the 1/6 stuff is sucking air out of the room.  -Daniel

[2022-06-10 13:54:03] - I didn't watch.  Almost all hearings seem to be like more than 50% fluff before it gets to the point of whatever its doing.  I'm impatient and willing to wait on reddit / npr telling me if anything notable happened.  -Daniel

[2022-06-10 11:34:08] - daniel:  i like your answer, and i agree the ages need to change, but i feel that anybody that tries to change the ages will get their hands cut off.  or, some sort of analogy.  ~a

[2022-06-09 18:01:41] - I do generally think defined benefit plans are worse than ones where you own your own money (for me and people I can help) but they do require people to be more active in their financial decisions etc so I'm not sure if that is realistic in terms of a solution across an entire populace.  -Daniel

[2022-06-09 18:00:31] - I think ages could change some sure?  I think taxes are probably the bigger game changer in terms of helping it out.  I just think that as a economic system there is enough wealth in it to sustain SS.  -Daniel

[2022-06-09 17:45:08] - I don't think SS is inherently unsustainable(thats a long word to type out).  It might be with current funding etc but I think policies / taxes could be changed to make it sustainable.  -Daniel

[2022-06-09 17:09:35] - Daniel: Yeah, Google's API goes wonky sometimes. Usually it's temporary, although it has been screwed up for AXON (ticker change from AXXN I believe) for awhile. -Paul

[2022-06-09 15:07:50] - paul/daniel:  it's because the stock ticker changed.  it's "meta" now.  ~a

[2022-06-09 14:50:51] - Gurkies stock challenge thing seems to have gone crazy some, google apparently thinks FB is worth 5k.  -Daniel

[2022-06-09 13:53:26] - a: I donate to them but fundraising week is annoying.  -Daniel

[2022-06-09 13:52:51] - NPR (and reddit?) are my main two news sources I think.  -Daniel

[2022-06-09 13:52:30] - paul/daniel:  yeah it sucks that it's their fucking fundraising week (here in nova, i'm not sure if they line these up nationally or not).  i refuse to donate to npr during their god damn fundraising week.  ~a

[2022-06-09 13:52:22] - a: Sorry you are still feeling sick too! -Daniel

[2022-06-09 13:51:50] - paul: I also heard about it on NPR. -Daniel

[2022-06-09 10:44:26] - daniel:  sorry i missed games last night.  i'm still kinda sick.  ~a

[2022-06-08 19:43:05] - Daniel: I think I settled on Pig being my preferred source of YouTube vids. I've definitely been watching more SC2 stuff since we've been playing more regularly as well. Not sure if it has improved my game, but I have picked up a few smart things like shield batteries in my natural when aggression is scouted (I never used to do that) and building more production buildings (something I was previously bad at). -Paul

[2022-06-08 18:36:42] - I think partly I had a period when Harden left the Rockets where basketball made me sad and I think I ended up filling that space with SC2.  -Daniel

[2022-06-08 18:36:10] - a: I've watched some of Harstem's stuff but not a ton.  I definitely watched a lot more SC2 on youtube since we started playing more regularly.  I watch Vibe on twitch and Lowko on youtube a lot.  Also GSL occasionally.  -Daniel

[2022-06-08 18:32:12] - Yeah I think the article is reasonable.  Climate Change is a thing that we need to deal with but its not turning our planet into Venus in the immediate future.  -Daniel

[2022-06-08 14:02:41] - paul/daniel:  sorry if someone already posted this, but i've been watching a lot of "beating grandmasters with stupid stuff" because they're mostly hilarious.  one was "pretenging i'm afk" where he acts like he's afk while he builds a base somewhere else.  once his opponent kills his "main" base, then the jig is up, but it's pretty funny to watch.  ~a

[2022-06-06 18:36:06] - Daniel: I was surprised Rogue lost that last fight in the second game. Looked like he had enough. I think those zealots were sneaky effective. It's odd that the casters didn't make a bigger deal of the fact that Protoss seemed to consistently be on the same number of bases as Zerg, though. Seems relevant. But yeah, those stalkers seem like 5X more effective than mine ever are. -Paul

[2022-06-06 18:31:46] - daniel:  i'm in this week, i think:  i'm kinda sick . . . so i'd prefer wednesday thursday or friday?  ~a

[2022-06-06 16:39:20] - paul: Turns out blink stalkers are good if used carefully.  -Daniel

[2022-06-06 16:32:19] - a: You out again for SC2?  -Daniel

[2022-06-06 16:32:12] - paul: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv0TMbyqL9U - I haven't watched the whole series yet but the first game shows that Stalkers can have some value since you shit on them a lot  -Daniel

[2022-06-02 13:45:29] - Daniel: https://liquipedia.net/starcraft2/Concussive_Shells You were right, concussive shells do not affect attack speed. -Paul

[2022-06-01 22:33:10] - Daniel: Can't tell if I am older and thus less tolerant of change, or if they have gotten worse, but I'm so fed up with their constant rebranding / sunsetting of products / creating duplicate products -Paul

[2022-06-01 21:18:26] - paul: yeah google does a lot and makes some cool stuff but long term stability / consistency isn't really their strongest suit.  -Daniel

[2022-05-31 23:43:26] - daniel:  i'm out this week, thanks!  ~a

[2022-05-31 20:12:37] - a: You have votes on SC2 email? -Daniel

[2022-05-25 13:35:02] - First place in the stock challenge!  Sad yay, I think for all of us...  -Daniel

[2022-05-23 15:12:17] - a: That sounds like something I said but I don't remember a specific key phrase to search on.  -Daniel

[2022-05-23 15:03:51] - a: Ha producers, the Obamas.  Just a bit pro gov.  -Daniel

[2022-05-23 01:09:52] - daniel:  well they did it, those crazy fucking bastards.  it's called the g word (and the executive producers are kindaaaa pro government).  it's definitely not 100% pro-government.  it's got pen and teller doing their shtick!  episode 4 they're literally like, your public dollars go to create this thing that we all use.  if you watch one episode, make it episode 4, but watch the other episodes too.  ~a

[2022-05-23 01:06:51] - daniel:  i tried to search the message board and couldn't find it.  you had said something like . . . that the government should do better public relations?  and advertise some places that public money goes?  so people wouldn't be as anti-taxes as they are?  like a psa or something?  i didn't make this up, right?  you said something like that?  what should i search for?  ~a

[2022-05-20 15:07:42] - Daniel: Every single damn game when I am Terran, I start thinking: "Now's the game I do medi-vac drops or liberator harass".... and every damn game I forget about it. -Paul

[2022-05-20 15:07:08] - Daniel: Like the lurker thing, or trying to counter with speedlings while hitting his mid-left base. Or even trying to get into his main. -Paul

[2022-05-20 15:06:45] - Daniel: Good job against Vibe. It's so weird. I can logically see a bunch of stuff you could've done differently while re-watching, but I also 200% know I wouldn't be able to come up with those things in the heat of battle. -Paul

[2022-05-20 14:56:33] - Daniel: Yeah, that blast door thing in Dr Strange 2 was so obvious and weird. -Paul

[2022-05-20 13:58:14] - Daniel: Watching the stream now. -Paul

[2022-05-20 13:39:56] - paul: I know this guy's whole thing is just to make fun of stuff but I think he goes through several of my same gripes with Dr Strange: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CDsRjbqZFUw -Daniel

[2022-05-20 04:06:15] - a: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1488369588  Near the end, not sure how to timestamp it starts around 6:11 into the stream. -Daniel

[2022-05-20 03:07:50] - daniel:  wtf, wow!  do you have a video?!  ~a

[2022-05-20 02:28:53] - a/Paul: Just played Vibe on stream.  He wanted to make an example against a plat player, so I volunteered.  I lost (obviously) but was fun.  -Daniel

[2022-05-19 21:41:05] - I think the both sides doing it is sad though as it provides an out where people can just throw up their hands and say "Both sides suck" instead of "Both sides suck but one sucks more"  -Daniel

[2022-05-19 21:39:43] - Its like the prisoner's dilemma.  If R's were the only ones who did bad things they would just win even more I think.  Which is a sad sentence and I wish no one had to  do any of those bad things.  I 100% think that R's do it more / harder / more conviction etc because they are forced to by being the minority party and having to get creative to not just completely loose power outside the senate.  -Daniel

[2022-05-19 21:37:47] - -Daniel

[2022-05-18 18:56:55] - Daniel: Skytoss is pretty hard to counter if you let them get there. -Paul

[2022-05-18 17:57:45] - a: "protoss is best" - clearly your most radical position.  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 16:57:00] - paul:  i like daniel's definition of a good government but it seems a bit subjective.  mine is an ass-backwards definition, but much less subjective.  do you have one?  ~a

[2022-05-18 16:41:21] - Daniel: "I don't think its inherently evil" I'm on the fence. If any type of government could be considered inherently evil, I would put communism in there, but I'm also fine if we're going to have nuance and say no type of government is inherently evil, but all can be used for evil purposes. -Paul

[2022-05-18 16:35:44] - I think the overall idea of US gov is solid though the EC and Senate are a bit out of wack but I do get the idea of trying to give geographic space / resources some weight (kind of - I'm most conflicted on this I think) but I think we messed up when we capped the number of reps.  Thats led to some of our issues.  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 16:33:48] - I think a good government represents the will of the people while potentially trying to lead in "good" way or trying to encourage some sort of "good" change.  However people generally disagree on the specifics of "good" as I think we've shown here on the msg board.  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 16:32:45] - a: lol  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 16:24:48] - Yeah I don't think we really need to debate communism and I would say its definitely seriously flawed but I don't think its inherently evil but that it definitely has been used by very bad people.  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 16:12:56] - Daniel: And I feel like those people are probably unfamiliar with Mao, at the very least. -Paul

[2022-05-18 16:12:26] - Daniel: I don't know about "idolize", but I can tell you with certainty that there are people who get very angry if you imply that communists have done some very bad things. -Paul

[2022-05-18 16:04:23] - Anti Castro is probably still a good political move in FL though.  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 16:03:44] - Who idolizes Mao?  -Daniel

[2022-05-18 15:39:18] - Daniel: Hah, yeah. I feel like it's especially a problem with libertarians because when you believe in maximum freedom, that often attracts people who want to use that to.... for example.... advocate pedophilia or use their freedom of speech to push anti-semitism or race essentialism. -Paul

[2022-05-18 15:32:32] - "disagree with the reasons he believes them" - this is always tricky / annoying for me when people agree with a conclusion but for terrible reasons.  I get annoyed when they jump in and try to "help" in some debate but just end up making my side look worse and I'm like 'why are you trying to help, please stop!'  -Daniel

[2022-05-17 20:50:32] - Future timestamp threw me for a loop at first!  Had to double check what today's date is.  -Daniel

[2022-05-17 13:32:30] - Daniel: I was disappointed in Dr. Strange 2 as well and have largely been disappointed in the post-Endgame movies. Some of the shows have been good, Too many of the movies have been mediocre. Also, the multi-verse stories seem surprisingly disjointed. -Paul

[2022-05-16 20:51:41] - a: The idea of non exhaust emissions has never even occurred to me though it makes sense once I think about it.  -Daniel

[2022-05-16 15:13:47] - Not sure where everyone here stands on the MCU but anyone have thoughts on Dr Strange 2? I mostly didn't like and am worried / sad for the MCU in its post endgame world.  -Daniel

[2022-05-12 15:29:37] - a: Closest I get is when I am on Mark's team and he takes Daniel's natural as his proxy hatch and I think, "great, now I have to back up this cheese" -Paul

[2022-05-12 15:27:41] - Daniel: Also, after the first part of that fight ended with me barely winning, I caught a bunch of your reinforcements piecemeal and killed them AND I got 1-1 upgrades while yours hadn't finished yet (bad timing on my part, I probably should've waited to attack until they were finished. -Paul

[2022-05-12 15:26:37] - Daniel: I can understand why you didn't see the immortal, though. It bizarrely took an entirely different route to your base and ran into a queen that it killed before joining the main fight from the other end. -Paul

[2022-05-12 15:09:11] - Daniel: I was curious about that PvZ battle in our second to last 1v1 last night, so I watched a replay this morning. Army supply was 35-27 in my favor at the start of that decisive middle battle between my zealots and your roaches. I think part of it might be that zealots look smaller? I admit your roach force looked bigger. -Paul

[2022-05-11 23:32:19] - Daniel: https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2022/05/06/americas-abortion-quandary/ This goes over some of those nuances well, I think. -Paul

[2022-05-11 23:27:46] - Daniel: Sure, but in my opinion that's overly simplifying a complex topic. The largest group answered: "legal in most, but not all, cases" and the next largest group said "illegal in most, but not all cases". You could easily read that as "majority of Americans want restrictions on abortion". -Paul

[2022-05-11 21:53:12] - daniel:  not sure I’m a fan of the position labelling.    I might consider myself legal in all or most cases.  Or not, depending on how “most” is defined. - mig

[2022-05-11 21:48:03] - Paul: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/17/key-facts-about-the-abortion-debate-in-america  59% is pretty strong support for a national issue.  -Daniel

[2022-05-11 21:07:29] - Daniel: In this case, does the Senate not reflect the will of the people? We haven't really touched on it, but Americans are pretty split (and sometimes confused) on abortion. https://news.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx -Paul

[2022-05-11 21:02:18] - Daniel: I kind of agree, but I also think the framing of the article is a little silly as well. They go into detail about needing 60 votes to defeat the filibuster and how all Republicans voted against it and the Senate is split 50/50.... but all that is frankly beside the main point that they couldn't even get a majority, filibuster or not. -Paul

[2022-05-11 20:32:03] - Paul: Also just goes to show why people don't like the Senate (and EC. and the house?) because it doesn't reflect will of the people.  -Daniel

[2022-05-11 20:30:54] - Paul: That seems like a technically correct but silly sentence because even if Manchin had voted for it thus getting all D's it still wouldn't be a majority.  "Dem controlled Senate by virtue of tie breaker not actually more senators" is more accurate  -Daniel

[2022-05-11 19:10:43] - When I posted I was only .1 off the lead.  Further now.  -Daniel

[2022-05-11 19:08:01] - Daniel: Oh, I'm sorry, we switched it to a competition to see who can lose the most money this year. Didn't I tell you? -Paul

[2022-05-11 17:55:12] - so close to taking the lead in the stock market challenge!  -Daniel

[2022-05-09 17:52:50] - a: You have a vote for sc2 b/w Mon vs Wed?  Since you missed last week you can have the deciding vote.  -Daniel

[2022-05-09 17:51:52] - bragging at -17%! Woooo.....  -Daniel

[2022-05-09 17:48:08] - Daniel: Now is your time to brag, btw. I'm getting absolutely massacred by the market this year. -Paul

[2022-05-09 17:13:24] - daniel:  i finally have more etfs than mutual funds (i'm now barely over 50-50).  it basically took this minor market-crash for this to happen because i wasn't about to pay capital-gains to make such a change.  ~a

[2022-05-06 16:20:54] - daniel:  "Could see if any of these are available through Vanguard?"  all US etfs are available on all US trading platforms, so i'm a bit confused by the wording of your question    ~a

[2022-05-06 16:13:23] - daniel:  here's the graph i made.  i'm a bit confused by this.  i get that there will be dividends that will account for interest or whatever.  but these move around a lot (many going -2% this last year, and something weird happened march of last year).  except bil i guess.  bil might be what i'm looking for.  ~a

[2022-05-06 16:07:13] - a: Could see if any of these are available through Vanguard?  https://www.investopedia.com/articles/etfs-mutual-funds/070916/top-4-money-market-fund-etfs-2016-shv-near.asp  -Daniel

[2022-05-06 15:33:02] - daniel:  i just figured, this is why we HAVE etfs right?  for flexibility and ease?  maybe there's something weird about money markets.  maybe they like don't make enough interest to overcome their expense, or something.  ~a

[2022-05-06 15:32:01] - daniel:  i guess, sorta.  vanguard has vmfxx.  maybe that's what i'll do.  ~a

[2022-05-06 15:30:49] - a: Do those places have money market funds?  -Daniel

[2022-05-06 15:29:23] - a: Don't you have to open an account somewhere to buy etfs? -Daniel

[2022-05-06 15:21:08] - daniel:  in other news i'm looking for something weird.  a money-market etf.  i can't seem to find anything like this, and i'm a bit surprised.  i found jpst and vusb.  but i literally want a money market etf.  i want it to go negative never.  and basically creep up at a snail's pace.  (maybe what i really want is a literal CD or money market, but i wish it was as easy as buying/selling an etf.  i don't want to "open an account".)  ~a

[2022-05-06 15:13:58] - daniel:  ugh.  ~a

[2022-05-06 15:13:08] - Just as more context for this whole discussion, its now the whole country but shows where some want to go with this ruling: https://www.wwno.org/2022-05-05/louisiana-bill-would-allow-murder-charges-for-abortions-opponents-call-it-barbaric  -Daniel

[2022-05-06 13:38:33] - Daniel: It's a little unclear, though. Some of them mention cut-offs at certain weeks of gestation. Others don't. Most seem to have exceptions for medical necessity. -Paul

[2022-05-05 19:05:19] - https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/us/state-abortion-trigger-laws-roe-v-wade-overturned/index.html  - Lots of bans or bans after six weeks in there.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 18:53:30] - Daniel: So even in a "worst case scenario" of all the Southern states banning all abortions and there being a significant number of people there who want to get one, there are still not completely unreasonable options? -Paul

[2022-05-05 18:52:44] - Daniel: It could be significant, but I guess I would like to see some numbers? Apparently half of all abortions are done medically now, and often the pills can be ordered online? https://www.newsweek.com/abortion-pills-that-are-legal-us-how-order-online-1702875 -Paul

[2022-05-05 18:35:05] - Paul: I don't have numbers but that crosses my threshold for 'significant'.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 18:33:49] - Paul: All the ones in the South from women who don't have the means to travel to get them.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 16:46:18] - Emotionally I think most people (everyone?) should be sympathetic to the pro life side.  I think everyone ought to agree that killing children / babies is not a good outcome.  Defining what counts as "a baby" and when even if its not a good outcome its still allowed has been challenging clearly.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 16:44:28] - paul:  26 weeks is still vanishingly uncommon.  i kinda don't care about third trimester abortions.  you and daniel and miguel can talk about them if you want?    i'd prefer to focus on 1st and 2nd trimester honestly.  ~a

[2022-05-05 16:44:01] - Paul: Even if on some level I could tolerate euthanasia post birth in some circumstances I think largely I'd be ok with birth being a line at least.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 16:39:25] - Daniel: Yeah, that's all fair. Not trying to say it's an easy decision. But I do think at some point the baby has rights to not be killed, even if the mom thinks it is the right call. I don't know where I draw the line, but I think no later than birth and maybe before birth. -Paul

[2022-05-05 16:36:55] - I think my policy position is slightly more extremeish than most potentially on the pro choice side but mostly cause I think I trust in the difficulty of the decision to be a limiting factor in and of itself.  I think there is trauma involved in choosing abortion (especially the longer the term was carried) and that is sufficient deterrent.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 16:34:41] - Paul: Euthanasia is another hard topic.  I'm not sure yet?  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 16:28:21] - Daniel: So, Devil's advocate, post birth abortion? Baby is born. Parents realize it has down's syndrome. Euthanasia? The woman not only carried the baby 9+ months but ALSO gave birth, so shouldn't her judgement still be trusted? -Paul

[2022-05-05 16:01:44] - Paul: I would probably also go so far that if a woman carried the baby 9+ months she probably already loves the baby so then to decide to abort would be on some level euthanasia of someone else.  Maybe we could get some rules on double parental consent of abortions in "safe" cases past 7 months or something?  But that also seems verrrryyyy tricky / dangerous in terms of the idea of "forced birth".  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 15:59:26] - Paul: I think so, if a woman carried her baby all the way to birth then she was clearly planning on going through with it and something in the situation has changed and she/they are going to make one of the hardest decisions in their life.  I would go so far to say there are 0 'casual' day of birth abortions but ONLY extreme situations in some way or another.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 15:49:29] - Daniel: So, just to be clear, you would be fine with a mother aborting her fetus all the way up to the day of birth? -Paul

[2022-05-05 14:48:34] - Where anyone who already carried the baby for 7 months not just deciding to abort on a whim. -Daniel

[2022-05-05 14:47:32] - Paul: If I were in charge I wouldn't put limits on the legality of it.  I would trust that the woman who was carrying the baby would have thought through it more than me and would have some compelling reason for choosing her path.  I think there is a natural relationship between the length of term already carried leading to needing ever increasing compelling reasons.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 14:01:18] - Daniel: I understand the woman might have a compelling reason, but should it be legal? That's what we're talking about, right? It's certainly a tough line to draw, but it has to be drawn somewhere. -Paul

[2022-05-05 13:49:41] - That was also where I wonder if better funds / efforts could be put into adoptive / foster systems to make those options seem a better choice to further reduce late term abortions.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 13:46:16] - Paul: I think for a third trimester abortion the woman will already have decided to carry the baby for 7+ months and then will be changing their mind and I think they will have had a compelling reason and feel that much worse for their decision.  Again (without research) I would imagine the number of 'casual' third trimester abortions to be extremely low.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 13:39:13] - Daniel: "if there is a compelling enough reason for a woman to feel like its neccessary to abort and they are willing I don't think I would stand in their way" Even if it's a third trimester fetus? -Paul

[2022-05-05 13:34:24] - a: Its irrelevant potentially to the courts decision.  I think its relevant overall for a governments legitimacy.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 04:30:36] - daniel:  regarding the will of the people.  the will of the people is sometimes irrelevant, though right?  especially when you're dealing with the courts.  ~a

[2022-05-05 00:24:00] - "Either court precedents are sacrosanct or they aren't.  You can't be selective about it."  I agree with Miguel that in principle prior rulings aren't set in stone forever and even laws can change over time.  I think the trick with this one is that it doesn't represent the will of the people and that the way this court came to be has some serious sheninigans attached to it.  -Daniel

[2022-05-05 00:22:27] - I would amend my position by noting that probably early term abortions are more "casual" (and I'm still not sure that is the right word) but that those are also the least objectionable.  -Daniel

[2022-05-04 23:35:26] - ... better and more viable option for an otherwise viable fetus.  -Daniel

[2022-05-04 14:47:32] - Daniel: " think the theory is if the fetus is "a person" then from that stems other questions related to its 'personhood'." Sure, I get that, but we have plenty of cases where people are undoubtedly people but don't have certain benefits just by virtue of being a person. Citizenship is contingent. Child support is contingent. -Paul

[2022-05-04 14:46:30] - paul:  "things should be judged on their own merits"  that's fair.  delete my statement and replace it with daniel's.  ~a

[2022-05-04 14:39:08] - I think the theory is if the fetus is "a person" then from that stems other questions related to its 'personhood'.  Eg citizenship, insurability, child support etc.  -Daniel

[2022-04-27 14:15:44] - Daniel: So, in this instance, I think twitter banning people is absolutely impactful to freedom of speech, but not applicable to the 1st Amendment since they are a private company and can do what they want. -Paul

[2022-04-27 01:14:17] - daniel:  agreed.  or even worse, would be the politicans (and to a much lesser degree judges) who are for sale.  ~a

[2022-04-27 01:12:05] - Mostly I think I don't agree with the seeming fundamental premise that twitter = "THE town square" as if there weren't other options (Facebook, Newspapers, Instagram, Reddit, WhatsApp, TikTok, NPR, etc).  -Daniel

[2022-04-27 01:10:02] - I wouldn't equate anything to do with twitter to do with freedom of speech.  If twitter bans people willy nilly or whatever I think it makes them assholes potentially or whatever but I don't think people's ability to get their opinions out in the world are curtailed.  I'd find it a much bigger deal if Verizon / Google / ATT ISP type people were bought by Musk with the intent to censor / limit content.  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 19:28:12] - I just have a hard time being motivated about Musk/Twitter cause it doesn't seem that big a deal to me.  Bezos owns WaPo.  Murdoch owns Fox.  Someone owns CNN, NYT, etc.  Sinclair owns all the local stations.  Is there a news source that isn't owned by someone?  NPR? Sort of?  People just gotta be informed, which is a high bar but once you fail that its hard for me to be mad at the messenger.  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 19:18:44] - daniel:  https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1518777886668374016 yes, to some degree some people are worried he's going to be disenfranchising voices and influencing elections. - mig

[2022-04-26 19:15:56] - daniel:  also, i agree with your second message.  it's not the bakery scenario.  ~a

[2022-04-26 19:05:40] - daniel:  well there was a certain level of sarcasm there, sorry.  but to answer seriously (to your first message), musk will ban some people.  i guarantee it.  and those people might be disproportionately part of protected classes.  but, no, i was joking:  i don't actually think he'll ban people because they're gay (etc).  i hate elon musk, but not because he hates gay people or something like that.  ~a

[2022-04-26 18:59:34] - a: I think its more akin to a bakery that does business with Trump is totally allowed but if everyone else decides they don't want to do business with that bakery another bakery that didn't serve Trump could easily open because there isn't anything inherently special about the first bakery other than everyone knows about it.  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 18:58:03] - a: I'm confused.  If Musk starts kicking off all gay people or whatever I'm sure there would be a problem.  But I don't think he is planning anything that clear cut / extreme.  Or that people are super worried about that?  Isn't it more like he will be pro free speech and letting people just post more whatever they want?  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 18:56:35] - Cause if the user base leaves it doesn't seem like it would be that hard for some company to create Twitter V2 as I currently understand Twitters features.  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 18:56:33] - daniel:  oh look who's all "freedom of association" now?  tell me what should happen if musk decides to open a bakery?  ~a

[2022-04-26 18:55:56] - Does Twitter have anything special other than some system to verify a user so that we can be reasonably sure that https://twitter.com/Lesdoggg is actually Leslie Jones vs someone pretending to be her?  Is there anything else special about it in terms of actual features?  I know it has a big user base.  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 18:54:43] - I think users have influence over the platform the same way that workers have influence over their employer.  They can accept the polices and work there (use the platform) or go somewhere else.  If people don't like what Musk does then either he will change and it will be like it was before (now?) or people can leave and if enough leave then I'm sure something else will take its place.  -Daniel

[2022-04-26 13:38:57] - Can't think of a good reason why. I guess Adrian usually plays Protoss and Daniel usually plays Zerg, so archon games with them skew that direction, which might explain the low play rate for Terran. -Paul

[2022-04-26 13:17:59] - Daniel: You maybe notice that means I played 6 games as Protoss and 8 games as one of the other races. This continues an oddity where I apparently get Protoss more often than any other race. 49 for Protoss. 32 as Terran. 41 as Zerg. -Paul

[2022-04-26 13:14:53] - Daniel: Final count from last night (of games I counted, so not direct strike or the 30 second game where you missed your mineral patch): 7 wins and 7 losses for me. 2-4 as Protoss. -Paul

[2022-04-26 13:05:02] - Daniel: Logically, I'm cautiously optimistic. Emotionally, it's hard for me not to get excited. I think there's a very good chance Musk fixes a lot of the obvious problems I think most people agree that twitter has (bots, spam, impersonators, etc) and I think he will move it more in a free speech direction, which I am personally for. -Paul

[2022-04-25 19:24:39] - paul: are you exicited about musk buying it?  i know we were talking about it but don't remember what your take was.  -Daniel

[2022-04-25 17:50:02] - a: check your email  -Daniel

[2022-04-21 14:58:19] - Paul: Its about the surface area that the attacking zerglings/ drones can get on the defending drones.  Same reason you put a zealot in a protoss wall and it can hold off a bunch of zerglings.  -Daniel

[2022-04-21 14:45:36] - a: I eventually went Skytoss in one of the 2v2 matches with Daniel last night. Damn corruptors sniped all my carriers. Also, vikings hunted down my oracles. -Paul

[2022-04-21 14:39:21] - Yeah that part is pretty advanced but also you didn't bring eight extra drones.  I think if I had the first six zerglings he talked about that would have gone a long way.  I on the other hand I think started four once you were already in my base.  So not as ideal there.  -Daniel

[2022-04-21 14:33:50] - Daniel: Yeah... and the defense involves things like "mineral pockets" created by specifically placed evolution chambers. -Paul

[2022-04-21 14:20:53] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHnaFtW4-Ko - Vibe defending an even harder version of your build.  Basically just better scouting and pull drones immediately.  -Daniel

[2022-04-21 13:56:32] - Daniel: That's kind of my concern. I don't know how it would be easily stopped as long as I know you are zerg and there is a safe place for me to build my spines on. -Paul

[2022-04-21 13:51:45] - and then eventually be able to win out  by making more zerglings + queens?  I think.  -Daniel

[2022-04-21 13:39:22] - paul: Nah its fine, I just wasn't ready and didn't see them crossing the map.  I think there are defenses for it but they also depend on the spines not going down but I'm not sure I'm up on the defense ideas for that attack.  -Daniel

[2022-04-21 13:38:04] - a: Yeah, Daniel and I played some 1v1 (after getting our asses kicked in 2v2 against diamond teams) and I did a pretty cheesy 13 pool (was supposed to be 12 pool) that I felt a little bad about since I don't even know how it would be possible for a zerg to defend without really high level micro skills. -Paul

[2022-04-21 13:30:25] - Daniel: Was my 13 pool too cheesy last night? -Paul

[2022-04-19 16:34:26] - Daniel: Re: stasis wards. Yeah, which is why I was looking for harassment more on our level like reapers (which I think I could micro decently if I ignored macro) or speedlings (same). -paul

[2022-04-19 16:20:01] - Also kills are more valuable at our level I think because there is a chance that a player just never replaces a killed drone. -Daniel

[2022-04-19 16:19:34] - I think stasis wards are more relevant in the world of timing attacks / higher level players.  If you can get some stasis wards down and delay their entire build by 10 seconds per ward and you can get down three wards then you can know you are 30 seconds ahead.  Which I don't think super matters for us but for high level people maybe?  -Daniel

[2022-04-19 16:17:51] - paul: ""Actually, maybe they do have the authority and people should've listened"" - then we would know for next time?  I definitely don't think we always get it right the first time.  Or then people vote and Congress changes things for the next time around.  I wouldn't argue its good it took so long and probably should have been a thing where they went faster.  -Daniel

[2022-04-19 16:13:09] - Daniel: And 2 years later, after the worst parts of the pandemic were winding down, the courts finally said, "Actually, maybe they do have the authority and people should've listened". -Paul

[2022-04-19 16:12:38] - Daniel: "our system leans more towards careful than quick overall" Sure, and I'm fine with that in general (especially when taking into account appeals and whatnot), but 2 years for the first ruling for something that probably requires fast judgement? What if the roles were reversed and people weren't enforcing mask mandates because they didn't think the CDC had authority.... -Paul

[2022-04-19 16:10:42] - Daniel: Re: Oracles. Agreed, and I think I need to learn how to better use Oracles later in the game too. They can be hid in corners and pop in occasionally for status wards. -Paul

[2022-04-19 16:00:26] - Paul: Re: courts I think that generally speaking our system leans more towards careful than quick overall (though sometimes can be quick and maybe this should have been one of those times).  -Daniel

[2022-04-19 15:59:13] - Paul: I don't think Oracles wipe out whole mineral lines as often as zerglings but I think they can more easily / consistently get 3-5 drone kills even with a queen present then run away and let shield regen and then try again.  -Daniel

[2022-04-19 13:53:37] - Daniel: Yeah, just feels like adepts can be shut down by wall offs although I guess so can speedlings) and oracles aren't great against zerg with queens everywhere. Worth trying, though. -Paul

[2022-04-19 13:30:57] - I think Oracles and Adepts are the "standard" protoss harass.  -Daniel

[2022-04-18 15:38:15] - paul:  i'm slowly and steadily getting to daniel's viewpoint.  "Part of me doesn't super care what Twitter does because I don't super care about Twitter"  i actually use twitter a lot, but if it was gone tomorrow, or if elon ruins it, i would shrug and move on with my life.  i care more about who owns github (fucking microsoft!) and other websites like that.  on the other hand, i do like that facebook and google have competition.  ~a

[2022-04-15 17:01:55] - Daniel: The state actor thing is a weird thing because does it mean they should get more leeway or less? It looks like a bunch of Russian affiliated twitter accounts have gotten in hot water for some posts about the Ukraine war (saying it's Ukraine's fault or whatnot). I imagine they're getting extra attention for being state affiliated. -Paul

[2022-04-15 16:59:51] - Daniel: "I feel like that is the case with everything from referees to teachers to parents" Maybe, but that doesn't make it right, right? I mean, just because refs might be influenced by the home crowd or a particularly whiny player doesn't mean it's ideal. -Paul

[2022-04-15 16:54:26] - In my head twitter isn't to the level of being an important enough thing that it needs to be held to a higher or lower standard.  They do what they do and other people either stick with them or like digg2.0 and google+ just go elsewhere.  -Daniel

[2022-04-15 16:53:30] - Part of me doesn't super care what Twitter does because I don't super care about Twitter.  I don't know if thats some boomer-ness leaking out but if Twitter goes strict free speech anything goes or becomes a thing where you have to be a verified democrat to post doesn't really matter cause its just a service online and you can use other things?  -Daniel

[2022-04-15 16:47:03] - Though to be fair I have no idea what kind of stuff MBS / Iranian leaders tweet so can't really talk about that in an informed fashion.  -Daniel

[2022-04-15 16:46:23] - a: I would think of them as pretty close to / representing their state (which was my  point as giving them more leeway).  I think Trump is / was a tricky case in that I would agree he was somewhat a state actor but one that didn't treat it as such and was causing a violent problem on US soil via his twitter actions.  -Daniel

[2022-04-15 16:13:39] - daniel:  trump was a state actor. - mig

[2022-04-15 15:20:31] - MBS / Iranian leaders are more state actors than Babylon Bee?  I get it is a different standard but we do have precedent with embassies / ambassadors etc having a different set of rules applied to them.  -Daniel

[2022-04-15 15:12:48] - Paul: That they didn't get in trouble till someone brought attention to it?  I feel like that is the case with everything from referees to teachers to parents.  Hard to police what you don't notice.  -Daniel

[2022-04-15 15:01:02] - paul:  i agree with daniel.  i'd even question if the tweets were or were not removed.  and that's very relevant to your point.  he posted a screenshot so we don't know if they were removed or not.  ~a

[2022-04-15 14:59:38] - paul: Just as a note those tweets in greenwald's screenshot are not good and if twitter suspended (banned?) those people I wouldn't be upset and would probably think its a good thing.  -Daniel

[2022-04-14 17:54:12] - daniel:  certainly possible that could happen, but i doubt it. - mig

[2022-04-14 17:47:11] - mig: Yeah I just wonder if twitter goes the way of parler if Musk buys it and goes with a strict free speech approach and then does that mean his investment was wasted? less of what he wanted.  -Daniel

[2022-04-14 17:38:13] - oops daniel:

[2022-04-14 17:28:56] - that does the same thing but with rules in place?  I guess that would give the free market a chance to decide on whether people prefer some rules or strict free speech. -Daniel

[2022-04-14 17:28:20] - Twitter is interesting to me in that it serves as the public town square as he puts it but it doesn't have to.  Digg used to be the hotness before Reddit and it made changes and people bailed.  If he buys Twitter and makes it strict free speech where anything goes, what happens if people just leave to another service?  Does twitter have any patents that would keep Flitter or Twotter or whatever new service from coming along? -Daniel

[2022-04-12 23:00:16] - daniel:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vgd-w71RKTiB0wgkrFmorxugJL4IN_GI/view?usp=sharing  it's a profanity overlay for place.  download it and you can overlay it over the place image to censor the profanity.  ~a

[2022-04-12 22:07:56] - daniel:  That there's somebody hand on the wheel is something I think that's something everyone understands though.  Personally, I think Reich is attacking an argument nobody is making. - mig

[2022-04-12 16:27:30] - Daniel: Like Miguel said, he seems to be basically saying anything he doesn't like is the same. He doesn't like Putin, and he doesn't like Musk, ergo... You can say a lot of things about Musk, but his approach to what kind of speech can or should be permitted on twitter would almost certainly be polar opposite of Putin. -Paul

[2022-04-12 16:26:08] - Daniel: Yeah, I think the most charitable interpretation of his article is that somebody always has to control the internet, and he would rather HIS people control it instead of Musk, and that the way Musk wants to control the internet is similar to how Putin would? That last part is where he completely lost me. -Paul

[2022-04-12 16:05:55] - I don't think he is saying Musk = Putin.  Just that both have an interest (arguably, I mean he is making the case that Musk does) in having an ability to control 'the internet' - though I would strongly disagree that Twitter = 'the internet' -Daniel

[2022-04-12 16:00:21] - -Daniel

[2022-04-11 20:06:57] - daniel:  by "pure capitalism" are we talking anarchocapitalism or something else? - mig

[2022-04-11 20:01:38] - Daniel: I think most things work better with more capitalism versus less, and I think our current society should be far more skewed towards capitalism (most of the worst segments of our society are the ones that are least free market, IMHO). I don't think that's much of a surprise, though. -Paul

[2022-04-11 19:05:53] - I think pure capatalism is bad but pure communism would be bad too.  But I think a mix of things is probably the way to go.  We already have socialized medicine to some degree just a stupid way so that seems an obvious improvement.  Utilities are already often publicly run /shrug.  I don't think cell phone companies should be socialized / communized (?) but I don't think capatilism works in all arenas.  - Daniel

[2022-04-07 15:02:32] - daniel:  from your link:  "The transformation is so complete that one might find themselves repeating, Wait, is that Stephen Root?"  i say this a lot.  or more often i just say the shorted version:  "stephen root!"  ~a

[2022-04-07 05:23:31] - a: Going from https://www.vulture.com/article/best-character-actors.html - I would go with Lance Reddick (bonus points for being in Horizon Zero Dawn games) or Benedict Wong.  -Daniel

[2022-04-05 16:42:57] - a: Yeah sub reddits don't always start with the best name (anti-work springs to mind).  -Daniel

[2022-04-05 16:36:24] - daniel:  and all of the other nuance in fuckcars:  "we don't want to isolate rural communities by taking away cars", "we don't want to disrupt work trucks and delivery vehicles", some/most of them are pro-bus and pro-personal-vans, and carpooling, and slugging, etc.  most of them aren't mad at car users, but the decision makes that decide that it is the only choice allowed.  it's just more about having *the option*.  ~a

[2022-04-05 16:36:21] - daniel:  yah, gotcha.  i also wonder if people misunderstand "fuck cars".  maybe it's just a bad *name*?  for instance, "i'm a car enthusiast and i unironically agree with this sub", "i'm a car enthusiast, and this one of my is my favorite subreddits".  ~a

[2022-04-05 16:29:06] - a: its very true in terms of kid's media consumption.  Andrea and I are way more conservative in terms of what we let our kids watch than almost all other parents I know.  My kids haven't watched any Marvel movies and most other kids Nathan's age (5 / kindergarten) have seen several.  Alex was 7 when I let her watch The Last Airbender and that was the most violent thing I think she'd watched at that point.  -Daniel

[2022-04-05 14:37:30] - daniel:  i know your kids are probably too young to fall into this weird part of our society:  that somehow we think violence is appropriate in our media and national-dialog, but naughty words are inappropriate.  so: i'm not really making a "real" point.  regardless, it's what i was noodling on after our conversation.  ~a

[2022-04-05 14:37:27] - daniel:  i thought a lot about fuck ears last night.  it's weird because car deaths and gun deaths are approximately equal, in our country.  and both are, on their own, greater than flu deaths.  it reminded me of the movie from the 90s:  south park, bigger longer, uncut.  and the thesis of the movie was that it was (satirically) ok to be insanely violent as long as you didn't say any naughty words. (and the v-chip was new).  ~a

[2022-04-04 20:13:12] - a: Tonight it is then.  Miguel / Aaron you guys are welcome to join if you like : )  We can play wacky SC2 shenanigan games if that is more appealing  We've tried Direct Strike, SC2 Poker, Micro Wars, Limited budget FFAs and other wacky things.  Just don't want to be exclusionary!  -Daniel

[2022-04-04 20:07:42] - daniel:  m,t,w please.  thanks!  ~a

[2022-04-04 20:07:10] - a: SC2 all up to you this week it looks like! -Daniel

[2022-04-04 16:08:16] - daniel:  poop.  ok, the title is "elon musk becomes twitter’s largest shareholder" and the article is about three sentences, and here is one of them:  "per bloomberg data, musk’s 9.2 per cent twitter stake would make him the largest shareholder in the company. notably it’s more than quadruple the 2.25 per cent position of founder jack dorsey".  ~a

[2022-04-04 16:06:08] - a: Paywall -Daniel

[2022-04-01 20:23:15] - a: Yeah, I can, but I was hoping to just have to deal with a single column. Also, I messed up my notation from earlier and can't tell if something like "Daniel/Dewey" means they were both my teammate.... or were an archon team that was my teammate. -Paul

[2022-04-01 15:32:07] - Daniel: Since I started keeping track, we haven't played archon as Terran, but I am 2-0 with you as my teammate in 2v2 games when I am Terran. -Paul

[2022-04-01 15:15:56] - Paul: We have a winning record as archon and Terran?  I find that hard to believe somehow.  I feel like I lose all games as Terran.  -Daniel

[2022-04-01 13:38:04] - If I exclude games where I was on the same team as Daniel, then I have a losing record with Protoss and Terran and a 50/50 record with Zerg. -Paul

[2022-04-01 13:37:18] - I did some checking of my SC2 games. I have a winning record as Terran and Zerg (losing record as Protoss). In games where I am on the same team as Daniel (teammate or archon), I have a winning record with all races. -Paul

[2022-03-31 18:09:52] - mig: I'm not sure about firing squad but if it continues to go terribly I could see Putin falling out a window or something.  I don't know who would take that initiative or be in charge after though.  -Daniel

[2022-03-28 16:21:42] - I guess 100m people don't have a simple name like millionaire / billionaire.  100m-aire.  I agree with  paul that its dishonest in a dumb way.  I agree with Adrian that probably not in a way that people will actually care about.  -Daniel

[2022-03-28 12:06:27] - i'm on your side.  a wealth tax is dumb.  but (regarding my disagreements with daniel) this bill is much less dumb than all of the other previous wealth-bills and proposals before it, because instead of literally taxing wealth, they decided to tax income if your wealth is above a threshold.  so, hiding wealth now is strictly less beneficial (it now only benefits people near the threshold).  still bad, imo.  but, less bad.  ~a

[2022-03-24 17:32:44] - I don't think defining currency is a winning argument for either of us though which is mostly why I didn't go down the road I guess.  I'm not sure there is a winning argument for either of us.  The things that crypto currency is good at I'm either indifferent or slightly against I guess so its upsides don't really sway me.  -Daniel

[2022-03-24 17:31:42] - a: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency  I don't think its a completely black and white thing.  I don't think its a very good currency for most of the things I care about a currency doing?  If all you are about is unregulated international transfers I can see how it (kind of) works there though it still assumes an ability to transfer it to a currency you can use locally.    -Daniel

[2022-03-24 17:11:39] - paul:  "eyes_gif" . . . daniel?  please define a currency for us, because every time i see something like this, i *know* you're just going to say "nope, it's still just an asset, because"  ~a

[2022-03-24 16:28:09] - I remember Primer from long ago.  I think I thought it was good but crazy.  -Daniel

[2022-03-22 21:28:58] - daniel:  "Just an easier to transfer asset?".  how do you define currency?  i'd start with an easy to transfer asset, and work from there.  ~a

[2022-03-22 21:27:57] - daniel:  which is kinda my point.  and also ukraine's point.  they aren't picking crypto because it's cool.  ~a

[2022-03-22 21:02:25] - daniel:  "if Ukraine wanted they probably could set up a way to accept GME stocks".  here i disagree.  if ukraine wanted to do this, they probably could not.  ~a

[2022-03-22 17:39:59] - There are probaly smarter people than me who have looked into defining those terms better somewhere, either lawyers or academics I would guess.  -Daniel

[2022-03-22 17:39:28] - a: I feel like we debating different fronts or something.  I agree crypto is easier to transfer across international borders than gold.  Just that if Ukraine wanted they probably could set up a way to accept GME stocks but yeah crypto is easier.  I'm not sure that makes it currency though. Just an easier to transfer asset? I guess the distinction is between "currency" and "asset" which I guess comes down to acceptance and ease of use?-Daniel

[2022-03-22 17:12:16] - daniel:  "I'm pretty sure stocks / gold do get sold / transferred across international boundaries".  it's possible, of course.  and it's super difficult.  i literally can't buy shares in companies that don't trade on US exchanges.  i can't BUY it.  let alone TRANSFER it, that's probably harder.  actually, fuck, why aren't people donating gold or gme to ukranie?  do you think it's not telling at all that people are ONLY using crypto/usd?  ~a

[2022-03-22 15:28:32] - Bitcoin has the advantage of not being regulated so its easier to transfer across international borders.  So  yeah I think we talked about that being an advantage it has before.  But I don't think that makes it currency?  -Daniel

[2022-03-22 15:27:23] - a: I'm pretty sure stocks / gold do get sold / transferred across international boundaries.  I'm not sure I get your point about USD in Europe.  Yes currency conversion is a thing.  But you wouldn't call GE stock currency and you could also take that to Europe sell it for euro's and buy stuff.  -Daniel

[2022-03-22 15:22:31] - daniel:  the banking system is complex in a way that bitcoin does alleviate.  i guess i don't care if people are converting currency or not?  if i pay for something in usd to buy something in europe, and money is translated into euros does that make usd not real currency?  obviously not, right?  ~a

[2022-03-22 15:20:45] - daniel:  what sort of system?  if such a system for that could be set up as well, why hasn't it?  worded differently, don't you think the evidence that such a thing hasn't been set up is that way for a reason?  our congress (not sure if it was the house or the senate) specifically asked ukraine this question:  why aren't people donating dollars or euros?  and the ukraine official replied that the banking system doesn't allow for that.  ~a

[2022-03-22 15:17:49] - a: It still doesn't seem like currency?  Seems like an asset they donated and Ukraine then converted it to traditional currency and used that to buy stuff.  It does seem easier to donate than say stocks or shares of gold but it seems like a system for that could be set up as well.  -Daniel

[2022-03-21 21:59:49] - daniel:  for some additional context, patreon literally closed an account that accepted money for ukraine military efforts.  ~a

[2022-03-21 21:51:01] - daniel:  "If the goal is to be currency then I think its debatable" (from you, in 2020).  do you have any thoughts on the 0.1b+ usd donated to ukraine using addresses like this one?  forbes (etc) have reported these addresses have been used to literally equip the military with thousands of bullet proof vests / binoculars, etc.  ~a

[2022-03-21 18:59:03] - a: I think I would support relaxed zoning laws / changing zoning laws.  -Daniel

[2022-03-21 15:07:39] - paul:  you and daniel seem to be focused on the density as the only thing that makes money.  this isn't the case.  as he points out multiple times in the video, some of the medium-density places that were walkable were also much more profitable than the medium-density non-walkable places.  ~a

[2022-03-18 15:21:46] - Daniel: "Also I'm weird in that in general I'm pro higher taxes" Question, but pro higher taxes for you? Or others? Or both? Or some subset? -Paul

[2022-03-18 12:37:32] - a: "both you and daniel got this part wrong!" No, I understood that, but the thing driving that discrepancy is almost certainly population density, no? Tax revenue is half the equation. If you greatly increase population but keep the area constant... that explains a lot. -Paul

[2022-03-17 18:16:20] - daniel:  it might be surprising to paul, but i'm pro lower taxes.  i'd actually hope that we first look at the people overpaying and get them all fixed up.  but also, that i'm mooching off of other people really doesn't seem right.  (i know i still don't have you believing this, but i'm fine with this).  ~a

[2022-03-17 18:14:02] - My family always talks about the ways they protest their house valuations which drive property taxes (which is the main tax vehicle here in TX since we don't have sales tax) and I don't ever protest because I'm ok paying more taxes.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 18:13:18] - Also I'm weird in that in general I'm pro higher taxes?  I think that puts me in the minority of most people.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 18:12:53] - I would believe there is some level of subsidization but I don't know its the simple metric of tax revenue per acre minus expenses per acre.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 18:09:58] - daniel:  i don't know either.  but i'd hope that such an analysis was included.  ~a

[2022-03-17 18:09:25] - a: I don't know?  My understanding based on watching was tax revenue - expenses.  Does that account for what proportion of the downtown tax profits are attributable to having that single family housing that allows for the employees that work there to provide that tax profit?  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 18:07:25] - daniel:  he's literally being paid by a broke town to analyze the economic impact of new development.  so a broke town saw they have a problem, recognized it, and hired some experts?  these experts are human, of course, but if he's not looking at the residential are that is supporting the commercial area, then i think he'd be considered negligent.  do you agree?  ~a

[2022-03-17 18:05:00] - daniel:  are you assuming he's not already accounting for the benefits of having that housing to the profitable tax areas?  ~a

[2022-03-17 18:04:36] - If the pattern is that the businesses supporting the residential area's should offset the money lost on those residential area's then maybe we should be taxing big foot print businesses (walmart / bestbuy / ikea / etc) more?  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 18:03:14] - a: "lets lower the taxes on the mixed use, and medium-density," - maybe?  Thats the part where I'm not sure? Do we know those residential people aren't also being subsidized?  Less strict on zoning / promoting mixed used areas I'm in.  Raising taxes on single use family areas to better reflect their expense?  Maybe but I'd want to explore the benefits of having that housing as well to the profitable tax areas.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 17:47:51] - daniel:  lets lower the taxes on the mixed use, and medium-density, and be less strict on zoning of the mixed use, and medium-density.  agreed?  ~a

[2022-03-17 17:47:21] - daniel:  "I guess not so strict on the zoning"  yes.  here we agree.  i understand your point, that sometimes low-density suburbs support real estate.  and his graphs don't highlight that very well, and of course i agree with you on that point.  but that low-density suburbs are inefficient (and undertaxed) and low-density commercial real estate is inefficient (and undertaxed) is the overall takeaway.  ~a

[2022-03-17 17:45:02] - Do we care if businesses are subsidizing residential areas of all kinds?  I think the point of less dense area's being more expensive is still valid but I don't know what conclusions follow from that in terms of city planning.  I guess not so strict on the zoning.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 17:43:32] - I still think there  is a commercial / residential aspect that's being ignored / conflated by doing it per acre.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 17:35:14] - daniel:  per acre makes the most sense to me . . . if you counted it per tax payer then you could easily be as inefficient with the land as you'd like, right?  ~a

[2022-03-17 17:22:38] - I also do wonder about the synergy of the single family area's providing economic support for all those tax paying areas.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 17:22:03] - a: his metric was difference of tax rev vs expense per acre.  Not per tax payer or something so in the mixed use case how do you separate whether the families there are being subsidized too?  Couldn't the conclusion of businesses subsidize residential also be supported by this data?  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 17:16:01] - daniel:  i don't follow, sorry.  "line of thought" i could understand.  but you're saying he's incorrectly conflating things, and i'm not sure i see what you mean.  i understand that you're uncomfortable, but that's probably because he's saying we're all mooching off of other people, which will never sit right.  ~a

[2022-03-17 17:06:34] - paul:  "areas with more population density generate more tax revenues?"  nope.  he's showing that the places with fewer parking lots and drive throughs generate more tax revenue.  the walkable communities generate more tax revenue.  and strictly speaking he was never looking at the tax revenue (both you and daniel got this part wrong!):  he's always been looking at the *difference* of revenue and expense.  ~a

[2022-03-17 16:50:24] - Which might still lead to an argument of balancing taxes or promoting mixed use to support more local businesses but I think his metric makes me uncomfortable some still.  -Daniel

[2022-03-17 16:50:03] - I also think there is a line of though on his metric having some flaws that by breaking it down by acre it conflates commerical and residential.  Like I don't know how much taxes the families are paying in the mixed use areas vs those in the single family areas and maybe both are being subsidized by the commercial taxes?  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:53:27] - daniel:  "If you took it to the other extreme and disallowed single use family areas would that work out for a city?"  i would not take this extreme, no.  would it work out for the city?  i don't know.  i do not propose we disallow anything.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:52:27] - daniel:  "I'm not sure what we're debating"  i'll argue against having as much motor-vehicle designed asphalt as we often do when planning new communities.  the video does touch on this briefly.  that's what i'm debating at least.  do you agree with me?  "Attempt to encourage people to want to live in mixed use areas more?"  no.  but i'll argue we should increase taxes on the non-mixed-use areas so they we aren't subsidizing them?  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:49:49] - If you took it to the other extreme and disallowed single use family areas would that work out for a city?  Also unsure so I'm not sure that the  metric holds up when holistically thinking about city planning? -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:49:08] - I'm not sure what we're debating.  Is there anyone who wouldn't concede that mixed use is more effective on a naive strict $ earned tax revenue metric?  I'm not sure what the point is.  Zoning laws are dumb?  Attempt to encourage people to want to live in mixed use areas more?  I think there are probably better ways.  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:42:29] - daniel:  ooooonly if you have enough families nearby!  otherwise it'll make you negative money.  which is kinda the point.  make the transportation from housing to/from commercial more efficient.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:40:43] - Also I definitely don't know enough about property taxes to talk intelligently on this but like if downtown has 1000 businesses isn't that going to always pay more taxes than a same size amount of land with 1000 families living on it?  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:40:29] - daniel:  "cities aren't taxing houses appropriately that is a thing to talk about"  he does this though.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:39:23] - a: I think the overall point of where there is density there is more tax revenue seems obvious and doesn't need a video?  I mean I get that if cities aren't taxing houses appropriately that is a thing to talk about about I don't think suburbs having lower tax returns is shocking or something?  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:36:49] - daniel:  downtowns make more money for cities.  true.  and he does discuss this.  but:  1. people live in downtowns.  2.  people live in *walkable* non-downtowns as well.  he mentions #2 a lot.  i added #1 because it's worth mentioning that he never said that where people live can't support themselves.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:34:48] - a: He keeps pointint out downtown's make more money for cities than where single family homes are.  And how where single family homes are is where its costing the city money.  He's kind of repeated that point a lot.  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:32:39] - daniel:  "This property tax ROI thing seems weird to me"  why?  "I think overall his arguement seems to be that where more businesses are more property taxes get paid and where its more just people living less taxes get paid?"  he definitely never says this.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:31:13] - daniel:  "modern development" you dropped the "car" in that sentence when you typed it out in your last sentence.  it's the density, not the age:  the modern approach of spreading everything out by having giant drive-through and huge sprawling parking lots you literally lose all of the efficiency of the location.  by jamming in all that asphalt, you turn a usable community that supports itself into financial insolvency.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:31:11] - daniel:  "I don't think the implication he thinks the modern development is bad there is a stretch"  hard disagree.  he's all about modern cities.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:31:02] - I think overall his arguement seems to be that where more businesses are more property taxes get paid and where its more just people living less taxes get paid?  And therefore that mixed use communities are better because more taxes get paid for those areas?  This property tax ROI thing seems weird to me.  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:26:56] - a:I'm watching more - just was commenting on that part since it was the part in question at the moment.  I mean I'm paraphrasing but I think his quote is "In this example a 100 year old commercial block, built in the traditional style of development drastically outperformed a shiny new developement, created in the modern car centric style."  I don't think the implication he thinks the modern development is bad there is a stretch.  -Daniel

[2022-03-16 21:21:19] - daniel:  what's with you guys and watching 90 seconds of a video?  i watched that video on 1.75x and it took like 5 minutes.  you said the same thing paul did:  "its bad to do the modern development".  i guess i'm the crazy one here, but he literally didn't say that.  he suggested that the one development was worse, but NOT because it was modern.  ~a

[2022-03-16 21:19:41] - not paul but after watching the first 1:30 I don't think I have quite the reaction Paul did but I also feel like he lost me already by showing me some example of two blocks that have different tax revenues(does say why and I have no idea) and stating that its bad to do the modern development.  I don't understand his conclusion there.  -Daniel

[2022-03-15 18:22:40] - paul:  this is a good thing.  (i'd mostly look to daniel to disagree) there shouldn't be one point of failure.  there shouldn't be one government, one fed, that decides the wordwide interest rate.  if the usd stops being the world reserve currency, then say fed rate hikes will have a MUCH smaller blow on the world economy (AND the us economy).  it also means who's president, or chairman of the fed, has less of an ability to fuck shit up.  ~a

[2022-03-14 20:17:29] - a: Yeah in this case I have no idea.  Maybe there is some very small market?  Like maybe 5 transactions went through somewhere?  No idea.  -Daniel

[2022-03-14 20:09:23] - daniel:  like for instance, if we somehow magically knew there was a 10% chance that russia would bounce back (even *partially* bounce back).  then, the $.07 is strictly incorrect.  how could they possibly know that there's not a 10% chance that they'll bounce back?  ~a

[2022-03-14 20:07:32] - daniel:  i think i understand what you mean.  i think that's close to the ebitda method.  but, i can't imagine they are doing that in this case:  if they were, why would they come up with $.07?  why did they say -99.9% of the worth of every company in the country has gone away since the start of the year?  how do you evaluate the effect of sanctions on a country of that size?  without a market checking your work?  ~a

[2022-03-14 20:01:32] - I think.  -Daniel

[2022-03-14 20:01:28] - a: Sort of?  I think that's why price of things can swing a lot after IPO's but I think like lawyers (or accountants? or someone? look at metrics / balances / debt / etc and maybe comps or something like real estate and come up with what they think the initial offering should be.  -Daniel

[2022-03-14 19:59:44] - daniel:  determining what a company is worth, without selling a part of it, is basically impossible.  think about it, why even have a stock market?  if such a method existed, you could just use that method and sell at that price.  iow, this is why the stock market exists . . . at all.  without a market, buying and selling part of things, it's all just a guess?  ~a

[2022-03-14 19:58:19] - daniel:  well ipos are magic to me too!  but, it seems like you get a bunch of people to promise to buy at a specific price.  that doesn't happen in this situation.  valuating the physical assets is possible.  or taking the ebitda and multiplying it by a pre-decided weighting-factor is possible (but i guarantee the $.07/share is not taking this into account unless that factor is very small).  ~a

[2022-03-14 19:53:54] - a: I think there is a way to valuate things that aren't being sold - kind of how an IPO happens but its much more slow and deliberate.  I'm not sure if thats what they would do or not in this case though.  -Daniel

[2022-03-14 19:42:44] - paul/daniel:  a more extreme case:  erus.  the nav says $0.07 even though the *last* price, from weeks ago, was $8.  (it's totally irrelevant, but the price at the beginning of the year was $42).  if it's *last* traded price was $8, who decides that it's changed -99% from that last traded price?  and how?  if nobody (domestically or internationally) is trading it?  ~a

[2022-03-14 19:39:28] - paul/daniel:  i wonder how mutual funds decide their price?  i assume it's similar to how ETFs decide their NAV (which is once per day, and not the same as their price).  but i don't know how that's done either?  so, for a less extreme case, look at vtiax . . . how are they valuating the russian equities they hold?  how do you decide what something is worth, if people aren't trading it?  no markets (anywhere) trade these assets.  ~a

[2022-03-03 21:32:10] - Daniel: Yeah, I agree that they might have sneakily been in a worse position than it seemed (ie, the one base and all), but it felt like they quit while the climatic battle was still going on. Don't know if they had reinforcements, but I felt like they were making headway pushing into our naturals and thought my expansion was going to go down. -Paul

[2022-03-03 21:25:11] - Yeah I went back and watched the replay.  I'm still not sure why they quit.  I don't feel like they had it won or that we did.  Two of their players were still only on one base though when they quit.  So maybe they just gave up once the proxy didn't just win right away?  Unsure.  -Daniel

[2022-03-03 21:20:29] - Daniel: Hells yeah. And I think we earned it too, even if I still suspect that one group was smurfs. Next up, masters? -Paul

[2022-03-03 20:49:11] - our 3v3.  -Daniel

[2022-03-03 20:38:42] - Daniel: You in Diamond 1v1? Or just referencing our 3v3 accomplishment? -Paul

[2022-03-03 20:36:31] - Daniel: Yeah, sorry, I almost prefaced that all with saying: "Not necessarily asking for pity for him but..." -Paul

[2022-03-03 19:35:57] - Also diamond league!  Still happy about that.  -Daniel

[2022-03-03 19:35:40] - Also Ukraine sucks up a lot of attention currently so might just be bad timing for hoping for outrage for other things.  -Daniel

[2022-03-03 19:35:01] - Probably though I imagine somewhere there is a recent story of something happening to an actress that we aren't currently outraged over so probably  but maybe not?  Doesn't seem like a good way to treat him.  -Daniel

[2022-02-28 20:42:07] - Daniel: "I think you are describing life insurance / annuity companies" Very possible. I'm not entirely sure how the annuity companies basically invest behind the scenes (if they do at all?) -Paul

[2022-02-28 20:14:08] - Just less good rates than you probably want.  -Daniel

[2022-02-28 20:14:00] - paul: I think you are describing life insurance / annuity companies.  I think that is more or less exactly what they do.  -Daniel

[2022-02-28 19:21:40] - paul/daniel:  the thing we probably won't like about an annuity (or pension) is that if the returns are guaranteed, then the rates are mega-low.  (only slightly higher than a CD or a bond rate).  they'll come up when interest rates increase, but with a zero-percent interest-rate, annuities and pensions are basically going to pay out jack-shit.  ~a

[2022-02-28 19:13:58] - paul/daniel:  i think there's no really good reason to not get a TINY annuity.  like 1/100th of your portfolio.  or something like that.  (if the rate is "good enough").  then you get the best of both worlds.  some super small guaranteed output, and you still get all the upsides of a normal 401k.  ~a

[2022-02-28 17:14:47] - Daniel: I guess my way of looking at it is that if I have something like a 75% chance of retiring successfully (ie, not running out of money) with an average of like $8 million left over after death, I would seriously consider trading that for a 100% chance of success and $0 left after death (sorry kids). -Paul

[2022-02-28 17:05:44] - I think mostly cause you give up on that potential growth 80% chance to come out ahead by keeping it yourself.  Even the 20-5% chance of you going under in the models generally assumes you made no changes along the way.  So if you are willing to potentially trim your budget / find new income stream(re:job) if you had to  you should be able to avoid hitting empty in most scenarios I think.  -Daniel

[2022-02-28 16:56:47] - Daniel: Good point. I had completely forgotten about those since they seem to have such a bad reputation. So why don't more people use annuities? I get they might be bad

[2022-02-28 15:59:09] - You trade potential growth for "guaranteed" payments.  -Daniel

[2022-02-28 15:58:55] - Paul: Service exists - called an annuity.  -Daniel

[2022-02-27 04:05:26] - Daniel: Yeah, it makes sense in some ways, but it's also a little... I dunno... off? I mean, if I am on my death bed with $5 million still in the bank... I'm going to regret not having retired sooner. -Paul

[2022-02-25 21:50:33] - I think my planner person was shooting for 80%.  I think a lot of plans end with the possibility that you have a fair chunk of excess money.  Because otherwise it would be to easy to run out with downswings.  -Daniel

[2022-02-25 19:17:06] - Daniel: Isn't what we really want to just raise the wealth / standard of living of everybody / the bottom 50% / however you want to define it? Why throw in the complicating factor of comparing it to the wealthiest people? -Paul

[2022-02-25 19:15:04] - Daniel: I'm saying wealth inequality is the wrong thing to focus on. For example, if we doubled the wealth of the bottom 50% tomorrow and tripled the wealth of the top 1% at the same time, wouldn't that be a miraculous outcome? At the same time, wouldn't wealth inequality be worse? -Paul

[2022-02-25 17:13:47] - mig: I'm not aware of AOC wanting wealth equality.  I think she also just wants less inequality.  I could believe she might want a wealth cap in a magical world but even that still doesn't equal wealth equality.  -Daniel

[2022-02-25 16:36:49] - daniel:    I don't want wealth equality. you may not want it personally, but a lot of the louder voices talking about wealth inequality (AOC) certainly do. - mig

[2022-02-25 15:00:51] - paul: I don't get your points around wealth equality.  I think you are either misunderstanding something or just making a strawman.  I don't want wealth equality.  I want less wealth inequality and want to be fair on the tax burden and not the tax amount.  You can have those things and still let Bezos/Musk be the wealthiest in the country.  -Daniel

[2022-02-25 14:40:51] - Daniel: "Even the really progressive ideas of like 80% rates on multi millionaires leaves them with more money than rando paying 15/20% on their 65k" Right. And I am saying I don't see the tax system as a way of fixing wealth inequality. I see it as a way to raise funding for the government. -paul

[2022-02-24 15:40:47] - It was trying to show  your idea of "fair" in this context doesn't make sense.  -Daniel

[2022-02-24 15:40:31] - Paul: No - having more equitable burdens doesn't lead to the same financial situations.  Even the really progressive ideas of like 80% rates on multi millionaires leaves them with more money than rando paying 15/20% on their 65k.    The paying everyone the same statement isn't a real idea - but a way to try and show that since we don't pay the same we shouldn't tax the same.  -Daniel

[2022-02-24 15:37:59] - Daniel: "I (we?) aren't trying to equalize the financial situations" Maybe semantics, but isn't that the goal to move towards, though? The disagreement here is all about how a flat tax would hit less affluent more, and so we need to hit the wealthier harder to even things out. You even mentioned paying everybody equally. -Paul

[2022-02-24 15:32:59] - Paul: I (we?) aren't trying to equalize the financial situations.  Having equal tax burdens does not lead to equal financial situations. -Daniel

[2022-02-24 15:26:30] - Daniel: I don't buy into the Harrison Bergeron idea that we need to equalize the financial situations of everybody. -Paul

[2022-02-24 15:24:43] - Daniel: "I think the idea is to have a fair burden not a fair amount in terms of taxes" Yeah, I understand that's what you (and Adrian?) want, but that's not my goal with taxes. I don't get why it makes sense for the wealthier to pay more in taxes any more than it would make sense for the rich to pay more for pizza or a hammer or whatever. -Paul

[2022-02-24 15:13:31] - Unless we pay everyone the same - then a set amount would make sense.  But I would assume that is a no go since that is not capitalism so if we are agreed that people can be paid differently then why not taxed differently?  -Daniel

[2022-02-24 15:12:24] - I think the idea is to have a fair burden not a fair amount in terms of taxes.  A tax amount of 1k to someone who makes 30k a  year is a much bigger burder than to someone who makes 1 mil.  -Daniel

[2022-02-24 03:03:50] - Daniel: But assuming you mean I don't think we should be using taxation as a way to try to even out everybody's level of wealth... then yes, that is accurate. -Paul

[2022-02-24 03:02:55] - Daniel: "I think one of the things I remember was that Paul wanted equal taxes not equitable taxes" I think I know what you're getting at in terms of "equitable taxes", but it's a weird term to me considering the definition of equitable is: "fair and impartial" -Paul

[2022-02-23 21:57:57] - I think one of the things I remember was that Paul wanted equal taxes not equitable taxes.  But I might be misremembering / putting words in his mouth.  -Daniel

[2022-02-14 21:08:47] - daniel:  . . . counter-protests are what you'll often end up with in that case?  i.e. if "jews will not replace us" is your message, you should probably expect a counter-protest.  ~a

[2022-02-14 20:59:57] - I mean blocking off economic activity is a good way of projecting a message but that doesn't mean society tolerates it indefinitely.  -Daniel

[2022-02-14 20:59:31] - "getting arrested is sometimes the cost of a safe non-violent protest?"  sometimes?  -Daniel

[2022-02-14 20:24:16] - daniel:  "I think they should be dealt with in some capacity"    mmmm.  no.  i disagree?  when a protest becomes annoying (and even if it disturbs commerce) is exactly when it becomes effective.  if you're protesting nonviolently and safely, i'm not sure the duration matters (to me).  and if you're protesting illegally, it might still be the right thing to do?  getting arrested is sometimes the cost of a safe non-violent protest?  ~a

[2022-02-14 20:20:43] - I don't agree with the truck convoy but I do think by and large its a good approach.  I think the part where it and other things in its vein will get push back is the duration.  Like if they block the bridge long enough to actually cause real problems to the economy then I think they should be dealt with in some capacity.  Similarly if a march walked through  a downtown and blocked traffic for even a couple of days vs like a month.  -Daniel

[2022-02-13 22:29:30] - Yeah at this point in life I'm pretty opposed to public money being used to fund major sports league stadiums / arenas.  -Daniel

[2022-02-09 18:47:43] - a: Ah nice - seems to support an idea that masking helps given their low rates - though not conclusive.  -Daniel

[2022-02-09 18:47:20] - daniel:  i agree there are other factors.  but at a certain point, you have to admit that any country should definitely avoid doing whatever the US is doing differently.  the US (and UK and Brazil) are almost always in the worst buckets.  ~a

[2022-02-09 18:41:28] - daniel:  you're welcome      ~a

[2022-02-09 18:38:51] - i haven't looked at all but I wonder what the numbers looked like in S Korea / Japan where masking is already prevalent in terms of helping to inform that discussion (even  though there are probably lots of other factors conflated in there).  -Daniel

[2022-02-07 20:09:55] - a: Yeah I wonder what else would account for that.  MAYBE GRAVITY IS INCREASING.  I mean no, but it sounds like a fun sci fi story.  -Daniel

[2022-02-07 18:52:14] - daniel:  here's another image that shows the context (obvious real takeaway here is that recreational drug use is really a major problem today, but still fall deaths surprised me).  ~a

[2022-02-07 18:51:03] - daniel:  it's up 35% in 10 years (2007-2016).  the life expectancy hasn't changed drastically from 2007 to 2016.  ~a

[2022-02-07 18:49:48] - a: kinda makes sense to me.  As we reduce other medical causes of death people get older and more frail.  Falling over is pretty terrible once you get old enough.  Broken hips are super bad but any broken bones is super hard to deal with at that age.  -Daniel

[2022-02-07 16:38:10] - Its a short story (something like 100 pages? not 100%) so not a huge commitment.  -Daniel

[2022-02-07 16:37:26] - Random product plug but this is one of my favorite stories by one of my favorite authors that you can read for a dollar.  Worth checking out if have any interest in reading: https://www.amazon.com/Emperors-Soul-Elantris-Book-ebook/dp/B00A1XOPE8/  -Daniel

[2022-02-07 16:36:42] - Also that I would agree with the sexist true sentiment.  -Daniel

[2022-02-07 16:36:23] - In this case I would argue that its both sexist and true.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 21:01:59] - daniel:  fair enough, that's pretty crazy.  I've only really listened to his episode with Dr. Gupta, which felt more like a discussion than most other media discourse on the topic. - mig

[2022-02-01 20:55:22] - Like maybe Pfizers and Moderna's dept's aren't going down that avenue, but the idea that all scientists are ignoring it rather than some tried it and it didn't work that great?  That seems much more reasonable to me.  Now a new study from Japan - maybe there is something there?  Maybe not?  We'll see how the peer review goes.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 20:54:13] - And later hosted proponents of ivermectin who continued that same line of thinking.  Personally I don't give a crap about ivermectin but the idea that the global scientific community isn't pursuing all angles and trying to figure it out and are deliberately avoiding a solution is bonkers.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 20:51:15] - He then immediately couches it with "I don't know if its right or wrong" but that seems pretty weak to say right after that.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 20:50:39] - Thats not positing the idea that studies should be done or checked / reviewed / duplicated.  Thats presenting something as a conclusion and adding a layer of conspiracy.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 20:49:42] - From https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/joe-rogan-covid19-misinformation-ivermectin-spotify-podcast-1219976/ a quote from Rogan "“This doctor was saying ivermectin is 99 percent effective intreating Covid, but you don’t hear about it because you can’t fund vaccines when it’s an effective treatment,”"  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 20:43:59] - daniel:  I'm thinking more like the Rogan situation, where I believe he only stated he was prescribed Ivermectin not promoting it as a super wonder drug, which got everyone freaked out (to the point where CNN blatantly lied about him taking horse dewormer).  I know you guys don't like Rogan, but he does seem more interested in actual discussion.  - mig

[2022-02-01 18:56:25] - Its possible(likely?) that the anti invermectin crowd wasn't patient / open to discourse either but people taking a drug and blinding / killing themselves isn't a great outcome that does seem like something we (society) should try to avoid.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 18:55:11] - So I don't know that is great but my personal experience wasn't that the pro ivermectin crowd was patient / rational / open to discourse.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 18:54:35] - I guess we'd need to look at examples at that point?  The ones I saw (mostly from my aunt) were not invitations to discussion with the idea that no action should be taken until we figure out if this is a good idea.  It was definitely this is good and there is some level of consipracy preventing us from doing so.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 18:44:23] - daniel?  ~a

[2022-02-01 17:36:23] - paul:  "so?", well i'd parrot daniel and say that conclusions without studies in the context of a public pandemic is not a good idea.  ~a

[2022-02-01 17:33:37] - Conclusions w/o studies in the context of a public pandemic are not a good idea.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 17:32:09] - "How do you know?" - cause no published studies on the matter.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 17:28:27] - Daniel: Or 2 years ago, "N95 masks don't do anything to prevent catching COVID: misinformation" -Paul

[2022-02-01 17:27:15] - Daniel: "You should take invermectin if you get covid because it works great and big pharma doesn't want you to know: misinformation" How do you know? What if a year from now we find out it DOES work great? Again, 12 months ago we could be saying: "I'm not wearing a cloth mask in Costco because it hardly does any good: misinformation" -Paul

[2022-02-01 17:22:25] - You shouldn't be censored or shamed for the first.  You should be for the second.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 17:21:53] - The idea that ivermectin might have uses and should be looked at by scientists: not misinformation.  You should take invermectin if you get covid because it works great and big pharma doesn't want you to know: misinformation.  Those two statements are not the same.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 17:20:03] - Daniel: And the science is known for sure and must be followed and misinformation can be known for sure and must be banned from being discussed. Again, people were shamed and censored for saying things that we either admit were true now or are realizing COULD be true. -Paul

[2022-02-01 17:18:12] - Daniel: "I think you want all of this to be binary and be  "right" or "wrong" but things are always changing and people work with the knowledge they have" No, quite the opposite. My point is that it's often hard to know what is right and what is wrong but there seems to be this growing idea that there is "science" and "misinformation". -Paul

[2022-02-01 16:56:03] - daniel:  ("overall net effect on society".  i wonder this about a lot of technological marvels.  how about computers in general?  or the internal combustion engine?  or the industrial revolution?    i mean, it's all musing because it doesn't change anything, but i think about it sometimes.)  ~a

[2022-02-01 16:40:08] - (though it also might be in some form an inevitable extension of the internet and increased communication among people).  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:39:24] - (totally derails the covid conversation but I wonder some if overall net effect of social media has been negative - like I know there are use cases and positive use cases but not sure on the overall net effect on society).  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:37:09] - (everyone I think would be better off with less social media consumption imo - including news organizations who report things ) -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:32:06] - I'm with adrian though that some study figuring out a way to use ivermectin safely / effectively isn't an L for the CDC / gov / "authorities".  They as 'authorities' don't have the luxury to just half ass some treatment recommendation and hope for the best.  That is not how we want it to work so they have to operate on the knowledge they have at the time.  If that changes then so do the recommendations / treatments.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:29:40] - It was and is dumb to take advice from social media about medicine to take when you are facing a potentially lethal disease instead of your doctor.  Maybe some study figures out that some dosage of ivermectin done in some way does have some benefit but doctors in FL / CO / VA wherever don't have the luxury of just starting their own rando experiment and if they don't know that its safe why would they advise/allow it.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:27:06] - And I'm pretty sure there were studies early on that didn't show anything positive from ivermectin.  So maybe that Japanese study figured out something new.  Or the other study was bad in some way - dunno.  But it did get looked at.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:26:48] - paul:  i defer to daniel.  he's explaining my thoughts more or less.  it's dangerous to suggest people do a thing without data.  it's not dangerous to study if a thing will work, and collect data.  if social media wants to censor "dangerous information" (cue 1984) during a global pandemic, it might be a good idea?  (but like, almost literally, between a rock and a hard place)  ~a

[2022-02-01 16:26:18] - I think you want all of this to be binary and be  "right" or "wrong" but things are always changing and people work with the knowledge they have.  If people had been like we really think ivermectin should be studied immediately and pushed it to go through approval processes that would be one thing.  But thats not what was advocated.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:24:46] - There is a difference between hey scientists here's an idea.  And hey layman go buy this medicine and dual use it and hope for the best.  -Daniel

[2022-02-01 16:23:49] - paul: People are positing the idea that ivermectin might be a good idea and that it should be studied.  They were (are) advocating for taking it right now and going to a vet store potentially to buy it.  -Daniel

[2022-01-31 16:35:29] - a: Ah, sorry, yes, I didn't see Miguel's post just said, "end masks". My mistake. Sorry, Daniel. -Paul

[2022-01-31 16:29:43] - Daniel "end mask mandates? end wearing them in general? not sure what that means" This isn't intended to be hostile to you, but I don't get the confusion over this. There's a HUGE difference between ending mask mandates and not wearing them in general. There's no "tipping" mandate, yet the majority of people tip in restaurants. -Paul

[2022-01-31 15:55:02] - mig: end mask mandates? end wearing them in general? not sure what that means.  -Daniel

[2022-01-26 02:43:40] - Daniel: Sure, but they often aren't reasons that also happen to be hot-button political topics. I'm not saying that's the case here, as the medical reasoning sounds valid, but it just sounds a little suspicious. -Paul

[2022-01-25 21:05:20] - paul: People get denied transplants for lots of reasons.  -Daniel

[2022-01-25 02:08:48] - a:  daniel summarized the gist of it.  My understanding is they do get counted in the overall statistics but not sure if thats 100% true. - mig

[2022-01-24 17:14:16] - daniel:  if mark (or dewey) come here i can ignore email?    i'm free every night.  ~a

[2022-01-24 17:13:48] - also mig or aaron if you want to join!  -Daniel

[2022-01-24 17:13:26] - paul / a: SC2?  (just poking since mark mentioned tonight as an option) -Daniel

[2022-01-24 15:10:31] - daniel:  it's weird.  when you look at the s&p500, or whatever, zoomed out over the past year, the drop since january 1st doesn't look so bad.  but living it . . . yikes.  my retirement accounts have taken quite the pounding, and i'm remarkably heavyweight in bonds.  ~a

[2022-01-24 15:07:58] - daniel:  do these get counted as covid deaths?  i guess it's probably hard to quantify causation.  ~a

[2022-01-24 15:06:20] - Fantasy investing had a rough start to this year.  Oof.  -Daniel

[2022-01-24 14:57:25] - a: Yeah - NPR has talked about them some.  You got to the hospital for a heart attack or w/e and they test you for covid and you were positive but you weren't showing symptoms or having respiratory issues.  -Daniel

[2022-01-21 17:07:54] - Daniel: https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/334972-poll-dems-dont-accept-trump-as-legitimate-president Also, this is super oddly worded, but it sounds like there was a poll showing that 65 percent of Democrats don’t believe Democrats have accepted that President Trump won the election fairly or that he is a legitimate president? -Paul

[2022-01-21 17:04:08] - Daniel: "I don't think anyone claimed Trump wasn't the winner" Maybe semantics, but is this the same as saying he was a legitimate president? Because Hillary called him an illegitimate president. -Paul

[2022-01-21 14:41:48] - paul: I don't think anyone claimed Trump wasn't the winner - just that the system is kinda dumb if Clinton can win the popular vote and still lose.  Also the whole Russia deal.  But I don't think it was the same as when Trump lost.  -Daniel

[2022-01-20 22:23:32] - daniel:  for what it's worth, low income families often have trouble affording a (safe) car.  let alone a (safe) car for every member of their family.  ~a

[2022-01-20 22:21:20] - daniel:  i understand.  having a lack of parking in a car-paradise seems like a living hell! but, usually a lack of parking is exactly what creates walkable communities.  then the developers (can) come in and provide what people need in a walkable package.  i don't think parking minimums are the only thing keeping us away from a walkable utopia.  but they are one of the things.  a abundance of parking is what creates car-only hellscapes.  ~a

[2022-01-20 22:17:40] - a: I wouldn't be upset if some city somewhere tried it out.  I would be curious if it ended up being an issue where low income families ended up getting screwed somehow because they were the only ones who bought it because everyone else wanted parking spaces and they ended up having a hard time dealing with lack of parking.  I don't know that would happen but wonder.  -Daniel

[2022-01-20 21:52:17] - daniel:  "My guess is that it wouldn't sell"  that depends.  but shouldn't the developer have the choice?  flipping the script (and removing the choice, in the other direction), many places in europe have parking maximums.  ~a

[2022-01-20 21:51:21] - daniel:  they have not always been a thing, no.  looks like they started being common in the 50s?  "Assuming they haven't then before did developers make housing with less parking?"  of course, this has to be technically true if you pick an infinite timeline.  but yeah, still true any way you look at it:  the ratio of parking spaces per person has basically been monotonically increasing since the invention of the car.  ~a

[2022-01-20 21:47:12] - a: Have parking minimums always been a thing?  Assuming they haven't then before did developers make housing with less parking?  My guess is that it wouldn't sell as well but I don't know that.  -Daniel

[2022-01-20 20:02:28] - a: I think traffic is bad and cars facilitate traffic but I do think there are a lot of plusses gained from cities and I think giving them all up  would not be a net win.  Which might not be totally what you are arguing but it comes across that way some?  I think I can be on board for more walkable - but even that is still going to have cars.  -Daniel

[2022-01-20 15:10:29] - Daniel: Yeah, it is a weird sentence, but Biden is also known for gaffes and incoherence so I didn't think much of it. I honestly just figured he was trying to be clever and subtle about making the voting bill sound urgent without sounding like he was pre-emptively casting doubt on a future election. -Paul

[2022-01-20 15:05:16] - daniel:  I dunno man, if I was concerned about faith in our election system, I wouldn't be mouthing off about even the possibility that the upcoming election may not be legitimate, especially if it's one that my party is forecasted to not do very well in. - mig

[2022-01-20 14:46:42] - paul: Thats a weird sentence - the increase in the prospect of being illegitimate - I would parse that as the odds increased which I think is probably true but doesn't address by how much?  So like if there is a .05% more chance of being illegitimate then its a true statement.  I think its hard to quantify how R voting laws affect that percentage though.  -Daniel

[2022-01-19 17:45:02] - Daniel: Sure, and Republicans are around 30% of the American population? So a majority of a minority. Also, voters are just one part. Trump lost soundly in court, so even Republican appointed judges didn't side with him. I know there's some disagreement here, but I really don't think we were that close to some sort of coup. -Paul

[2022-01-19 15:28:55] - daniel: It's not just filibuster but just general disruption of anything getting done.  The democrats basically held a bipartisan infrastructure bill hostage for months because they were pounding the table for the BBB bill demanding it be passed together with it.  They're still pounding the table for BBB even though they have absolutely any leverage to get the votes for it, and in the meantime nothing else meaningful is getting done. - mig

[2022-01-19 14:56:53] - paul: Also Colbert suggested it - Warren didn't really endorse it.  I think most people would prefer the version of congress that actually does things and votes on things rather than the version where everything gets filibustered.  I'd have to go back and look but did things get filibustered at the same percentage level back in the day  like pre WW2?  -Daniel

[2022-01-19 14:53:55] - paul: "most people saw through and were united against" - you realize most R's still think the election was stolen and that most R politicians either go with this or believe it? (npr poll had it as 75% of R's)  -Daniel

[2022-01-18 19:49:19] - a: Yeah NBA doesn't want to take on China.  Lots of $$ there for them.  (This came up before though different when Morey tweeted out support for Hong Kong and it caused a big stir) -Daniel

[2022-01-18 19:13:18] - mig/daniel:  for some context.  warriors is nba? and they get a lot of money (very-indirectly) from china?  if so, it feels related to that upton sinclare quote ("it is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it") ???  ~a

[2022-01-18 18:58:44] - daniel:  interesting thought on the auto-increase.  hmm, i'll think on that.  it'll be annoying to implement, but still, probably for the best.  ~a

[2022-01-18 18:31:06] - mig: yikes as well.  -Daniel

[2022-01-18 18:30:29] - a: That idea for defaults seems solid to me.  Yes to target retirement based on birth year.  I've also seen lower starting but with auto yearly increase (again unless you go change it) so you start with just like 2 or 3 percent but it increases by 1 or 2 percent every year automatically unless you go change it back.  -Daniel

[2022-01-18 17:40:05] - daniel:  ok cool, thank you for that input.  for what it's worth, i'm already doing all of those things except the self-directed one.  (i'd do the self-directed one, but it is very expensive).  i'm also not technically doing the opt-out thing, but maybe i'll set that up before we hire on a next person.  so, what should the opt-out-defaults be???  2%-traditional + 2%-roth, everything into *the* target-retirement fund for your birth year?  ~a

[2022-01-18 17:06:33] - a: Make 401k opt out instead of opt in - make sure you have quality options with low/lower expense ratios - offer a solid match - low vesting time - reduce fees where possible (not always in your control though).  Once those are done I think things like true up or self directed options can be looked at but those seem more like extra / bonus things to me I think.  -Daniel

[2022-01-18 16:38:08] - daniel:  understood, thank you for your input.  i won't change it then, and i'll visit with the people it does affect.  "my list of 401k changes" do you have any specifics here?  i do run our 401k, and my biggest change in the past 10 years was changing our provider from paychex-401k to ascensus (uses "vanguard" branding and vanguard plans).  ~a

[2022-01-18 15:45:35] - a: In terms of the true up I don't think I have strong feelings for or against.  I think its definitely a thing that won't affect many people and for those its affecting I would tend to guess its not a huge deal for them so it would be low on my list of 401k changes if I were in charge of my companies 401k.  -Daniel

[2022-01-15 17:13:25] - paul/daniel:  our current P/E ratio for the s&p is nearing 40!  i feel like CAPE (p/e) is the closest thing we all have to a forward-predictor on the stock market.  thoughts on this?  correlation is loose, so we *might* be seeing as high as 10%/year of growth over the next 10 years, but the odds of that happening are looking exceedingly small. ~a

[2022-01-14 19:52:58] - paul/daniel:  i asked this exact question four years ago, and wonder if you have any new data or info from the past four years.  does your company have a 401k match true up?  and/or do you have any opinion on 401k match true up?  fwiw it OLNY matters to people who contribute the irs maximum (20.5k in 2022).  ~a

[2022-01-14 19:10:09] - a: "can we revisit history please?" Amash's first tweet was in 2020, right? Didn't Democrats have control of Congress then? I don't understand why you and Daniel keep pushing back on the idea of the Democrats having control of Congress now. They have the majority or tie+tie breaker. That's how we have defined control for forever, no? -Paul

[2022-01-14 19:06:34] - a: What circumstances are different? Trump had a Congress in control by the opposite party and Biden has a Congress in control (or... um... whatever alternative Daniel had said) by his party? -paul

[2022-01-14 18:44:12] - Daniel: But I get it, I've had plenty of times when I will criticize Biden or the Dems and the response is basically, "You're a Trumptard" and I'm like *hard eye-roll* -Paul

[2022-01-14 18:43:19] - Daniel: Ah, okay, I understand now. I guess (unsurprisingly) I see it as a false... dichotomy? Is that the right term? Like, I don't see why criticizing Biden (or D's) has to at all mean support for Trump (or R's) and in fact, I think that kind of thinking is super harmful because it leads to people blindly supporting their side even when it does bad things. -Paul

[2022-01-14 18:41:41] - I mean I think a lot of this might be fixed to some degree if we could change our voting system to better enable more political parties viable.  -Daniel

[2022-01-14 18:40:32] - construe my critism and lack of satisfaction with the current D party as an endorsement of the R's in any way shape or form."  -Daniel

[2022-01-14 18:38:10] - Daniel: "Congress has to start doing things again to help with that" Absolutely, and this is where things get a little weird for me because, obviously in theory Congress should be a sharply different institution from the Presidency, but in actuality recently, it seems like it often just acts as an extension of the presidency when the parties in power are the same. -Paul

[2022-01-14 18:38:00] - paul/daniel:  so, along those lines, if this is not allowed . . . can/should miguel compare trump to democrats?  i.e. saying that a democrat doing something bad is *almost as bad as* trump, instead of the opposition saying that a democrat doing something bad is *better* than trump?  ~a

[2022-01-14 18:37:07] - The D's only control part of congress.  I get they count as majority in Senate but its hard for to say they "control" the Senate.  -Daniel

[2022-01-14 18:36:44] - Daniel: I don't think I understand the question. I mean, just because one option is worse than the other, it doesn't mean both options are bad. Are you saying I can't criticize Biden because Trump was worse? I know that's a total straw-man, but I legit don't know what other point you are making. -Paul

[2022-01-14 18:36:29] - "respect for limits on executive power" is something that has been lacking since like Korean War but isn't something that the president can entirely fix on his own.  Congress has to start doing things again to help with that.  -Daniel

[2022-01-14 18:34:59] - paul: brings up an interesting point in the land of narratives - how do you call out Biden while also recognizing he's vastly (six points on this scale) superior and that one would (for sake of the argument) vote for Biden 10/10 times over Trump.  -Daniel

[2022-01-14 16:26:38] - daniel:  Things like Jim Eagle and the whole "if you oppose my agenda you're basically Jefferson Davis and George Wallace" has really just been irritating.  All this whining and moaning about needing to return to "norms" and "not being divisive" but this mother fucker isn't much better than Orange Man(tm). - mig

[2022-01-13 20:08:58] - -Daniel

[2022-01-13 19:24:29] - daniel:  sure that's not a good extreme either.  I do that a lot of the backlash currently though, wasn't over the initial decision to close schools, but the constant dragging off the feet to eventually get them open, usually because of constant goal post shifting by teachers on the conditions for reopening. - mig

[2022-01-13 19:09:33] - Daniel: Obviously we've already seen it with Republicans and their argument. I don't think I have to go into any more detail there. But I'm saying I'm seeing it just as much with Democrats (lots in the past, as mentioned before with Hillary and Abrams and Gore and whatnot), but especially going forward, and I think a lot of it is thanks to this overheated rhetoric from Biden about Jim Eagle... -Paul

[2022-01-13 19:07:54] - Daniel: Obviously. all fair points since we can't know the future. But knowing what we know now, what do you think the chances are that there will be something that people can point at as being "the reason" why Biden was cheated? This is what I'm worried about: People are primed on both sides to disbelieve the election results if their side loses. -Paul

[2022-01-13 18:59:39] - I agree that people rely on schools so certainly more communication / updates / efforts on that front would have been (or still would be) good but I think ideas to just "open back up" have their own challenges too.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 18:57:20] - As a counterpoint everyone I know associated with the school system here in TX thinks its been a disaster on some level to remain open with the same expectations as normal because so many teachers / students have been out.  Thats certainly currently anecdotal but I don't think its as simple as schools should have remained open the end.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 18:34:58] - (those are all me just making up things not things I think will happen) -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:49:22] - mig: I don't think they cackle but I 100% think there are smart R's in a room trying to figure out how to get less voters.  If you don't I guess that can be your thought but doesn't seem born out by their policies or goals.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:47:59] - I do generally think of R's as less legitimate as an entire party (for a couple of reasons) but the one relevant here is that they actively seek to have less voters vote.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:47:21] - Daniel: But also, I guess I don't see the same connection of "legitimacy" with "number of voters who turned out", at least in terms of what I am talking about. This seems like a bizarre attempt to redefine the term so that Republicans crying about illegitimacy in 2020 can still be thought of as crazy conspiracy mongering but Democrats can do it in three years if their guy loses. -Paul

[2022-01-13 17:46:52] - "will have cheated" != "cheated to win".  I can cheat on a problem of a test and not on the whole thing and still pass legitimately.  I don't think its binary - hence the spectrum you alluded to earlier.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:45:32] - Daniel: But not always. Virginia recently had big turnout and still went Republican. Sometimes turnout represents dissatisfaction with the party in power. I wouldn't be surprised if Republicans wanted bigger turnout in 2024, especially if Biden's approval ratings continue to be low. -Paul

[2022-01-13 17:44:25] - Daniel: "R's want less voters.  Do you not agree to that?" At a high level, sure. I also think it's not the most accurate way to look at it. I think Republicans and Democrats want different groups to vote. Republicans tend to, for a variety of reasons, be more dedicated voters so lower turnout on average tends to be better for them. -Paul

[2022-01-13 17:32:21] - Less voters = less good representation of the will of the people.  Will of the people = Legitimacy.  So wanting less voters is inherently less legitimate (though still could be legitimate).  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:31:05] - I don't see it as the same as R's in regards to 2020.  They allege actual results / elections were stolen.  I do not think that will happen.  I think ahead of time and currently R's seek to make voting harder and suppress turn out.  R's want less voters.  Do you not agree to that?  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:28:54] - Cause they don't have enough votes to take control?  I think in all the places that are close where they still have control they are doing as much as they can to consolidate that power regardless of whether that represents the will of the people.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:27:28] - Define cheated - I already said that I think the elections will be legally abided.  But I think R's want to make laws that better favor them.  Do I think an R will ever win the national popular vote again?  Possibly but increasingly unlikely.  So splitting hairs/ defining things is probably important here.  I think an R could win the electoral college yes.  Would I assume they cheated?  The election no.  Will of the people?  Maybe.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 17:24:49] - aDaniel: So I feel like we're splitting hairs here. a: "republicans are going to cheat" Daniel: "they know they won't win otherwise". The latter heavily implies that the only way Republicans can win an election is by cheating. The former outright states Republicans are going to cheat. So... if Republicans win in three years then it's safe to assume you both think R's cheated? -Paul

[2022-01-13 16:34:38] - Paul: I don't know that I would blame him losing the election on cheating.  I think as a separate question is do I think that R's are actively and currently trying to stack the deck in their favor as much as they can because they know they won't win otherwise.  Yes I do.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 16:19:49] - Daniel: "I'm sure there are people already calling the next election illegitimate" Okay, so maybe I was misunderstanding things, but it sounded like both you and Adrian were already leaning on the side of, "Republicans are going to cheat so if Biden loses in two years we'll know why". -Paul

[2022-01-13 14:42:17] - Paul: "are there degrees of illegitimacy" - yes - Though I think its hard to know / measure.  The closer you are to the will of the people the more legitimate.  But how do you ascertain that or measure that?  Other than voting which as we've shown isn't always easy or direct.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 14:37:45] - But thats partly my guess for where those would be coming from.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 14:36:48] - My guess is that when its talked about R's talk about it as if the 2020 election was fraudently stolen and that D's would talk about it terms of voting access/rules and that actively working to reduce the number of voters reduces the legitimacy (perhaps at some point crossing a threshold and becoming illegitimate). -Daniel

[2022-01-13 14:35:02] - paul: I'm sure there are people already calling the next election illegitimate but I haven't seen that so I don't think its widespread and certainly isn't the position of most of Congress at the least.  -Daniel

[2022-01-13 13:46:01] - Daniel: On some level I understand what you mean, but can we agree that's not what 99% of people mean by the term? Also, in your case, are there degrees of illegitimacy? -paul

[2022-01-13 13:45:19] - Daniel: Sorry, I had all night to think about this and I still don't quite know where to go. So Obama was an illegitimate president? Biden is illegitimate? When Republicans talk about how Biden is an illegitimate president... you agree? And no, I meant 2024, I was going to present a hypothetical but you blew that idea out of the water... -Paul

[2022-01-13 05:53:41] - On the topic of hypothetical presidential elections - https://thehill.com/homenews/media/589363-nyt-columnist-floats-biden-cheney-ticket-in-2024  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:50:33] - daniel:  did they air the whole thing?  "woah woah woah! [he starts to ask a question] ... oh, he's gone, ok"  that ending was weird.  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:25:26] - Paul: I think generally people are important but natural resources and what they bring to the table are not insignificant. -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:24:32] - Paul: Lol - I wondered when you would ask.  I think there are questions to be asked about the EC and how it matches the will of the people at this point.  I think it made (more) sense in a big ass distributed country back in the day.  I go slightly back and forth on it.  If geographic representation is meaningful in representation and if so how much.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:24:24] - daniel:  you were close.  i've also only ever heard his name!  steve inskeep  and this is the thing you meant:  the video link looks to have the audio too.  thanks daniel!  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:23:01] - paul: Did you mean 2016 there?  Didn't they win that one?  I'm slightly confused there.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:22:10] - Daniel: Sure, and if Biden loses in 2024 and you want to make the argument that it's illegitimate because of the electoral college.... actually, wait, so you think every election is illegitimate because of the electoral college? -Paul

[2022-01-12 22:22:05] - Morning Edition had a thing where Trump talked to Steven Inscape (spelling?  only heard that name before I think) that aired today.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:21:23] - I try not to assume people are just crazy pants, so if they talked about legitamacy and the EC and will of the people and all that I would think its a very different conversation than counting votes in GA and AZ.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:20:34] - daniel:  which show?  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:20:11] - Paul: I mean Trump got 9.25 minutes on NPR today that I listened to.  He could have made a case for it.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:18:39] - Daniel: Hmmm, I can kind of see the distinction, but I feel like that is extremely splitting hairs and is not the type of nuance that would be afforded to anybody else. I mean, if Republicans were talking about how the 2016 election was illegitimate, would you listen to see if they had a thoughtful argument about the electoral college or just assume they were crazy pants? -Paul

[2022-01-12 22:14:56] - So then if R's go about instituting laws that make it harder to vote and thus less people vote then how well does the gov reflect the will of the people?  And if it doesn't reflect that then how legitimate is it?  Those are more philosophical questions and less legal ones though.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:14:31] - daniel:  yes, great distinction.  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:13:59] - paul: I think partly in my head it's a question of illegal vs illegitimate.  I'm pretty sure / confident it will be a legal election run by the applicable laws.  Whether its legitimate begins to dig deeper into those questions of what counts as legitimate and what doesn't.  Is the electoral college legitimate?  Or a way to give outsize power to nebraska / dakotas / idaho etc?  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:11:16] - daniel:  this is true.  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:10:55] - a: I think its easier to vote for fair districts when you know that ultimately fair is better for you.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:10:08] - a: Sure which is nice - but I'm not sure if the D's were the minority party if they would be so magnanimous.  I mean we hope so right? But human nature is hard to overcome sometimes.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:09:07] - daniel:  "I do think D's might be just as likely if the positions were reversed" i disagree.  most anti-gerrymandering proponents are democrats.  anti-gerrymandering proponents want there to be independent councils to redraw boundaries.  and many of them are getting what they want.  i think virginia has forged ahead with this (my mother participates in political actions regarding anti-gerrymandering).  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:09:01] - So R's either have to accept a backseat or find ways to try and work around the fact that they don't represent the will of the majority.  Though they clearly still represent a lot but settling for a proportional amount of power is unsatisfactory for them (or their voters).  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:07:52] - Whether 'representing the will of the people' is good or not is a slightly separate question.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:06:53] - I think in terms of "representing the will of the people" R's are less interested in that than D's currently because I don't think the majority of the people are R's.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:06:08] - paul: I think R's are definitely more pro pushing boundaries as much as possible (see gerrymandering) though I'm not sure that its an R thing because I do think D's might be just as likely if the positions were reversed.  I think R's know that they are the shrinking party numbers wise but still have geographic power and work to find ways to make that work for them.  -Daniel

[2022-01-12 22:06:01] - daniel:  "FL was down to figuring out those hanging chads or w/e" to add to this, the republican run executive told the voting officials to stop counting well ahead of the deadline.  she should not have done this and she only told them to stop counting because she wanted bush to win.  ~a

[2022-01-12 22:03:50] - mig: That election was bonkers close to be fair.  I haven't gone back to review but basically whoever won FL won right?  And FL was down to figuring out those hanging chads or w/e.  -Daniel

[2022-01-10 18:00:24] - Daniel: I'm not necessarily trying to trivialize the impact on the healthcare system, but have you been harmed by it? Have most vaccinated people? As for the education system, I don't really see a connection between harm from unvaccinated people and stress to the education system. In many cases schools are going remote or virtual regardless of vaccination statuses. -Paul

[2022-01-10 17:22:22] - paul: Also I think the stresses on systems such as healthcare and education aren't trivial.  I'm not sure they themselves dictate a need for mandates but I think they are valid factors to consider.  -Daniel

[2022-01-10 17:13:05] - Daniel: Looking forward to December of 2022 when I announce we're all losers for not only losing to the market, but also being significantly negative. -Paul

[2022-01-10 15:52:06] - paul: new milestone for fantasy investing!  everyone negative!  woo!  -Daniel

[2022-01-07 20:09:14] - Daniel: Yeah, it's very odd to put those two categories together, and the article itself continues to confuse things with language seeming to imply that people who work under a vaccine mandate are in favor of it. -Paul

[2022-01-07 19:59:58] - a: I mean if you are rounding 30% to the nearest half.  Then its half!  -Daniel

[2022-01-07 17:45:55] - I mean it might be accurate math but bad math at supporting a conclusion.  -Daniel

[2022-01-07 17:45:32] - Paul: It does seem odd phrasing since those that work under a mandate may not want it so adding those together seems like bad math.  -Daniel

[2022-01-06 18:28:51] - a: Did you build a forge as soon as we scouted the enemy forge? Daniel suggested that could be a decent counter (assuming you didn't). -Paul

[2022-01-06 18:19:39] - i'm (emotionally at this point) mad about cannon rush the same way that daniel is mad about skytoss.  ~a

[2022-01-05 20:11:36] - a: Mine don't.  Also second place with negative return so far!  Woo!  -Daniel

[2022-01-05 17:57:09] - a: to long since i read the books - i'd need to go back and find the parts where they go to the bank.  -Daniel

[2022-01-05 17:47:02] - a lot of the dog pile is fair though:  rowling has said a bunch of dumb shit since her books and movies got popular.  your issue with stewart ranting about the movies makes sense, but only because i can't know if the books weren't the same or worse.  daniel or paul feel like people who might have read the books.  is stewart off-base here?  ~a

[2022-01-05 17:34:06] - a: 'if the courts typically don't give a shit about pedestrians' health' - I don't know this and if I hit someone with a car wouldn't want to really roll the dice on that being true to get off w/o paying a lot.  -Daniel

[2022-01-05 17:32:41] - daniel:  i agree sort of.  but . . . if the courts typically don't give a shit about pedestrians' health (and they typically don't), then why didn't the perp low-ball my coworker?  offer him a settlement of $2k out of court, and if it goes to court, the court will rule something super crazy-low most of the time.  your $100k scenario seems to be out of the realm of reality / likely.  i'm pleasantly surprised things worked out this once.  ~a

[2022-01-05 16:54:26] - a: not suprised at a settlement.  I think settlements are generally the more common outcome than taking things all the way through for most cases I think?  Safer to negotiate an amount than risk the judge being like you owe him 100k for punitive damages! -Daniel

[2021-12-29 20:22:39] - a: Yeah diplomacy is one of those games too where you have to be careful who you play with and that they wont' take the inevitable betrayal to personally.  -Daniel

[2021-12-28 21:58:34] - Daniel: "Capitalism doesn't do much for those at the bottom?" I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but trying to understand what you are saying. Are you saying that whenever you have a huge increase in wealth (like in SF), then you're likely going to have a corresponding increase in poverty? -Paul

[2021-12-28 21:54:26] - I'm not sure a city could institute a UBI since its super easy for people to just move there?  I imagine they already have a larger homeless issue because homeless go there in order to benefit from some sort of compassionate policiy vs say homeless policies in AZ?  Thats just a guess though.  -Daniel

[2021-12-28 21:52:51] - Capitalism doesn't do much for those at the bottom?  I'm sure they have progressive policies (I assume - I mostly know jack about San Fran politics) but that can only do so much.  I think people get priced out of homes etc unless they make those big bucks from tech.  So not sure what there policies are in terms of that?  -Daniel

[2021-12-28 15:44:44] - paul: its definitely worth giving a shot.  Its got some strong elements to it while definitely having enough to differentiate it from being straight up Slay the Spire clone.  -Daniel

[2021-12-28 15:26:38] - Daniel: Inscryption is showing up in a lot of "Best Games of 2021" awards. Definitely on my list to check out if it comes out for Xbox or goes on sale for PC. -Paul

[2021-12-23 21:49:35] - paul:  yes, i think you understand the question, sorta, but i don't think you answered it.  (technically, daniel and i only said the unvaccinated were breeding grounds).  i'll answer yours though:  no, i don't think so.  suggesting omicron is potentially a good thing, seems to be against every bit of info i've seen on it.  do you believe omicron is a good thing?  ~a

[2021-12-23 21:24:42] - paul:  i've been thinking a lot about how you+miguel would reply to the "[unvaccinated] provide breeding grounds for variants" (to quote daniel) that we have brought up a few times, and i wanted to bring it back to the top again to see if you'd bite.  context:  there's a small chance we wouldn't have had omicron/delta with a higher vaccination rate?  ~a

[2021-12-23 18:12:34] - daniel:  is this the first year where you're going to have to file taxes with your individual stock brokerage account?  let me know how that goes  ~a

[2021-12-23 16:54:23] - Daniel: Nice! I know nothing is a sure thing, but man, I really don't see how that isn't a big winner in 2022 (or 2023 at the latest). The only possible way I can see it being a loser is if for some reason people don't want to use their treatment for other types of cancers, but I can't figure out why people wouldn't. -Paul

[2021-12-23 16:53:17] - Daniel: Yeah, I get that vaccines are a little different since they more directly affect others, but I just get really uncomfortable with trying to force others to make "good" personal decisions. If you're not free to make bad decisions, then do you really have personal freedom? -Paul

[2021-12-23 16:52:15] - paul: I bought some shares of novacure after reading your quarterly pvtm post!  Rando sharing.  -Daniel

[2021-12-23 16:50:25] - Obesity is a thing that a lot of people have been trying to figure out how to deal with for awhile now.  -Daniel

[2021-12-23 16:50:03] - paul: I mean vice taxes are a thing because of that.  /shrug.  But yeah I think when things have a high shared cost across society then society gets some voice in how thats responded to / handled.  -Daniel

[2021-12-23 16:45:42] - Daniel: And I bring that up because I worry about the same rationale about shared cost/burden being used to justify things beyond vaccine mandates. -Paul

[2021-12-23 16:44:58] - Daniel: "there is still a shared cost / burden to all of society" I don't say this to troll at all, but I am curious how obesity correlates with mortality when it comes to COVID, specifically in relation to vaccination status. I've heard obesity is a major risk factor. -Paul

[2021-12-22 07:39:52] - Boo apparently I don't understand tie breakers  my bad -Daniel

[2021-12-21 18:42:20] - Also congrats to Miguel on making playoffs in both fantasy leagues!  Strong run in the keeper league to win six in a row!  If I don't win the championship I'm definitely rooting for you in a giant winning streak to take it.  -Daniel

[2021-12-21 18:41:08] - However there is still a shared cost / burden to all of society because of a larger than necessary unvacinnated community.  -Daniel

[2021-12-21 18:40:37] - paul: I think to some degree there already is a new normal to some degree but I don't think the unvaccinated operate in a bubble so I don't think we can just ignore them off to the side to die.  They take up hospital space.  They add stress / hardship to doctors and nurses.  They provide breeding grounds for variants.  If it wasn't for these things I'd be more for screw it just let em ride it out.  -Daniel

[2021-12-20 20:40:15] - daniel:  yeah, i think they're desperate; as they should be; as we all should be.  but still, in moments of desperation, it's probably a bad idea to make things worse.  ~a

[2021-12-20 20:39:09] - I think the "I strongly urge" or "I'm pleading with you" approach was tried from basically April to like November.  Maybe they are trying new verbiage to see how it goes?  -Daniel

[2021-12-20 18:35:01] - Daniel: Instead of saying, "You and your family are going to die and the hospitals will be overrun", how about a "I strongly urge" or "I'm pleading with you"? I think the latter is far more likely to convince somebody. -Paul

[2021-12-20 18:32:35] - Daniel: It's less about the factualness (or non-factualness) of the statement and more about the tone. After all, sometimes (although admittedly not that often) there was a kernel of truth to what Trump was saying, but he always found the most asshole-ish way to say it. There's definitely a more compassionate and more likely to convince people way of phrasing this... -Paul

[2021-12-20 17:09:56] - paul: I mean if we get to over 3k deaths a day again it doesn't seem that outrageous to me? And if most are in the unvaccinated community?  Why is it vindictive? -Daniel

[2021-12-20 16:45:47] - Daniel: You didn't have NEARLY enough randomly capitalized words for your tweet. -Paul

[2021-12-20 16:38:16] - I dunno its hard to be in Trump's head lol - thats the best I got for now.  -Daniel

[2021-12-20 16:35:20] - Paul: Disagree.  -Daniel

[2021-12-20 16:27:41] - Daniel: Yeah, I can see the difference, but from somebody detached from the two-party hate-fest, it's a little tough to see a bunch of prominent Democrats being very open about mistrusting the COVID vaccine... and contrasting that with the loud calls now from prominent Democrats (in some cases the same ones) that the very same vaccines should be mandatory. -Paul

[2021-12-20 14:35:49] - Paul: I can see a case for a similarity?  I think Trump is unique in his un-trustworthiness but I think some people see that as partisan distrust and then see distrust of Biden as the same but I don't think Trump is the same as any modern president that I'm aware of.  -Daniel

[2021-12-19 17:39:34] - Daniel: I can't remember, did you say you would be planning SC2 this coming week still or are you taking the week off? -Paul

[2021-12-19 17:39:15] - Daniel: Do you see any similarity in your distrust of the vaccine and current Republican distrust of the vaccine under Biden? -Paul

[2021-12-17 19:34:41] - So it probably wasn't helpful but I also wouldn't trust Trump at all either.  Soooo not sure where that lands.  -Daniel

[2021-12-17 19:34:08] - I think it depends on how its phrased?  I mean I think you are right that mostly CDC staff and stuff are the same though I think there might be a new head of CDC under Biden?  I think in general its just the issue of making sure Trump didn't pressure stuff and that the experts in the room are actually comfortable with the vacinne / effects.  -Daniel

[2021-12-17 18:58:16] - Daniel: Adrian is correct, my family has plans to go (minus the youngest). We found a showing early in the day that was emptier and we're pulling the kids out about an hour early so we can see it. -Paul

[2021-12-17 18:57:25] - Daniel: So do you think the hesitancy was justified at the time (ie, pre-Biden's election)? If so, what changed your mind? I imagine most of the people at the CDC/FDA are the same regardless of the administration in power. Is it because the Biden admin said it was safe and effective? -Paul

[2021-12-17 18:37:52] - Anyone going to see Spiderman in the theater?  I'm thinking about it but looking at the tickets for it online is daunting to see how full every showing is    -Daniel

[2021-12-17 18:03:39] - Like I am not a fan of Bush but I don't think he would try to shove a vacinne through just to get credit for it.  Or Romney or McCain.  I kind of 100% think Trump would do that if given a chance with no to little thought on the actual effects of the vaccine.  -Daniel

[2021-12-17 18:01:56] - paul: re dems&vacinnes I think its a mix of sad/annoyance that politics so easily gets in the way of science / truth.  And understanding that of all recent politicians Trump is the one I trust the least to not try and shove something through in a way that is bad.  I think under any other R administration I don't think I would have had that same concern.  -Daniel

[2021-12-17 16:09:59] - Yeah I guess I'm too international heavy this year with my picks - if I'd gone with a more 'normal' domestic heavy picks I think I'd be doing better.  -Daniel

[2021-12-17 16:08:07] - paul: Yeah I don't think I'll ever outright win a stock challenge but I think this is the best relative performance so far.  -Daniel

[2021-12-17 15:50:23] - uh, yeah?  i'm still losing to vti.  still sorta even losing to vt.  i think daniel (or herndon) could have taken 1st place this year if he had picked normal index funds  ~a

[2021-12-17 14:17:11] - Daniel: Beginning to look a lot like 2021 is going to be a win (your first?) for the index fund crowd. It's a shame that the first year I get a lot of entries is the year everybody sucks at it. -Paul

[2021-12-17 14:16:25] - Daniel: My team has mostly been spared from the COVID disaster going around. Glad the playoffs aren't this week. Would've sucked to have it marred by this. -Paul

[2021-12-16 21:54:56] - also another Oof day for fantasy investing.  -Daniel

[2021-12-16 21:50:56] - Fantasy Football is crazy this week dealing wtih Covid.  Yikes! -Daniel

[2021-12-16 21:23:43] - my booster shot just made me really tired and maybe a slight headache.  Nothing to bad but more tired than normal for sure.  -Daniel

[2021-12-15 16:41:03] - paul: An inflation rate of 22% would seem joker level of crazy.  -Daniel

[2021-12-15 16:03:48] - 10 dollars after 10 years of inflation might not be worth much.  -Daniel

[2021-12-15 15:47:00] - a: You do seem invested in making this a bet - lol.  -Daniel

[2021-12-15 15:39:57] - paul: Yeah that seems like a weird/bad twitter policy.  Maybe if its used as justification not to get vaccinated? Or something?  -Daniel

[2021-12-15 14:54:02] - Daniel: No, sorry. I have been looking into it, but the fact that it is Windows only is a limiting factor. For whatever reason, I don't play a lot of single player games on PC. I've had Telling Lies on my queue for forever and haven't even loaded it up yet. -Paul

[2021-12-15 07:06:01] - paul: You ever try Inscryption?  -Daniel

[2021-12-14 20:47:09] - CGP Grey posted a video about 'testing' a self driving Tesla today and while it did well enough it made me very nervous to watch it driving on a very twisty highway.  -Daniel

[2021-12-14 20:44:03] - -Daniel

[2021-12-08 18:19:32] - Clearly we should all invest more in noodles!  -Daniel

[2021-12-08 17:34:48] - a: We've never had one but are considering trying to get one for next year.  -Daniel

[2021-12-08 06:13:45] - daniel:  lol, i know what you mean, but fidelity literally has an hsa.  fidelity hsa  ~a

[2021-12-08 05:25:40] - Optum for Andrea.  Are they like the Fidelity of HSA's apparently?  -Daniel

[2021-12-07 23:25:15] - daniel:  what company is andrea's company using to manage the hsa?  ~a

[2021-12-07 22:26:11] - Paul: Andrea's company is offering the HDHP / HSA combo so we are going to look at it as well in the next week or so.  -Daniel

[2021-12-07 14:08:40] - Daniel: I think "hopeful" is the word I would use as well. I'll probably watch it, probably not on opening week or anything, and I hope it will be good but my expectations are low. -Paul

[2021-12-06 22:43:43] - Excited ish?  I'm hoping its good but unsure how it ties in to the originals and I think the story was slipping on 2 & 3 already so I don't have super high hopes?  But I think it should at least be fun if not that great.  -Daniel

[2021-12-06 19:51:30] - a: I don't know about Daniel specifically, but pretty clearly elements are using it to justify basically forcing people to get vaccinated or lose their job or lost health insurance or be forced to quarantine or whatever else. -Paul

[2021-12-06 19:42:55] - Paul: Sure and I think with most things you find teh balance.  If there is something to push the balance further one direction I think a global scale pandemic would be the thing.  -Daniel

[2021-12-06 19:42:37] - paul:  "justifies action"  what action is daniel justifying?  ~a

[2021-12-06 19:38:50] - Daniel: Yeah, that's a good point. It just feels like the kind of indirect harm that, as a libertarian, I feel like leads to a slippery slope. Once you accept that some possible indirect harm justifies action, you can justify a lot of stuff like making people get flu shots or mandatory annual physicals or restrictions on fast food consumption. -Paul

[2021-12-06 19:33:50] - paul:  it can be both though.  it can be amazingly effective and also a big issue that unvaccinated people exist in great numbers everywhere (so that 5/100k is as large at it is).  then on top of all that, there's daniel's thing . . . that the unvaccinated are making mutations worse but also making vaccines less effective?  both seem like a problem by themselves, but both together seem like a fucking time bomb.  ~a

[2021-12-06 15:05:25] - omg great point daniel i hadn't thought of that.  ~a

[2021-12-06 14:50:19] - Which could start the whole process over again.  -Daniel

[2021-12-06 14:50:09] - Paul: I think pandemics do have some complexity to them so thats part of the mixed msg's part.  I think vaccinated peeps are generally safe-ish from Covid but can still transmit it around and in doing do give it chances to mutate and I think one of the concerns is that rather than just effectively get rid of Covid by getting 'everyone' / enough people vaccinated its going to mutate into something the vaccines aren't good against. -Daniel

[2021-12-03 19:44:41] - i was in first on wednesday.  but yeah, you're doing pretty well, daniel.  too bad you didn't go all-in on vti though, you'd be #1!  ~a

[2021-12-03 19:40:15] - Oh man - the fantasy investing chart went super red since last time I looked!  Oof.  Adrian in 2nd place though!  -Daniel

[2021-12-03 17:38:01] - I did buy Paul's book!  More than once!  NOooooooooooooo  -Daniel

[2021-11-23 00:45:17] - mig: Yeah seems pretty solid.  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 18:37:41] - If you go to a bar and instigate a fight and someone takes a swing at you and you defend yourself I think you still get to claim defense if the other person swung first?  It might make you an asshole for choosing to do that but I don't know that it makes you legally guilty.  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 18:36:05] - maybe instigator is the word I want for Rittenhouse?  He was helping to instigate things?  Which I don't think is really a legal term or anything here.  Just that him being there wasn't a calming effect and wasn't really intended to be a calming effect (in my mind / opinion).  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 18:35:32] - daniel:  and that's where I'd be taking the macro into significant account. - mig

[2021-11-22 18:34:42] - a: Yeah I was just taking that specific case as the example why I don't think Rittenhouse can just be blanket labelled 'the aggressor'.  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 18:33:42] - daniel:  "defend[ing] yourself when someone takes a swing at you with a skateboard is reasonable".  joseph rosenbaum didn't have a skateboard.  i know you know this, but i wanted to point out that one of the three didn't even have a skateboard.  ~a

[2021-11-22 18:33:23] - daniel:  sure, the macro is worth considering, but I think it's largely irrelevant since we reasonably know the micro details.  If we were solely taking Rittenhouses word on his version of the events we'd be having a much different conversation (i.e. i'd be skeptical of a self defense claim). - mig

[2021-11-22 18:32:30] - It makes him something but I'm not sure what the right word is and I'm not sure that blanket label of aggressor is right either.  I don't think I would label him an innocent bystander either though.  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 18:31:43] - Even if he was being an asshole vigilante (which I understand is not how mig / paul / others would label him - but for the sake of just already assuming a negative read on his macro actions) he does still get to defend himself I think.  I don't know that leaving his house with a gun to go defend a rando business makes him the aggressor in the interaction b/w him and guy with the skateboard for example.  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 18:29:31] - I still think this debate hinges on the macro / micro elements.  I think he aggressively(?) left his house and went to the riot with a gun prepared to be a vigilante.  I think in the micro someone took a swing at him with a skateboard and he defended himself.  I think being allowed to defend yourself when someone takes a swing at you with a skateboard is reasonable.  -Daniel

[2021-11-22 15:08:04] - Daniel: I had similar thoughts about "shouldn't have worn that dress" comparisons. It can both be true that somebody was acting irresponsible and put themselves in a situation where there is an increased likelihood of bad things happening to them AND that it's wrong for bad things to happen to them. -Paul

[2021-11-19 22:22:17] - mig: I get that.  You're probably right.  Sometimes I'm sure I will still think things along the line of "shouldn't have worn that dress".  It doesn't make it 'right' I guess?  But sometimes still true/prudent.  -Daniel

[2021-11-19 21:24:05] - daniel:  I really don't like playing those "well if he wasn't there this wouldn't have happened" games.  Ultimately he had a right to be there just like anybody else, and legally he had a right to be armed (as others who were also armed there), even if his reasons for being there were silly and/or stupid.  Personally, I feel it does straddle perilously close to the "well she shouldn't have worn that provocative dress" type arguments. - mig

[2021-11-19 20:22:31] - He was found not guilty but I would guess those people would be alive if he had stayed home.  Though maybe they would have picked a fight with someone else.  Hard to say.  -Daniel

[2021-11-19 20:21:10] - I think in terms of the verdict from what I know I might have voted the same way and definitely not surprised.  In terms of if I was a friend / family member of Rittenhouse I would definitely be like what the fuck is wrong with you why are you out there with a gun being a jack ass.  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 21:27:37] - mig: Agreed with mig on the prosecutor being either like super terribad at his job or trying to get some shenanigans through.  All the reports I heard about that were not kind to the prosecutor.  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 20:14:47] - daniel:  right it wasn’t his only reason, but i believe the property protection claim was genuine as well.  - mig

[2021-11-18 20:14:05] - mig:  "An AR wouldn't be my choice" i think this is what daniel means.  ~a

[2021-11-18 20:13:28] - daniel:  other medics that were there were armed.    An AR wouldn’t be my choice but it didn’t seem to impact him giving aid (his general incompetence at it did though). - mig

[2021-11-18 20:06:40] - It might have been a motivation but seems simplistic to say it was the only reason he was there.  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 20:06:07] - "Genuine" seems like a strong word for someone who brought an AR with them.  My guess is most EMT's don't do that.  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 17:54:45] - daniel:  agreed (with your first message but not the second one).  the law can't ignore how you got there.  it can't and doesn't look at just the micro situation, as you describe it.  if you're the aggressor, self defense can't be claimed.  you literally cannot just go out looking for threatening people to kill in the hopes that they threaten you.  ~a

[2021-11-18 17:51:55] - I don't know enough about the law but I think in my head it hinges on some of these macro / micro distinctions.  I think in the macro Rittenhouse was not looking to be a peaceful observer.  I think in the micro he was defending himself (in at least two of the three instances).  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 17:50:40] - a: I think those are all the macro reasons why its dumb.  But in the small scale of someone is clearly angry with you and is trying to take a gun you are holding so I'm worried they might shoot me isn't crazy.  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 17:14:55] - As daniel mentioned, the 3rd guy was armed and by his own admission was pointing his gun at Rittenhouse when he shot him.  - mig

[2021-11-18 16:29:37] - well I think I know that first part - I could be wrong  -Daniel

[2021-11-18 16:28:45] - i haven't followed all of it but I know that at least one witness said they had pointed a gun at rittenhouse before rittenhouse shot him (obv not one of the deceased).  Someone else I think tried to grab the gun maybe from Rittenhouse?  So I think there is some things that do suggest some level of self defense.  Though I think the macro setup as adrian alluded to does not.  -Daniel

[2021-11-17 15:50:06] - Daniel: The church example is a valid one. Jesus was big on the idea of a progressive tax system. I can't think of many other places in life where we do it, though. -Paul

[2021-11-16 22:01:32] - a: Sure - just an example that percent based giving idea is quite old.  -Daniel

[2021-11-16 22:01:07] - Fair in my head is a much more subjective thing and if everyone were treated equally in terms of taxes that would be deemed unfair by me as evidenced in Adrians apple example where one apple means a lot more to someone than to another.  However that does more complicated with options for apples that have their value determined by others in a market setting, lol.  -Daniel

[2021-11-16 21:59:53] - daniel:  tithing was the first example i thought of too!  christian church is not exactly a great example of what's right and virtuous, though  ~a

[2021-11-16 21:58:49] - Even the church doesn't say for everyone to pay the same flat rate when it comes to tithing.  Its percent based.  Just as example that this concept predates our current gov.  -Daniel

[2021-11-16 21:54:37] - fair != equal.  They can be the same but aren't always.  Just with my kids they don't get treated equally by me but I think are treated fairly by me.  -Daniel

[2021-11-16 15:51:27] - Yeah I think the real issue seems to be here defining what counts as "fair" in terms of "contribution to society" and what counts as "contributing".  -Daniel

[2021-11-15 18:32:18] - daniel and i are the two business owners here.  everybody else has zero credibility on this topic  ~a

[2021-11-15 18:22:01] - Doing thing A can definitely give you some perspective on thing A but I don't think the idea that you have to have done thing A in order to have credibility to talk about thing A is silly.  -Daniel

[2021-11-12 14:40:14] - paul: Yeah I don't think judge's statements are bad either?  I'd probably want someone to explain to me how / why they felt offended.  -Daniel

[2021-11-12 14:38:40] - Paul: Yes on Ibonds as I understand it.  -Daniel

[2021-11-10 20:03:31] - Yeah I haven't been following super closely but saw that the prosecution dropped the ball significantly more than once - mainly about being surprised at their own witnesses answers to things I think.  -Daniel

[2021-11-09 19:33:31] - daniel:  the facebook posting by the district attorney uses the word "juvenile" four times in two sentences.  my guess is that he won't be tried as an adult.  ~a

[2021-11-09 19:31:19] - a: I wonder if he pleas out to something lesser?  Given the witnesses involved it seems like it would be hard to get off completely unless there are new facts brought to light.  -Daniel

[2021-11-09 19:19:35] - daniel:  finally charged!  better late than never, i guess.  looks like the prosecutor went with felony for the 16 year-old . . . six of them, actually.  big oof.  ~a

[2021-11-08 19:49:49] - daniel:  understood.  i just noticed that some people on reddit were saying that the aca subsidies were pretty sweet for retired people, so i ran the numbers and noticed that it would potentially be 1000s per year depending on your magi after retirement (which i feel is dependent on the unknowable cost-basis).  ~a

[2021-11-08 19:47:06] - Yes I would consider it.  I don't have very specific plans on that front though since I find healthcare very daunting to plan for.  There is just the rough number put in for budgeting purposes (ala 20k for health insurance) but thats about it currently.  -Daniel

[2021-11-08 18:05:37] - paul/daniel:  "then I add in around $20k for health insurance".  would you consider enrolling into aca after retiring?  here's a calculator.  the trouble i have with planning around the aca, is having any idea what my agi is going to be.  since i can only guess at my cost-basis, i can only guess at my agi!  ~a

[2021-11-05 18:36:20] - a: Thats a crazy story.  Reminds me of Catch Me If You Can.  Act like you belong and its fine and people just go with it.  -Daniel

[2021-11-05 16:34:36] - a: I vote spam.  -Daniel

[2021-11-03 14:11:08] - Daniel: (5) The whole masking / vaccine mandate thing might be bleeding into education as well in terms of kids being required to mask all day. -Paul

[2021-11-03 14:09:58] - Daniel: (4) There's been a lot of talk about concern over CRT being taught in school. I haven't seen much of that specifically, but I've heard enough official communication from FCPS to have me concerned over things and to have emailed the principal about the "Anti-Racism and Anti-Bias Curriculum" they said they were implementing. He said he would get back to me by end of week. That was in August and I haven't heard back yet. -Paul

[2021-11-03 14:07:23] - Daniel: (2) Nationwide there has been a move to get rid of "gifted and talented" programs in terms of "equity", and some of that has been seen in the debate around TJ admissions (3) There was apparently a sexual assault in Loudon which was handled... poorly? I don't have much in the way of details and apparently there was some bad reporting around it too. -Paul

[2021-11-03 14:04:49] - Daniel: There's a lot of things, and it's hard to disentangle which are biggest. (1) Fairfax County Public Schools is one of the wealthiest schools districts in the country and completely failed and getting remote learning working (also, I think most parents viewed it as a disaster even when "working") -Paul

[2021-11-03 14:02:36] - daniel:  i have no idea what paul's talking re charter schools, but maybe i haven't been following closely enough.  on the other hand, 100% of youngkin ads had this quote from mcauliffe:  "i don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach".  its a very unpopular sentiment in rural areas of virginia (the non-rural areas agree with mcauliffe on this) and its very related to debates they had on critical race theory.  ~a

[2021-11-03 13:55:04] - I'm not up on my local VA politics much anymore - why are parents fed up with public schools?  Covid things?  Is that schools or gov or is it something else?  -Daniel

[2021-11-02 14:20:11] - Daniel: And there's the little matter of our current Democratic governor having been caught in blackface along with the democratic attorney general. If you look at the current tickets and discard the narrative, it seems like the "racist" charge sticks easier to one side. -Paul

[2021-11-02 14:18:35] - Daniel: I get your point and mostly agree, but is there a point where the commonly accepted narrative should get questioned a bit when it runs up against specifics? I haven't heard of any questionable racist stuff in Youngkin's past, and the Republican ticket is a white male, black female, and Cuban male, which is more "diverse" than the two white males and Lebanese female for the Democrats. -Paul

[2021-11-01 20:39:34] - daniel:  yah!  i typically re-balance my shares super-often.  the downside to this, though, is that even when i hit big (like nvidia or tesla) i typically don't get rich.    ~a

[2021-11-01 20:38:48] - a: Thats a large percent.  -Daniel

[2021-11-01 20:38:03] - Also though - "Youngkin shouldn't be blamed for a few wackos supporting him" - is a true statement as well.  Just in this particular case I think the point that was attempted seems mildly redundant or something to me.  Like every so often you see a story about who David Duke (think thats his name) is voting for and its some R politician.  Like duh.  -Daniel

[2021-11-01 20:37:59] - Also though - "Youngkin shouldn't be blamed for a few wackos supporting him" - is a true statement as well.  Just in this particular case I think the point that was attempted seems mildly redundant or something to me.  Like every so often you see a story about who David Duke (think thats his name) is voting for and its some R politician.  Like duh.  -Daniel

[2021-11-01 20:36:29] - Paul: Mostly yeah - I think most people already know that white supremacists vote R and that socialists probably vote D (assuming both find it in themselves to vote major party) and people like to point that out as a smear but I guess I'm surprised if there are swing voters out there that are just figuring it out.  I guess new voters maybe who haven't paid much attention before?  -Daniel

[2021-11-01 19:16:50] - Daniel: Hmmmm, okay, I can see that. It probably makes sense that the actions of a few people shouldn't necessarily reflect that poorly on a candidate. I get the feeling that's not quite what you're saying though? It seems less like, "Youngkin shouldn't be blamed for a few wackos supporting him" and more like, "We already know Youngkin is the candidate for white supremacists, so what changes?" Is that accurate? -Paul

[2021-11-01 18:58:38] - Paul: Does it matter?  Maybe?  Is it new information or informative for voters etc?  Probably not.  -Daniel

[2021-11-01 18:50:26] - Daniel: Even if I grant your point that it's safe to assume that any Republican candidate is supported by racists and white supremacists, does it really matter much? What if a bunch of Young Republicans dressed up as McAuliffe supporters holding signs saying "Stalin was right" and "Down with whitey" or whatever. Does it matter if the majority of socialists and black panthers support McAuliffe over Youngkin? -paul

[2021-11-01 18:01:34] - Paul: Also not to jump in late and while I don't think its a good look / good move I also think that most (all?) white supremacists do vote R.  So for your very specific statement "as supported by racist" that is probably 100%.  I don't really know anything about Youngkin so don't currently have any reason to think they are racist but almost certainly supported by racists.  -Daniel

[2021-10-27 14:34:25] - mig: ' Correcting misinformation from a gubernatorial candidate for your local readers would strike me as at least somewhat of a priority.'  - Agreed.  -Daniel

[2021-10-27 14:24:08] - daniel:  the part that really bugs me is the post writer saying, "But we got busy with other stuff and chose not to do a fact check" (and yes that was their words verbatim).  I'm not sure in what world that would read as a reasonable explanation.  Correcting misinformation from a gubernatorial candidate for your local readers would strike me as at least somewhat of a priority. - mig

[2021-10-27 14:12:26] - mig: Seems they should have pushed back.  There might be part that when they contacted the campaign the campaign admitted it was wrong.  Had it not then Wapo presumably would have pushed back more.  My guess is that after admitting they were wrong Wapo thought they would then be less wrong in the future, which seems to have been a bad assumption and not the one it should have used.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 20:59:13] - a: I agree with "i usually regret staying completely silent when some fucked up shit is going down" - and I would probably say something as well but it would need to be a careful something and not just "white guys are awesome!" cause that probably wouldn't be the best approach (unless the party was a KKK party).  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 19:15:28] - daniel:  i'm totally fine defending white guys that deserve being defended.  i know that making my position worse by saying something dumb should be avoided, but i usually regret staying completely silent when some fucked up shit is going down.  ~a

[2021-10-26 19:14:27] - So would need to tread carefully I imagine.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 19:14:15] - Paul: I think I'm with adrian there.  Lots of context needed.  Randomly blaming all white guys isn't great but also defending "white guys" generally isn't a socially winning position either.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 18:21:50] - a: this made me chuckle "rolling coal in a tesla might be hard" -Daniel

[2021-10-26 18:04:21] - daniel:  i've definitely wished harm on people who regularly treat my well-being as being worth less than their convenience.  ~a

[2021-10-26 17:59:58] - a: The story of linked in that reddit thread about a cyclist shooting back at a driver who hit someone is pretty crazy too.  Sadly maybe if that becomes more common dumb 16 year olds will be less likely to be dumb.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 17:53:30] - a: Yeah it doesn't seem out of the realm of possibility that they just want to bury the story.  I'm still hopeful that doesn't happen but its hard to say at this point  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 17:40:42] - Daniel: "Thats a big chunk of why we moved back to TX" I keep sending those "Buy a house in Italy for $1" stories to Gurkie but no success yet. -Paul

[2021-10-26 17:37:25] - daniel:  while we're on the topic of texas, i keep looking for updates on this story (link is from conversations since thursday).  i know its only been a month, but like so much of my soul believes that waiting for the story to be buried is exactly what the cops and DA want.  there has been basically no movement on this.  ~a

[2021-10-26 17:30:48] - My mortgage is like 27k and thats with a smidge of prepay.  Thats a big chunk of why we moved back to TX  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 15:24:50] - a: (not an accountant but) I think so.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 15:17:20] - But it does seem like then we'd still be lower than our current tax bracket.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 15:16:49] - a: I probably looked at some point but currently didn't realize that l.t.c.g. was 0% up to 80k.  Thats solid.  Yeah I think the questions will be where we are at inflation wise and bracket wise by the time we retire.  Also if you are doing roth ladder you have to take out extra on top of current year spending.  -Daniel

[2021-10-26 14:53:57] - daniel:  "Our accountant has given us our overall tax rate the last few years so I just normally go with approximately that"  i feel like i'm rethinking this to be, in early retirement, my effective taxes will be very close to 0% (because of deductions + cost basis).  the only reason i'd pay any income taxes in early retirement at all, will be because of roth ladder:  to take advantage of the low-tax situation.  ~a

[2021-10-26 14:47:36] - paul/daniel:  can we go back to the effective tax rate in retirement conversation?  i talked to my financial planner and he said if your (married filing jointly) income is all long term capital gains, and is less than 105k, you pay zero income taxes?  (standard deduction = 25k, and the 0% bracket for l.t. capital gains is 80k).  that assumes a cost basis of 0, which is, of course, ridiculous.  so, your spending could be a lot higher.  ~a

[2021-10-25 12:52:30] - a: Yeah, maybe I got you and Daniel confused again. Sorry. -Paul

[2021-10-20 20:48:01] - Daniel: I've tried. For whatever reason people get all indignant about trading 1sts to me but do it all the time with you. I think it's a good strategy that has clearly worked for you but for some reason others keep trading with you. -Paul

[2021-10-20 20:04:30] - Random odd factoid I just noticed - in our fantasy keeper league I'm the only player (that I can tell from looking) that has ever had multiple first round picks and I've done it 4 times out of the 9 years in our yahoo league history.  Kind of surprised that no one else has tried to make that happen at some point.  -Daniel

[2021-10-19 20:57:54] - daniel, also the ads wouldn't be nice:  we all care a lot about our neighborhood, except mig who doesn't vote.  ~a

[2021-10-19 20:56:12] - I feel like we should contribute to your new computer cost given you are providing us a free service without ads!  -Daniel

[2021-10-19 20:46:34] - ok, daniel, i turned off the "notifications" thing.  we'll see if that's what was making things slow.  ~a

[2021-10-19 20:44:52] - daniel:  "doesn't make it nice though" as campaign ads go this actually was very nice . . .  on the other hand, i guess you're kinda right:  making fun of the voter is atypical.  ~a

[2021-10-19 20:39:07] - daniel:   yeah, i'll be buying a new computer in ~2022, so we only have to endure this for a few more months.  ~a

[2021-10-19 19:51:54] - a: Also I'm not sure how we can know whether it was effective or not?  Is that info available somewhere?  -Daniel

[2021-10-19 19:51:26] - everytime i hit enter again after two seconds thinking I mis clicked or something then immediately go why didn't you just be patient Daniel....

[2021-10-19 19:50:37] - a: I am definitely not an expert so if someone did studies and found its effective vs a more positive spin go vote ad I could believe it and might result in a positive of getting more people to vote.  Doesn't make it nice though.  -Daniel

[2021-10-19 19:50:33] - a: I am definitely not an expert so if someone did studies and found its effective vs a more positive spin go vote ad I could believe it and might result in a positive of getting more people to vote.  Doesn't make it nice though.  -Daniel

[2021-10-19 19:40:47] - daniel:  any suggestions for how you'd change the ad?  it's targeted at people who are borderline considering voting, so the fact that it pisses people off that wouldn't be voting anyways might not matter?  i honestly think it probably has (from their perspective) positive outcome.  ~a

[2021-10-19 19:07:55] - The ad made me chuckle but not sure I love it either.  I'm pro people voting but it does seem like a not nice way to go about it.  -Daniel

[2021-10-15 20:15:42] - So 1) does that fit with what you saw miguel?  2) in the punching up/down paradigm what happens when people disagree about where they or others fall in that system?  Hmm -Daniel

[2021-10-15 20:15:05] - I read somewhere (on reddit probably) an interesting comment about Chapelle's show where he is making jokes about trans peeps and that part of his point is that some people see that as 'punching down' as aaron has phrased before but that he (and his point apparently with the jokes maybe?) is that Chapelle doesn't see it as punching down.  -Daniel

[2021-10-14 19:23:14] - daniel:  i hope so too.  but chances are low that this will get fair and equal treatment under the law.  so whether or not the law should come down harshly on the unnamed teenager, it probably won't regardless.  this quote from the lawyer representing the victims sums up my opinion:  "if somebody were to hurt six people with anything else they would’ve been arrested on the spot"  ~a

[2021-10-14 18:31:34] - a: Hopefully the DA is able to get an investigation done and figure out what charges he thinks are appropriate / applicable.  -Daniel

[2021-10-14 18:23:21] - daniel:  this case was not handled appropriately by the investigating agency. PERIOD.  this doesn't change what you said two weeks ago, i'm sure, but its interesting that the DA is pissed that the kid, who's parents have connections with city hall, had his case treated improperly.  ~a

[2021-10-13 18:17:23] - Daniel: Yeah, the lack of flexibility definitely needs to be considered but.... I'm still surprised there are no other "hardship" requirements or anything. -paul

[2021-10-13 18:15:18] - (at least I'm pretty sure thats what I remember as the catch to a Sepp withdraw plan - its been awhile since I've read about that) -Daniel

[2021-10-13 18:14:51] - Paul: Sepp isn't flexible at all - thats the catch.  You make a payment plan and thats it!  No changing till later.  But yeah trying to figure out a minimum type payment plan with that and then maybe withdrawing extra if you need?  /shrug  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 19:23:48] - I honestly couldn't even say if I've ever received a 5498.  I mean I totally could have but didn't pay attention / file / realize why I cared so who knows whats happened to those if I did receive them.  I can check where stuff gets filed and see?  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 19:06:51] - paul/daniel:  i did see on some random website that during rollovers your old custodian is required to pass this information to the new custodian, but based on what i've read online you should definitely keep track of your 5498 documents forever (they say until the account is emptied out).  i'm definitely missing a few 5498s, my oldest 5498 is from 2010, so i've fucked this up too.  ~a

[2021-10-12 18:34:38] - I definitely don't have those contribution numbers personally either.  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 18:26:41] - daniel/paul:  i guess i should also mention that i recorded exactly how much i contributed to roth for every year since i started working.  ~a

[2021-10-12 18:22:23] - daniel:  but there does not "have" to be something.  you don't report cash tips, you don't report barter transactions, you don't file state sales tax on in person sales, you get caught, and you get punished (usually maybe they just demand the money with interest, but sometimes you go to jail).  but no, there is often nothing else that keeps you honest.  ~a

[2021-10-12 18:20:57] - daniel:  yeah, i mentioned 5498 further down.  ~a

[2021-10-12 18:19:48] - So thats how the IRS knows.  How an individual knows?  My guess is make your brokerage tell you somehow...  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 18:19:21] - Googling provides the notion of  IRS Form 5498 which your brokerage sends to the IRS that includes how much in roth contributions you made.  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 18:16:56] - What prevents someone from just claiming they contributed 100% of their Roth balance in retirement?  There has to be something right?  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 18:09:24] - Daniel: I might do that if it gets to a point where it's important. All my work is still very hypothetical and many years off in the future. I agree it should be there somewhere. At the very least, maybe the IRS has documentation on it? -Paul

[2021-10-12 18:07:24] - Paul: email / live chat with someone and ask?  It seems like it has to be there somewhere?  Or at least I would think so...  -Daniel

[2021-10-12 16:09:17] - daniel: "overall tax rate the last few years so I just normally go with approximately that" I'm calculating my taxes in retirement to be much much lower.  my income will be much lower and also I've already paid taxes on a lot of that money (the roth but also the cost basis of the taxable accounts).  ~a

[2021-10-12 16:01:07] - daniel:  "I just estimate an effective tax rate and go with that"  i am also doing this, but now my effective tax rate should be greater than i thought it was going to be.  i'm changing my 6.0% effective tax rate to 6.38% because of this conversation with paul  ~a

[2021-10-12 15:59:08] - I just estimate an effective tax rate and go with that (which is less specific but I also run out of mental energy to get more specific.  Our accountant has given us our overall tax rate the last few years so I just normally go with approximately that.  -Daniel

[2021-10-10 04:20:15] - Daniel: Yeah, Gurkie likes WoT. She is looking forward to the show. -Paul

[2021-10-08 20:29:57] - Its a book series that in Fantasy book circles is up there with Game of Thrones.  Amazon is making a TV show based on it that starts this fall.  I was just curious if anyone else was familiar with the IP.  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 20:26:36] - daniel:  nope.  gurkie and mig seem like your go-to there.  ~a

[2021-10-08 20:04:34] - All:  Random question for folks - have any of you heard of the Wheel of Time or have any idea that is?  Just curious.  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:57:43] - Paul: My guess is that its there somewhere since it an important number that the IRS would want to verify.  So in order to do that I think they would want someone other than you to be able to tell them.  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:54:24] - a: Ah yeah I gotcha - in my head I can see the contribution amount by source as well but I'd have to check and make sure I'm not just remembering some other balance number by source.  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:49:25] - daniel:  most transaction/history/statement tools won't let you go back like 10+ years, though.  vanguard does, but most others do not.  and they'll tell you the current balance by source, but not the . . . total contributions (ever, since the beginning of time) by source?  if they do, i can't see it except in vanguard.  ~a

[2021-10-08 15:46:20] - Paul: You can look up your contributions by source in all the various 401k tools I've ever had for my work 401ks (and Andrea's).  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:45:38] - a: Yeah I don't remember exactly but the difference b/w roth laddering / using roth contributions and just taking the 10% penalty wasn't that big in the end.  I'd have to go back and see if I can find the math.  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:39:32] - Daniel: "eating the 10% penalty wasn't actually that terrible results wise and can still be worth it for the growth you get from the tax free (so far) 401k money" Yeah, I didn't do the math, but that's what I assumed. Thanks for the info. -Paul

[2021-10-08 15:32:08] - Also the adviser I talked with did a lot of the sim stuff that Adrian mentions and said that just eating the 10% penalty wasn't actually that terrible results wise and can still be worth it for the growth you get from the tax free (so far) 401k money.  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:30:15] - Paul: You can read / figure out roth ladders more later if you want but the main takeaway from them is that you only need money to cover five years if your otherwise retirement accounts have enough.  (because a roth ladder takes five years to work and after that you can start to get money from your retirement accounts prior to 59.5).  -Daniel

[2021-10-08 15:28:26] - Paul: Also my financial adviser lady that I talked to awhile back just suggested putting more $ into Roth accounts currently so that we had more $ in those accounts later.  Because you can withdraw up to the amount you contributed to roth accounts without penalty (since you already paid tax on those $).  -Daniel

[2021-10-07 20:35:29] - paul: I haven't.  -Daniel

[2021-10-06 19:30:50] - Sports are back, bars, cruises are going again.  I think people try to be a bit more careful on average than like 2019 but I think 2020 when it was new people were either actually in lockdowns or were more willing to not go out.  -Daniel

[2021-10-06 19:18:21] - Paul: I guess I'm not super surprised.  Delta was worse, people aren't as willing to stay home etc anymore / gathering more. But still sad given the possibility of the vaccine.  -Daniel

[2021-10-06 18:49:32] - Daniel: It's really surprising. We have a pretty effective vaccine. One would think most of the most vulnerable people would've already succumbed in 2020. Before I read that I would've guessed the death count was closer to 50% or lower. -Paul

[2021-10-06 17:45:23] - Paul:  -Daniel

[2021-10-06 15:06:41] - mig: I haven't been following it super closely so I don't know a lot of the details currently but I don't think holdouts within a party are unreasonable as a definition.  Unreasonable is a tricky word too because what is reasonable for a D from NY or CA is different than WV or AZ.  -Daniel

[2021-10-06 13:10:21] - daniel:  do you think manchin and simena are the ones being unreasonable in this current standoff? - mig

[2021-10-05 14:37:18] - daniel:  i mean this goes all the way back to the blm protests and the casual dismissal of the violence that occurred.  It seems like an increasing amount of terrible things like what's happening to Simena  get continually excused, downplayed or even actively encouraged as long as it's in service of the "cause", which feels pretty maga-y (maybe Trump-y is a bad word to use). - mig

[2021-10-05 13:35:04] - Those seem worse to me in a long term way more so than normal partisan /  political stuff.  -Daniel

[2021-10-05 13:34:35] - mig: Can you elaborate on how Trump-y you see the Dem's being?  I think they have always had issues with the last few conservative D's in order to get things done.  I remember 'Blue Dog  Democrats' being a whole thing at one point (though they didn't get followed into the bathroom that I'm aware of).  I think part of what made Trump worse on a different level to me was the corruption and undermining of the system as a whole.  -Daniel

[2021-10-04 17:47:49] - daniel:  https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1445058378741473292 biden responded to the incident and his response seems ... not great.  Calling it inappropriate seems good, but then saying it "happens to everybody" and "it's part of the process" seems pretty dismissive. - mig

[2021-10-04 17:37:05] - a: I watched sc2 streamers /  youtube matches more than I used to as well.  I'm clearly not as good as them but it can give ideas for openings (where my room to suck doesn't build up as fast) or transitions / responses based on game flow.  -Daniel

[2021-10-04 14:46:50] - mig: walking into a bathroom filming is not cool.  I do think in general senators aren't enabled to the right to be left alone a lot but this does seem inappropriate.  -Daniel

[2021-10-01 16:29:55] - a: I mentioned you the other day when I was driving around Austin with my sister and went past some construction where they are widening a road and said I wasn't sure ultimately if that would relieve traffic.  -Daniel

[2021-10-01 14:17:56] - daniel:  if you liked that title, maybe you'll like this trolley problem:  https://i.redd.it/9wytrsn87o971.jpg  paul too loves trolley problems!  ~a

[2021-10-01 13:58:50] - daniel:  it is hard to have both in virginia.  and in texas.  outside of college campuses.  it's a fixable problem, though.  city (and suburb) planners are 100% to blame for this problem.  and there are dozens of examples of planners successfully undoing their decades of mistakes.  ~a

[2021-10-01 13:52:25] - title: Its the only time I and my entire social circle lived in the same walkable community.  Its hard to have both!  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 18:26:58] - (gotcha - i closed the tab and reopened and it still didn't have the comment so I thought it actually didn't go through.  Its what I get for not being patient) -Daniel

[2021-09-30 18:01:42] - (daniel:  btw, the duplicated posts are totally my fault!  i've been doing a lot of high-intensity cpu+memory+io processing on this computer and it makes everything SUPER slow.  just don't hit enter twice even if its being lame and slow)  ~a

[2021-09-30 17:56:44] - daniel:  i also don't think you are crazy or wrong for thinking it isn't the same.  ~a

[2021-09-30 17:56:24] - a: Which I guess brings up a more general if A does action Z towards B and B feels threatened then was A threatening them by definition?  I think I say no that someone could feel threatened by me walking down the street at night even without me even knowing they were there or having any ill thought.  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 17:54:38] - a: I think I would still lean towards convicting based on the results but I'm still not sure he was threatening (as I define that word).  I think threatening is hard for me to do in a car?  Like revving my engine or swerving towards you?  Somehow driving close doesn't seem like the same to me?  I don't think you are crazy / wrong / etc for feeling threatened though.  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 17:54:26] - a: I think I would still lean towards convicting based on the results but I'm still not sure he was threatening (as I define that word).  I think threatening is hard for me to do in a car?  Like revving my engine or swerving towards you?  Somehow driving close doesn't seem like the same to me?  I don't think you are crazy / wrong / etc for feeling threatened though.  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 16:43:10] - daniel:  based on some of the things you're saying now, is this still true?  "I'm leaning towards I would vote to convict".  did i do reverse progress?    ~a

[2021-09-30 16:42:45] - daniel:  "moreso to me than driving close to someone"  is there any amount of closeness that would change your mind here?  what if you're going 40mph and i'm going 25mph, and you bump me.  do you still say "moreso"?  ~a

[2021-09-30 16:01:35] - a: moreso to me than driving close to someone.  which I think might be part of the difference in our thought.  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 15:07:27] - daniel:  waving a loaded gun near somebodies face doesn't automatically imply a threat to shoot.  do you agree?  ~a

[2021-09-30 15:05:18] - daniel:  there is an update:  "After their investigation, they decided not to charge my client and did not even issue him a traffic ticket".  i mean, i'll admit that nothing is set in stone yet, but this assessment by the (defense) attorney is interesting if its true.  ~a

[2021-09-30 15:02:58] - a: I guess threaten has an intent component to me somehow?  Like he is clearly irresponsibly close or negligently close or some other term but I don't know if he is threatening to run them over in my head.  But that might be my internal definitions.  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 15:00:57] - a: Yeah I'm just not sure if I think the analogy transfers from a gun to a car for me.  Driving close to something / someone doesn't automatically imply a threat to run over.  I guess I'm not sure what threatening to run over someone would look like?  But just going off that quote from the witness if he thinks the driver isn't trying to hit them that makes me think not threatening to run them over?  -Daniel

[2021-09-30 14:43:23] - daniel:  "if he had a gun and meant to pistol whip someone and accidentally shot them instead"  i didn't notice this sentence before. yeah, this is much closer to how i feel.  if you intend to pistol whip someone with a loaded gun, this is a good way of thinking about it.  and yeah, you'd probably still get (some sort of lower) murder if they die, and aggravated assault if they don't?  ~a

[2021-09-30 14:40:02] - daniel:  back to the analogy, if you wave a loaded gun in someone face, then shoot them, and * say * it was an accidental discharge, you might be right.  you may have not intended to shoot anyone.  but you're probably going to still get aggravated assault, right?  why is the one leap easy and the other leap difficult?  ~a

[2021-09-30 13:50:56] - daniel:  "Because he drove close to them?"  that is correct.  he drove to close to them on purpose.  i understand that this might be a leap for you, but it isn't for me.  i concluded "on purpose" because of the spraying diesel on them.  (spraying diesel is what the article was calling this).  ~a

[2021-09-30 13:42:07] - (also feels weird to be defending him in any capacity) -Daniel

[2021-09-30 13:41:29] - a: why do you think he threatened to run them over?  Maybe we are defining that term differently?  Because he drove close to them? "He clearly didn't mean to hit them, but he was definitely trying to intimidate them and blow smoke on them"  - to me I don't translate that as threatened to run them over.  -Daniel

[2021-09-29 21:03:46] - daniel:  "He wasn't threatening to run them over and then accidentally did"  i'm not sure that i agree with your assessment.  rolling coal combined with close-pass of a person on foot / person on bike is strictly different than just rolling coal of another car.  close-pass without a cab doesn't have a car-equivalent?  the something else stupid he was doing was threatening to run them over.  but there is some grey area here for sure.  ~a

[2021-09-29 19:05:08] - a: I think the gun analogy doesn't quite fit.  He wasn't threatening to run them over and then accidentally did.  He was doing something else stupid?  Like if he had a gun and meant to pistol whip someone and accidentally shot them instead?  I'm not sure what the rolling coal equiv is for a gun.  -Daniel

[2021-09-29 17:57:09] - daniel:  understood.  its very similar to how i feel (but not the same).  for instance, if it had been a gun, and he had threatened someone with a gun, then pulled the trigger and shot them, it would take quite a lot to sway me at trial.  do you agree?  ~a

[2021-09-29 17:15:12] - Currently in my head I'm leaning towards I would vote to convict if I was on a jury but I would feel sad about it.  I also think I could definitely be swayed at trial potentially.  -Daniel

[2021-09-29 17:14:12] - a: I don't know.  I mean there are lots of 16 year old drivers who don't do this.  There are adult drivers who do dumb things too.  Dumb/Asshole people in cars is a bad combo but I'm not sure how you alleviate that.    -Daniel

[2021-09-29 17:07:32] - daniel:  understood, thank you for answering.  it sounds like you are still on the fence about aggravated assault.  and i don't blame you, it's a shitty situation either way.  but, i'm definitely not on the fence.  "clearly not all 16 year olds should have them".  can you be more specific?  would you make a specific change if you had the power to?  ~a

[2021-09-29 17:05:44] - As to the question of 16 year olds and drivers licenses clearly not all 16 year olds should have them.  -Daniel

[2021-09-29 17:05:14] - a: Yeah I think I still don't know how I would vote if I were on a jury.  Giving a 16 year a felony conviction seems like a pretty big deal.  Also almost killing people cause you are an asshole is a pretty big deal.  I think the 'justice' answer is conviction but I'm not sure how thats weighed against 'mercy' for someone who isn't an adult yet.  -Daniel

[2021-09-29 16:58:39] - daniel:  and if so, are you on the fence about 16 year old's getting drivers licenses?  ~a

[2021-09-29 16:58:09] - daniel:  i understand, thank you for the update.  are you still on the fence about aggravated assault for this situation?  ~a

[2021-09-29 16:54:21] - daniel:  parentheses.  people often put parentheses in urls so i have to assume that a close parentheses might be at the end of a url.  ~a

[2021-09-29 15:05:10] - not sure how that got so messed up with my copy / paste of the link...  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 19:48:21] - daniel:  "kids do shoot other people and not get tried as adults though"  wait, are you sure this is a similar situation though?  where 16 (or older) year old kids shoot other people after threatening them with the same gun?  ~a

[2021-09-28 19:46:20] - a: I mean kids do shoot other people and not get tried as adults though.  I'm mad at the kid too, just pointing out that he is still a kid.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 19:31:12] - daniel:  in virginia you can give allowance to a 16 year old to use a gun.  i'm not sure about texas.  if the 16 year old threatens someone with a gun, *then* pulls the trigger, i imagine there would be a felony, right?  he'd lose his ability to have a gun, but that would just be the beginning of his assault related problems?  ~a

[2021-09-28 19:26:54] - daniel:  so what about driver's licenses to 16 year old's.  if you had asked 16 year old me to decide whether i'd be charged as an adult if something went bad, or not be able to get a driver's license, i'd have to think about it.  but, i was able to bike to school when i was 16, so . . . maybe i'm not a good case-study?  ~a

[2021-09-28 19:24:54] - Having a car is a big responsibility though that clearly he has shown he isn't ready for regardless of charges / convictions.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 19:24:09] - I don't know whether having a license automatically means you should be tried / treated as an adult.  Maybe?  Maybe not?  I'm not sure and would want to think about it more.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 19:22:51] - a: Oh yeah for sure - its not a facts in question here.  Its a age based responsibility thing.  Like if he was 18+ I think he is definitely charged and I definitely convict.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 19:21:44] - daniel:  "pretty much just because of his age"  i guess i agree with you that the age does make it a worse situation for everybody, because its heartbreaking, but if we treat him differently then we definitely shouldn't give 16 year old people driver's licenses in the first place, right?  ~a

[2021-09-28 19:20:06] - daniel:  based on the names alone, i feel like aggravated assault with motor vehicle or negligent collision, right?  i looked up the definition of both in other states (other than in texas) and both seem to fit pretty well.  the first one implies you were behaving irresponsibly when it happened.  the 16 year old was pretty clearly behaving irresponsibly here?  ~a

[2021-09-28 19:12:47] - a: Just if he was charged with felony assault I'd have to think hard about it - pretty much just because of his age - but he should definitely have consequences.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 19:04:37] - a: Yeah I'm not entirely sure where I stand on felony conviction but definitely losing your license seems like a no brainer.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 18:45:12] - a: 16 years old is sad. Dumb kids do dumb things in a big vehicle is very bad.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 17:52:40] - DC Smashers is my team name.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 17:52:27] - a: fantasy football team names.  Paul named his team Hydralisks.  Unsure why.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 17:00:41] - Daniel: My team feels due for a massive disappointing game where I am out of it by early Sunday, so congrats in advance for going 4-0! -Paul

[2021-09-28 16:39:55] - But maybe I can get a 40 point game out of Henry and Allen and it will all work out!  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 16:39:27] - Paul: I would be more confident if CMC hadn't hurt his leg this week.  So takes a bit of the air out of my sails.  -Daniel

[2021-09-28 16:21:29] - Daniel: "One streak will conclude in Week 4, as Hydralisks (2-1) enter next week on a two-game unbeaten stretch, while their upcoming opponent (DC Smashers, 3-0), come in having won three straight. After three weeks of action, Hydralisks have accumulated the third-most points in the league while DC Smashers (and their 144.66 points per game) are ranked second." Let's go! -Paul

[2021-09-27 18:49:03] - daniel:  the rally itself was pro-women on its face.  it was the day after inauguration, so uhh, obviously there were some political overtones and the people who attended, obviously, ran the gamut.  100% pro-women.  and like 75% anti-trump.  but otoh, nothing nearly as political as your average blm or alt-right rally.  my cousin is pretty rabid left-leaning person:  i mean she lives in missouri and flew to dc for this thing.  anyways.  ~a

[2021-09-27 18:41:28] - Which then makes it a pretty weak rule I guess.  So maybe adults should just be careful with it.  Taking a 5 year old to a purely Dem/Rep rally that is super all the party and less about a specific issue maybe is more questionable than taking a kid to some issue based thing?  I dunno, I think I'm making a weak argument though I'm still questionable on kids at political events  -Daniel

[2021-09-27 18:39:53] - Also showing your kids how to try and make a difference / make your voice heard can be valuable.  I know lots of people took their kids to BLM protests / movements / marches / etc.  I don't know that is wrong either.  I think the principles of kids not being able to be fully cognizant of all the inputs / issues holds but not sure its not outweighed by other concerns?  So I think it probably depends on the rally / march / issue?  -Daniel

[2021-09-27 18:37:12] - a: It probably depends on how it was framed?  That march in general was pretty anti trump?  So I think if you are like we are going to celebrate how awesome women are then it maybe not even political?  If you are like we are going because we think Trump is going to screw women I think it starts to be slightly more iffy?  Also teenagers are definitely different than like a <10 year old kid.  -Daniel

[2021-09-27 17:32:43] - daniel:  i attended the women's march in 2017 with my cousin and her kid.  kid was 13ish.  the kid wasn't holding a sign, or promoting a message, or anything like that.  she was just there to witness it.  thoughts?  ~a

[2021-09-27 17:15:11] - I also agree that kids aren't a good idea for political stands.  I even question taking kids to political rallies though that isn't uncommon.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 15:52:44] - Daniel: Sure. It could have been worse. The panel could've recommended against it 15-0. But they didn't. It was 9-6. And based on that, the CDC had two choices: Follow the recommendations of an independent panel of experts, or go against it. -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:31:05] - Paul: I would agree there are elements of D's being oversafe on covid but I also think if we had all gone that direction we would be in a better place currently with covid more behind us so between the two it seems like the better way to err?  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:29:32] - Again I think if its 15-0 I think your case would be much better but on a split panel to go with the slightly broader approach doesn't seem like a big departure or "rejecting science".  Its not strict adherence to the panel yes.  But I don't think your conclusion easily follows (for me).  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:28:26] - -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:17:12] - Daniel: I mean, as far as I know, there is no evidence for Ivermectin working OR not working to treat COVID because it hasn't been studied. Yet we feel pretty comfortable calling those people idiots who are rejecting the science even though it's in a similar gray area of "it could work, but probably not". -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:15:25] - Daniel: I get your point, but if an independent panel of experts (ie, "the science") says one thing and you explicitly do the opposite. That's kinda rejecting the science, no? -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:13:44] - a: One vote away from split vote so its at least close?    -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:13:03] - Paul: "both parties just politicizing stuff to rally their own base." - this (sadly) I do agree with.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:12:11] - Daniel: So my point is that it's less about one party following the science and another rejecting it, and more about both parties just politicizing stuff to rally their own base. Republicans have a bunch of people who think COVID is a hoax and vaccines make you magnetic, and Democrats have teachers who don't want to work and people who think vaccines swell your balls. -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:11:51] - Paul: "The problem is that oftentimes the Dems are just as bad at following the science as Reps." - I think this is a bad example of that concept.  I don't think extending an booster umbrella slightly further than then panel reccomends on a split vote is rejecting science.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:10:32] - a: Sure I can agree that they should explain / defend but I think the explanation needed is also proportional to the departure.  If the vote was 15-0 and they went against it I would feel different than a 9-6.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:09:47] - Daniel: The science (notably NOT the CDC) says that booster shots aren't necessary, nor are masks among the vaccinated, and schools are not causing outbreaks. -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:08:44] - daniel:  hmmm, i disagree with your characterization of the situation.  if the cdc seriously departs from the recommendations of the panel, as they have done here, they should do it for a good reason.  and they should state their reason.  and they haven't.  and that's shitty.  (maybe they will?  but its shitty that they haven't.  its the kind of question that often get hashed out in the press briefing.)  ~a

[2021-09-24 14:08:36] - Daniel: It's because for the past few years, all we've been hearing is the non-stop cry of "follow the science" in regards to why Dems are so smart and good and Reps are so dumb and evil. The problem is that oftentimes the Dems are just as bad at following the science as Reps. -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:08:33] - a: My point was that it seems like Israel should be worried about their defense being funded by other countries, but I guess I don't know for sure that they are actually dependent on it or if its just a nice bonus.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:06:31] - Daniel: " the scientists said to do one thing (in a 9 to 6 vote), and the cdc decided to do the opposite.  following the science was sarcasm." Yeah, what Adrian said. -Paul

[2021-09-24 14:06:06] - daniel:  if we add consequential conditions, they'll (probably) just reject the funding.  but, i hear you, we do sometimes get something for our foreign aid.  was that your point?  ~a

[2021-09-24 14:05:54] - Cause if the point is see biden's admin doesn't always follow the science so HA and they are the same as all these other things than I still disagree and would say that Paul is mischaracterizing it.  If we are just pointing out that there is still room to dissent while being reasonable then sure.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:04:41] - I don't think that is rejecting the science in the same vein of anti-vax, flat earth , climate deniers though in my head for the CDC to give a bigger booster umbrella than the panel recommended.  I get that its technically not strictly following the panel's advice but it doesn't seem like a radical departure either?  So partly trying to decide what is behind the sarcasm.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:03:06] - a: Thats mostly what I'm assuming but wanted to clarify.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:02:12] - a: Oh yeah I don't think we currently do, but would seem worrisome to another country that we could.  (I was just saying for example that I would).  Over time if poltics changes it seems plausible at some point that there do start to be strings attached.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 14:01:42] - daniel:  the scientists said to do one thing (in a 9 to 6 vote), and the cdc decided to do the opposite.  following the science was sarcasm.  ~a

[2021-09-24 14:01:03] - daniel:  i wouldn't assume that we put in any seriously consequential conditions.  ~a

[2021-09-24 14:00:48] - Paul: I'm confused what you mean by your follow the science quotes.  I'm assuming sarcasm on some level but not 100% how you intended it.  -Daniel

[2021-09-24 13:56:35] - -Daniel

[2021-09-23 14:15:31] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/23/politics/daniel-foote-haiti/index.html Differences in motivation aside, at what point can we start to have the discussion about which administration was more hostile to refugees / migrants? Trump's or Biden's? -Paul

[2021-09-21 13:47:00] - Daniel: No, but it does reference JoJo Siwa, so it's a draw. -Paul

[2021-09-21 13:40:31] - paul: just as a comparison - probably due to business model - npr doesn't mention trump at all or the missing lady or person dying from refusing vaccine.  -Daniel

[2021-09-17 16:50:30] - Daniel: I've got a Captain America shield decal on the wall and a Thor's Hammer (you might have seen it during the draft). You think I need more? -Paul

[2021-09-17 15:28:43] - MCU / Avengers poster?  I have a star wars print, a fallout print, spider man poster, band of brothers print, and a print from a book series (cosmere) on my wall if any of those sound interesting.  -Daniel

[2021-09-14 14:14:11] - Daniel: "I guess that assumption is a large crux of the argument?" No, it's just part of it, but I think it's something that people often selectively forget. Just because something is made illegal, it doesn't magically make that thing stop happening. -Paul

[2021-09-13 16:53:01] - paul:  i'm kinda with daniel, i don't follow your premise.  if that were true, then we'd probably see 0ish vaccinations per day today, but we are not seeing that.  ~a

[2021-09-13 16:44:08] - Paul: I guess that assumption is a large crux of the argument?  What if we assume after not working for a month or two they all decide they have to get the vaccine even though they didn't want to?  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:42:51] - Daniel: What if we assume that, for the majority of the current unvaccinated population, most aren't going to get vaccinated because of this mandate? Then it effectively becomes a law where X% of the population isn't allowed to work. -Paul

[2021-09-13 16:41:50] - "it needs to be considered" - I think this is one of the tricks / problems/  hard things with gov.    Do we know it wasn't considered?  Do we know that it was?  I think its reasonable to assume it was but also that doesn't mean it definitely was.  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:41:40] - Daniel: "Are you advocating that 'we' / the gov / whoever  shouldn't try to get people vaccinated?" No, just that we shouldn't be judging laws based on their intent alone. Here's a better analogy: anti-abortion laws. I imagine you (and Adrian) probably agree that they ultimately do more harm than good even if the intent is to reduce harm. -Paul

[2021-09-13 16:40:14] - Paul: How do you think we should get people to get vaccinated?  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:39:46] - a: made up number for loading back up in car / driving to other place / checking in to new place.  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:26:14] - daniel:  "I do agree with Paul that there is some cost there"  well we're all obviously in agreement there.  biting the bullet has cost, i thought i did touch on that.  ~a

[2021-09-13 16:22:25] - I dunno - just saying birth is an involved process that putting an hour interruption in somewhere isn't without cost.  I'm still on the society probably wins in the need to get everyone vaccinated but I do agree with Paul that there is some cost there.  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:21:27] - Maybe I'm thinking of nicu as subset of maternity ward but maybe not...  So maybe its only regular birth stuff they can't really support?  So then they could just deliver baby and then drive to other place with maternity ward?  Though that is also not ideal.  Andrea had a fairly significant bleeding thing occur about 30 or 40 minutes after Nathan was born.  Was handled fine but unsure how that would have gone in an ambulance.    -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:16:38] - a: Maybe? Probably not? I'm not sure?  What do you do with a baby if you don't have a maternity ward?  Is it worse to deliver the baby and not be able to support it or to tell the woman stop pushing and drive an hour that way where there is a nicu etc?  Deliver the baby then have them drive to other place but that assumes no complications?  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:13:43] - daniel:  i looked up lowville, ny.  there are many options for pregnancy wards within 20km drive, but more importantly i'm like preeeetty confident if you show up (in an emergency situation) pregnant at lewis county general hospital, with a baby coming out, they won't send you away.  ~a

[2021-09-13 16:13:39] - Paul: or just not this way?  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 16:13:17] - Paul: Are you advocating that 'we' / the gov / whoever  shouldn't try to get people vaccinated?  Given that unvaccinated people make life harder for society in general I'm not sure that makes sense to me.  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 15:44:26] - a: No idea on this hospital in particular but out in the country there aren't always four hospitals in easy driving range and labor isn't always a thing where you have two hours or something to drive to a further away hospital.  -Daniel

[2021-09-13 15:43:33] - Paul: Yeah I think its not good for that hospital to be impacted but I think on a society level trying to get everyone vaccinated and reduce variants might be worth lumps along the way.  -Daniel

[2021-09-10 21:30:59] - You guys remember / still good for SC2 tonight? -Daniel

[2021-09-10 17:26:18] - Paul: I also wish Congress was more active in getting things done.  Also I think to some degree its why the executive branch was created to do things w/o waiting on Congress though I do imagine its not played out exactly as intended.  -Daniel

[2021-09-10 14:58:09] - a: Hmm it will be interesting to see what they do with the differences between now and the 1905 case.  Law vs executive order.  State vs fed gov.  But there definitely do seem to be similarities and the quote from the justice about everyone having to suffer some restraint so that everyone can actually have liberty seems pretty applicable.  -Daniel

[2021-09-10 13:59:52] - Daniel: Like, it's one thing to say: "I want anybody coming over my house to be vaccinated" and another thing to say: "I am going to make everybody in America who works a non-USPS job be vaccinated". -Paul

[2021-09-10 13:59:12] - Daniel: I think it's the difference between some group requiring you to vaccinate in order to do some activity, and the government requiring all groups to require all their members to vaccinate period. -Paul

[2021-09-10 13:36:59] - Paul: I could believe its a overreach of executive power but I don't know if it actually is.  I know I've been required to get vaccines / shots for different things in my life.  I guess the difference was that they were required by the individual company / school district (state?) and not the federal gov?  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 20:06:41] - daniel:  i posted this here in 2014.  ~a

[2021-09-09 20:00:25] - a: Nah - I read the article and was like finally a use case that makes sense!  I think you talked about global transfers before I don't remember if remittances came up or not but yeah those make sense for crypto (bitcoin).  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 19:53:39] - daniel:  i was thinking you might respond.  bitcoin used for remittance seems like the hardest thing to argue against, but i was hoping that you'd give it a try.    ~a

[2021-09-09 19:52:24] - a: This can be "Fuck the media" week here on the message board.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:59:24] - paul:  in this specific case daniel didn't see the mask . . .  so i think this situation is not that.  ~a

[2021-09-09 16:54:52] - Yeah I think with the mask you loose the benefit of the doubt.  So while I would say its possible its not racist and maybe some terrible coincidence it seems unlikely and probably racist.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:51:56] - daniel:  yeah, there was a mask.  if you didn't see the mask, i guess i'd be with you that it wasn't super obvious what it was all about.  ~a

[2021-09-09 16:50:09] - a: Depends on the member?  Context matters.  If it was a rando R that I didn't know anything about it would still be maybe.  I didn't notice the gorilla mask.  That might be a tipping factor.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:49:53] - daniel:  with zero extra context, this is pretty obviously racist.  likely intentionally so, but that can't be known as easily.  she might be a loon, but again, benefit of the doubt that we wouldn't give the out-group.  ~a

[2021-09-09 16:47:58] - daniel:  "its possible race doesn't p lay into it"  this is a level of benefit of the doubt that you wouldn't offer to a member of the right-wing.  ~a

[2021-09-09 16:47:52] - If we find out that she's throw eggs at four other politicians and those were all black/poc as well then more likely yes.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:46:32] - So maybe?  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:46:26] - a: I mean its possible race doesn't p lay into it.  I don't know much about him or her other than the video?  Maybe he is hard core flat eather who wants to teach everyone about the flat earth and she is a middle school science teacher fed up with flat earth conspiracies and couldn't take it anymore?!  I have no idea.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:43:13] - daniel:  only maybe?    ~a

[2021-09-09 16:43:12] - I didn't listen with audio. does she yell / say anything?  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 16:42:22] - maybe? -Daniel

[2021-09-09 15:17:43] - Paul: I had no idea.  Sad for Morpheus.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 14:50:07] - Daniel: TIL that Morpheus apparently canonically died in the Matrix Online game, which is why he seems to be recast in this movie. -Paul

[2021-09-09 14:27:55] - paul:  looks interesting but i'm curious how it fits into the established timeline of things.  -Daniel

[2021-09-09 13:34:54] - mig: I think the headline / conclusion is wrong so not trying to move goal posts but I also don't think its 100% false like Paul / reason.com said either.  The doctor did connect them.  Not to the degree of being the main reason though.  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 23:02:51] - daniel:  this feels like a moving the goal posts.  The main thrust of the story (ivermectin overdoses were clogging ER rooms) was 100% false.    Quibbling over whether there were a few people who did show up at the ER who did overdose on ivermectin (which no one really disputes) is kind of asanine. - mig

[2021-09-08 21:43:23] - https://kfor.com/on-air/seen-on-tv/more-of-dr-mcelyeas-interview-with-kfor/  I think it got pushed off to the next page already but if you go there the thats where the doctor does link ER back up to some cases of Ivermectin use.  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 21:42:23] - I would change the article if I were in charge of it, but I don't think its 100% false.    Maybe like 90?  Unsure how to quantify that.  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 21:40:57] - Paul: I thought in the extended video it wasn't "not true" it just was overly stated.  The doctor said the ER was backed up and that "some of the examples" of other things were people with Ivermectin issues.  So yeah I think the headline / conclusion was wrong / dumb but was based somewhat on the doc's statement.  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 13:54:17] - But his connection doesn't entirely support the claim of the  journalist either that  "Patients overdosing on ivermectin backing up rural Oklahoma hospitals, ambulances"  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 13:52:40] - Sorry I typed part of that sentence wrong below.  . "In the article by reason this part specifically" was how that should have read.  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 13:50:55] - https://kfor.com/on-air/seen-on-tv/more-of-dr-mcelyeas-interview-with-kfor/ but he does connect them there.  -Daniel

[2021-09-08 13:50:46] - Paul: I think it does seem well supported that people over reported / sensationalized Ivermetctin use but also in that article specifically by reason this part "But he never actually connects these two issues. It was the journalist, Ogle, who added that framing. She did not respond to a request for comment." is contradicted by the the video of the doctor talking to KFOR.  You have to click on the see more of the video link though.  -Daniel

[2021-09-07 15:53:24] - That was supposed to be oof - not off in my response about the correction.  Yo dawg I heard you like corrections....  -Daniel

[2021-09-07 13:47:57] - I also think the TX law is dumb but also not sure it stands forever either yet.  Either way dumb to compare it straight up to taliban.  -Daniel

[2021-09-07 13:47:03] - mig: Yeah off on the correction.  That was definitely a widely reported thing to fuck up.  -Daniel

[2021-09-02 18:38:40] - daniel:  yeah, that middle sentence is telling.  i'm obviously on your side here.  it's not just about "owning" as paul suggests.  ~a

[2021-09-02 15:03:25] - Sorry that middle sentence was a quote from the wiki article.  Should have had quotes.  -Daniel

[2021-09-02 15:02:58] - Paul: Maybe cause people are taking it in the horse dose? In August 2021, the state of Mississippi announced that 70 percent of recent calls to poison control centers were due to people taking ivermectin in a dose formulated for large animals.  So maybe they want to discourage that part?  -Daniel

[2021-09-02 14:55:52] - Daniel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivermectin I'm no expert either, but wikipedia starts off by listing a bunch of uses in humans for the drug. I think the second tweet is probably accurate: It's a non-subtle way of trying to point out the stupidity of people taking the drug. -Paul

[2021-09-02 14:54:18] - Paul: Probably cause people aren't getting it at animal stores / vets?  To be fair I don't know much about Ivermectin and its human / non horse uses so I'm not an expert on the drug.      -Daniel

[2021-09-02 14:44:42] - Daniel: And D's will point out that even after Obama we didn't get much movement in universal healthcare or rolling back the patriot act or bringing the troops home or whatever the issue is... -Paul

[2021-09-02 14:44:03] - paul/daniel:  here's an interesting take i just heard, from a son of a former judge:  if an emergency motion is denied that signifies one of two things:  1.  there is no short-term damage.  2.  there is basically no chance the court will rule in the same direction of the emergency motion.  (non-sarcastically and honestly) i wonder which one they're going with?  i.e. both seem pretty crazy to me.  ~a

[2021-09-02 14:43:50] - Daniel: "what does that do to the R party" I feel like there's a lot of that going around for both parties lately. The extreme wings of both parties are pointing out that even getting their party in power often doesn't result in much. So the R's point out that Roberts has been a disappointment because of his Obamacare votes... -Paul

[2021-09-02 14:21:25] - daniel:  from wikipedia:  "during the first trimester, governments could not prohibit abortions at all; during the second trimester, governments could require reasonable health regulations; during the third trimester, abortions could be prohibited entirely so long as the laws contained exceptions for cases when they were necessary to save the life or health of the mother"  ~a

[2021-09-02 14:20:59] - daniel:  "If states can overturn it within their own borders but abortion is still available elsewhere".  i think you misunderstand rvw.  rvw does NOT say that abortion can be legal *somewhere*, rvw (more or less) states that abortion (before the third trimester) is to be legal everywhere.  ~a

[2021-09-02 14:19:21] - daniel:  "Give up on RvW?"  never give up, never surrender.  nah, they'll just do what they always do:  try to chip away at it at the local level.  ~a

[2021-09-02 14:06:45] - In terms of "overturning" RvW or not - does it count if its overturned effictively in some places but not others?  If states can overturn it within their own borders but abortion is still available elsewhere how does that count?  -Daniel

[2021-09-02 14:03:00] - I understand that its slightly getting ahead of where we are at, but its an interesting thing for me think about.  -Daniel

[2021-09-02 14:02:41] - I have a different angle that I'm curious about.  If the SC doesn't let it stand what does that do to the R party which has had as such a long standing goal to get a R majority on the SC for this exact purpose?  If they don't come through what does it do to the voter base?  Even more extreme SC justices?  Give up on RvW?  -Daniel

[2021-09-02 13:35:26] - a: Hmm I guess maybe not always then?  I know states / fed gov has defended their own laws before.  If it gets to Supreme Court my guess is that TX would do some sort of work / brief / something that would defend the bill.  But maybe not.  I don't really want to defend TX in this instance though.  -Daniel

[2021-09-01 20:47:35] - daniel:  really?  i think the passer of the law doesn't always pay for having their law overturned.  henry wade (in roe vs wade), for instance, wasn't a lawmaker and wasn't a governor (he didn't sign any bills into law).  he was in charge of enforcing the laws:  a district attorney.  ~a

[2021-09-01 20:42:00] - a: I mean sure - court costs for starters.  -Daniel

[2021-09-01 20:16:14] - daniel:  clap clap clap clap deep in the heart of texas.  is there any downside to passing a law that you know is going to get overturned by the courts?  (for the sake of argument, can we assume that this will get overturned by the courts?)  ~a

[2021-09-01 19:01:31] - a: Also - w t f.  -Daniel

[2021-09-01 19:01:22] - a:  Wow -Daniel

[2021-08-25 15:44:47] - Paul: He seems unlikely to win that case but I suppose one never knows.  Porn is a slippery category sometimes but under the "I know it when I see it" type test I don't think the nirvana cover qualifies in my head.  Provacative? Sure.  Arouse?  No.  -Daniel

[2021-08-24 16:16:44] - a: I have not seen those signs here.  -Daniel

[2021-08-24 14:49:08] - a: thats gross.  -Daniel

[2021-08-19 14:14:40] - paul/daniel:  huh.  i noticed that one of the canadian etfs did unexpectedly "well" today compared to similar etfs, but then after investigating some, it's because the canadian dollar did -1% (compared to other major currencies.  other major currencies are relatively flat).  any idea why a currency would go down a whole percent in just one day?  ~a

[2021-08-19 13:38:05] - mig: I didn't say who could have known. "I don't know who / what should have predicted the gov imploding like this or gives odds but either it wasn't given enough weight as a credible outcome or wasn't planned for sufficiently as an outcome."  So yeah I think someone should have done better?  However I also don't think its crazy that they might have thought it would last two months and not like two weeks.  -Daniel

[2021-08-19 12:09:03] - daniel:  re - "who could have known the government would collapse?"  I just don't find that an acceptable response from the us gov.  We've been there for 20 fucking years.  If the "top men" trying to manage this situation could not see this coming, that is an incredibly massive fuck up on their end, and I don't see why there shouldn't be mass firings/resignations once this situation is over. - mig

[2021-08-18 21:30:37] - a: Sure but is the or else the gov implodes?  I think there is room to read "instability" and not assume Taliban take over within a month.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 21:14:01] - daniel:  "I don't know who / what should have predicted the gov imploding like this"  did you see the first wsj article?  this one.  "the president's top generals...urged Mr. Biden to keep a force of about 2,500 troops"  so, to answer your question:  the president's top generals?  ~a

[2021-08-18 20:35:37] - That said I'm not entirely sure what planning for immediate gov implosion would have looked like.  If the Afghan president is like nah we're cool then straight bolts I'm not sure how we should have accounted for that.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 20:34:29] - I don't know who / what should have predicted the gov imploding like this or gives odds but either it wasn't given enough weight as a credible outcome or wasn't planned for sufficiently as an outcome.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 20:32:48] - Ah so the Americans left are non gov affiliated ones.  That does seem more tricky but I would definitely agree they should be helped (rescued?).  I think they fall into the category though of if you thought the gov was going to still be there this week then why would you have evacuated them already camp.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 20:08:27] - daniel:  https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-americans-left-behind-11629211589 yes, apparently there are americans stuck in kabul right now. - mig

[2021-08-18 20:00:06] - Are there americans that didn't get out safely?  I would agree that changes things if so.  I think the concept of "refugees" is tricky because the original theory I presume was that they were just staying in charge so no refugees.  If they start evac'ing 'refugees' at the onset then its not an american withdrawal but collapse of the gov.  Which is what happened but I imagine wasn't the plan.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 19:07:32] - mig:  gotcha, ok.  that makes sense to me.  you suggest that biden should have ignored the drawdown agreement between the taliban and the united states?  (i'm not questioning you, just confirming)  daniel, any thoughts?  ~a

[2021-08-18 14:28:21] - I think we have corruption in the US but that it is fought against and hasn't reach the tipping point of undermining belief in the system completely but if we do get to that point I think it will be bad.  Its part of why Trump was bad in my head (yes tangent I know) because I think he moved us closer to that point more so than others imo.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 14:26:52] - Corruption I think is such an insidious problem for a country.  Once it gets to a point where its ubiquitous / expected its so hard to overcome because it undermines the idea of what "Afghanistan" is.  So if you think that "Afghanistan" isn't worth much then why bother trying to fix / improve / fight for it.  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 14:18:14] - Which is hard given all of the costs that went into it (blood / treasure / time) - Daniel

[2021-08-18 14:17:41] - I don't think its going to be good for a lot of people there but I'm also not sure that if we can't make any permanent progress in 20 years whether we would be able to ever?  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 14:15:55] - If we start evac'ing to start then it goes from we are withdrawing and leaving to the gov to the gov is withdrawing with the US (which seems to have happened but wasn't the idea)  -Daniel

[2021-08-18 14:15:10] - Afghanistan is such a hard problem.  I definitely don't any answers.  I don't think the withdrawal went well? (what does well even mean here?) but I'm not sure what we should have done differently?  Gone slowly?  I've seen the idea that we should have evac'ed more people ahead of time but I don't think that makes entire sense either?  The idea was that we were withdrawing but leaving country to the gov. -Daniel

[2021-08-12 17:32:00] - daniel:  i asked you specifically because i remember you were talking to "jarvis" one day at sc2, i just wasn't sure what solution you were using.  ~a

[2021-08-12 17:31:16] - daniel:  yeah, i guess really don't integrate many smart devices with my voice assistant.  i just ask it google questions, and tell it to play radio and music.  but i use google's . . . not one of the opensource solutions.  ~a

[2021-08-12 17:29:50] - a: I think I looked at it once but I don't currently use it or anything else to integrate smart devices.  I never actually got enough smart things to feel like I needed something to integrate them so currently just have apps on my phone for sprinkler / ac / lights.  -Daniel

[2021-08-12 16:46:17] - daniel:  do you still use your home-assistant?  remind me what software stack you used?  thanks!  ~a

[2021-08-11 14:47:39] - I think a lot of the "hero worship" of cuomo definitely came about as a contrast to trump who didn't seem to take covid seriously and cuomo who did seem to.  -Daniel

[2021-08-11 14:46:25] - mig: I agree that politician hero worship isn't a good idea but I don't see all of those as 180's.  You can think he did a good job on covid (though clearly debatable - see Paul) and also think he is bad for treatment of women and right to resign.  -Daniel

[2021-08-05 18:42:02] - daniel:  i think i found it in libreoffice calc (and i think excel has a similar feature):  edit -> track changes -> merge (there's also "compare" which will do a diff).  ~a

[2021-08-05 17:31:35] - a: Our code is validating data in spreadsheets currently so we have some for integration tests.  Team has grown some and now people are making changes to the same sheets working on stories concurrently. -Daniel

[2021-08-05 17:20:08] - daniel:  what's the use-case?  you don't have to explain your business, but like why is java talking to a spreadsheet?  why isn't java talking to a database?  to answer your question literally, yes java can talk to google sheets, but this is probably not actually what you want.  ~a

[2021-08-05 17:08:54] - a: Can you have java get a file reference to a google spreadsheet?  I guess if everyone sync'ed it to their local desktop somewhere?  Hmm.  -Daniel

[2021-08-05 16:44:26] - daniel:  if you want to *look* at the diffs though, i have often used stuff like ods2csv / ods2tsv (and xlsx2csv).  then you can just diff.  ~a

[2021-08-05 16:43:04] - daniel:  nooooope, sorry.  i've done this a shit-ton with documents (odt/docx), but after i mostly moved to google sheets, this become a non-issue with spreadsheets:  everybody edits the same spreadsheet!  ~a

[2021-08-05 16:37:35] - Anyone know a good way to merge changes two people made to the same excel file other than by hand?  -Daniel

[2021-08-04 15:44:41] - a: If  you watch full episodes I often skip the first six minutes cause the first task is always the same type and I'm less interested in that part.  But the actual tasks / end of the show are generally good/funny.  -Daniel

[2021-08-04 15:16:39] - a: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OO4QTRSJAa4 is a reasonable entry.  Almost all of them make me laugh though.  -Daniel

[2021-08-04 14:49:38] - daniel:  do you have a link to one we should watch?  ~a

[2021-08-04 14:18:44] - Daniel: "Hard part of psychology to overcome" Yeah, absolutely. I don't expect the media to change or even most of society to change, but maybe I can get a few friends to be skeptical of initial media reports on things and seek out other sides of stories or later corrections (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/aug/02/facebook-posts/novak-djokovic-did-not-refer-simone-biles-when-he-/) -Paul

[2021-08-04 14:17:09] - Unrelated to the current topics at all but one of my new favorite things in the world is this British show called Taskmaster.  Its stupid / funny but super funny to me.  You can look it up and watch clips / episodes for free on Youtube.  If you one clip (<10 minutes) of a task you'll get a good sense of the show.  -Daniel

[2021-08-04 14:15:17] - paul: "stop making snap judgements" - I think most people would agree in theory while also almost 100% continuing to still make snap judgements  Hard part of psychology to overcome.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 19:56:56] - daniel:  ah, i think 60% of your stuff is overseas.  emerging markets, european, and pacific are all overseas.  ~a

[2021-08-03 19:45:47] - daniel:  vtiax is up 8% ytd, so i'm not sure 40% of your stuff being overseas explains the difference.  ~a

[2021-08-03 19:43:20] - daniel:  not surprising to you?  why do international stocks historically lose to domestic?  what's the deal there?  i'd expect at least a tiny bit of reversion to the mean.  ~a

[2021-08-03 19:42:09] - a: 40% of my fantasy stuff is overseas.  so not surprising to me.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 19:40:58] - paul:  right, but that would maybe explain you losing to the market.  what about the other 16?  daniel for instance?  i'm blown away by how much he's losing to the s&p500  but also you'd think with a "random" selection of 20 or 30 companies, at least a few random groupings of 5 would be beating the market.  ~a

[2021-08-03 19:40:29] - Daniel: "Its what SOME have been trying to do.  R's (and L's?) don't seem to want to cooperate" You're welcome to think that. Obviously I disagree. In fact, I would argue that some of the worst disparities in public schools are solidly democratic areas. NYC seems to have some truly terrible public schools, as does Baltimore. -Paul

[2021-08-03 19:38:39] - though does  speak to part of the hard thing of our gov is that so few times does a party really get to enact their vision to then see how it would actually work.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 19:38:09] - Daniel: Also: "people who can afford to pay more for better schools and leaving those who can't to just deal" is exactly what we have now with people who can afford to sending their kids to private schools. This way, we make it more possible for poor people to afford those better private schools. -Paul

[2021-08-03 19:38:06] - Paul: Its what SOME have been trying to do.  R's (and L's?) don't seem to want to cooperate.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 19:37:16] - Daniel: "I would argue for making those worse schools better than making people who can afford to pay more for better schools and leaving those who can't to just deal" But that's what we've been trying to do for decades and, surprise, the monopoly in public schools hasn't been great at improving itself. -Paul

[2021-08-03 19:36:29] - paul/daniel:  of the 17 people in the stock market challenge, not one of them are beating the s&p 500.  to me this is unexpected and i wouldn't have been able to foresee this.  maybe only a handful beating the market, but literally nobody beating the market?  is this something that we can learn from?  vtsax is up 18% ytd.  s&p500 is up 18% ytd (18.5% with dividends).  everybody else is less than up 18% ytd.  thoughts?  ~a

[2021-08-03 19:36:08] - paul: Right and so I would argue for making those worse schools better than making people who can afford to pay more for better schools and leaving those who can't to just deal.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 19:30:29] - Daniel: "Aren't those the less good schools by definition?" Probably. I certainly agree in my proposal that there would be better schools and worse schools, but that's also how it is now. The difference being that right now, people are locked into bad schools based on where they live, where in my proposal they would have some choice available to them. -paul

[2021-08-03 18:38:38] - paul/daniel:  ooooof, nevermind nevermind nevermind.  paul your link seems to be a problem.  have you been to the front page?  ~a

[2021-08-03 18:36:10] - daniel:  10 bucks for school and good schools cost 100?  can we use a real example?  from paul's link, each student is going to get 14k/year, and private schools cost on-average 8k/year.  i think you're going to be sad by the real-world examples.  ~a

[2021-08-03 18:33:10] - a: define failing? A lot of people think we do fail kids cause we dont make schools better for everyone.  I think our schools could be better - I dont think a school market does that though.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 18:32:28] - a: " they can afford it (almost) by definition" not if good schools raise the price?  If everyone gets 10 bucks for school but good schools cost 100 then who can go? -Daniel

[2021-08-03 18:10:40] - daniel:  "Equal / Fair schooling"  does this need to be the goal?  if so, then why aren't we already failing because there are for-profit schools that cost more and are (often) better?  ~a

[2021-08-03 18:09:28] - daniel:  "Capitalism is super good at providing the best service to those that can afford it"  but we're literally talking about giving people money.  they can afford it (almost) by definition.  is your argument that schools will only cost more than we give to the people?  ~a

[2021-08-03 18:09:25] - paul: Aren't those the less good schools by definition?  Equal / Fair schooling doesn't seem an outcome of this system or a goal of the system.  I don't know that its definitely an outcome of the current system but its at least a goal that people work towards.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 18:08:18] - a: the capatalism is the market for schools.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 17:27:38] - Daniel: "So what happens to poor kids when x dollars isn't enough  cause good schools raise prices?" Then lower costs schools will move in? I don't understand why the market wouldn't work here. It's not like groceries are priced out of range for poor people because the government isn't "fairly" providing it to everybody. -Paul

[2021-08-03 17:22:06] - daniel:  in this case, though, paul wants us to all pay tax money that we'd then get back to pay for our kids educations.  so not even remotely capitalism.  ~a

[2021-08-03 17:21:07] - I don't think Capitalism always works the best when the idea is to provide something to everyone in a good / reasonable / fair way.  Capitalism is super good at providing the best service to those that can afford it.  But I think education (and other things) don't fall into that paradigm well.  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 17:19:43] - Paul: So what happens to poor kids when x dollars isn't enough  cause good schools raise prices?  -Daniel

[2021-08-03 17:09:34] - Daniel: Like Adrian said: Add more classrooms / teachers / schools? Raise prices? It's the free market. It's the same way Tesla deals with more demand than they can meet or Intel. -Paul

[2021-08-03 16:31:41] - daniel:  always be matching supply with demand.  ~a

[2021-08-03 16:30:37] - daniel:  increase capacity and/or increase prices . . . that is, until competition comes in.  ~a

[2021-08-03 16:21:23] - paul: How do schools deal with more demand than they can meet?  -Daniel

[2021-08-02 21:08:23] - daniel:  he probably meant money . . . i read it as money when he posted it, and when i quoted it i still didn't realize it said "data"    ~a

[2021-08-02 21:07:33] - paul: I'm confused by the part adrian quoted.  did you mean money instead of data?  -Daniel

[2021-08-02 20:57:03] - paul:  i'll generally argue against progressives (and maybe even daniel) when they say that the government should do more.  but we're talking about school supplies (say $20 / year / kid), this isn't exactly something that can be easily or efficiently privatized without privatizing all of the schools.  ~a

[2021-08-02 20:52:11] - Daniel: For "desperately trying to ignore", I would point to Biden shuffling responsibility off to Harris, who promptly avoided going to the border for as long as possible to where even the media was asking when she was going to go. If the administration was paying attention, there likely wouldn't need to be as many whistleblowers as there have been. -paul

[2021-08-02 20:50:43] - a: Sure.  Either way just seems dumb to have / need charities for stuff like that but my emotional response to them makes me feel like grinch / scrooge somehow.  -Daniel

[2021-08-02 20:50:07] - Daniel: "Is it dumb to be annoyed by charity cause I wish we all just paid more in taxes?" I don't think it's dumb to be annoyed by it, although I would tend to be annoyed by the mismanagement of public schools instead of us not getting taxed enough. -Paul

[2021-08-02 20:48:48] - daniel:  i think school supplies for kids (up to some ridiculously low amount per kid) should probably come from tax money, but i think we can probably keep taxes the same by lowering (federal) tax money destined for the dod.  ~a

[2021-08-02 20:48:24] - -Daniel

[2021-08-02 20:46:26] - a: for things like that, for teachers to have money to buy supplies, I guess ultimately its all some flavor of "supplies for kids" via some way or another.  -Daniel

[2021-08-02 20:43:57] - daniel:  can you be way more specific about the "back to school" fundraisers?  ever since we were kids in nova (not representative of the us as a whole), we were required to provide our own paper and binders and shit.  are you talking about fundraising for *this* or something else?  ~a

[2021-08-02 20:37:32] - Is it dumb to be annoyed by charity cause I wish we all just paid more in taxes?  I've seen several different 'back to school' fundraisers of various sorts recently for both teachers and students.  The goals are good but like part of me wishes they weren't necessary and in some ways prop up a system I see as broken (underfunded schools).  I dunno.  Maybe I'm just grumpy today.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 19:45:01] - Daniel: So I just stick with being skeptical and trying to verify whenever I can. So I'll be completely open to the idea that the vaccine isn't safe or COVID isn't deadly or whatever, but I'm going to need some strong evidence to back it up or else I'll go with the majority. -Paul

[2021-07-30 19:43:31] - Daniel: Yeah, I don't know. I guess the ideal situation would be a CDC completely immune to political pressure that can present the science to the public and trust them to interpret it intelligently. But that's so far from realistic that it's not even worth considering. -Paul

[2021-07-30 19:39:01] - Twitter war b/w Hart and CDC for the fate of public schools?    -Daniel

[2021-07-30 19:38:32] - Yeah I guess ultimately it would come down to that and whether Mr Hart or Fauci or whoever could make the better case to convince more people.  In that view I guess Twitter does make sense.  So then I guess does the CDC need an outreach person that works on Twitter and  just lays out studies and stuff that supports their decisions?  Does that already exist?  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 19:29:07] - Daniel: School boards and superintendents are probably ultimately answerable to voters so if enough parents get upset that schools aren't being opened to their satisfaction, then that could be a tipping point. -Paul

[2021-07-30 19:28:08] - Daniel: I don't have a good answer. Assuming we're talking about schools and if they should be open / in-person / maskless (which seems reasonable based on the studies listed), I think the idea is to arm parents with knowledge to advocate for what this person thinks is the best policy. -Paul

[2021-07-30 19:17:01] - Just wondering about communication and how best to use science to change policy I guess?  Like if he thinks the CDC should be trying to get schools to actively not want masks is Twitter the right way to go?  /shrug.  I don't particularly know there is a better way just that Twitter feels odd to me.  Maybe I'm old fashioned  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 19:15:23] - So given that most people aren't scientists / biologists/ virologists how does one discern the basis of the CDC's recommendations from Mr Harts when they don't agree?  When 60% of the scientists don't agree with the 40%?  Are we qualified to take into account the different factors that effect the outcome of studies?  Maybe?  Sometimes yes but maybe  not in other cases?  I dunno.  I'm not advocating for censoring Mr Hart or anything.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 19:09:46] - Yeah I guess I'm just thinking about how to question / be skeptical of authority in an increasingly expert / specialized world.  I would probably not believe Rick Perry's DoE telling me coal was clean but if the entire scientific community could read the papers / do experiements to show some new tech was good then yeah.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 18:58:09] - Daniel: That first link was labelled as: "Impact on pediatric mental health from COVID-19". Yeah, I agree it's weird grouping to have put that under the other category.... -Paul

[2021-07-30 18:55:56] - Daniel: Did you check the second link for #9? The headline says, "Masks Can Be Detrimental to Babies’ Speech and Language Development" -Paul

[2021-07-30 18:55:13] - Daniel: Who were also right about other things that the CDC eventually came around to (vaccinated people not needing masks being the big one). -Paul

[2021-07-30 18:54:40] - Daniel: And yeah, I get that on the surface taking the word of a rando on Twitter sounds pretty bad, but where else are we supposed to get info? Many of those links are to reputable sounding sources if you dig into them. Yeah, they could be cherry picked, but a lot of those points made are things that I've heard from other sources... -Paul

[2021-07-30 18:53:11] - Daniel: Sure, I get that you would trust the CDC more than some rando on twitter. But, what if it was the DoE under Rick Perry saying that coal is clean? Obviously that's a bit of an exaggerated example, but I'm just trying to point out Adrian's point about authority not always being right. -Paul

[2021-07-30 18:03:01] - So not conclusive for all his stuff but big oof on the one I picked to look at.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 18:02:45] - ... and it literally doesn't contain the word mask in the pdf.  Control F - mask -> 0 results.  It  does talk about the pandemic being bad for the mental health of kids.  Nothing about masks though.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 17:50:02] - a: Yeah I don't think blindly following authority figures either is good, but twitter just seems like such a poor forum for scientific discussion? Maybe its just the only real tool to amplify his voice?  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 17:48:19] - Maybe thats what he is doing just in a very public way?  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 17:48:09] - Paul: I don't entirely know what my point is, I don't mind someone pointing out that conflicting studies exist or even coming to a different conclusion but blasting stuff on Twitter seems an odd way to go about it.  Like why should anyone believe that guy is more scientifically accurate / rigorous than the CDC?  I dunno, shouldn't he be trying to convince other scientists / policy makers?  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 17:47:04] - daniel:  learning more information and learning more about how that information is used doesn't change the fallibility of any conclusions.  you're alllllmost arguing that we should blindly follow authority figures, and i'll usually vote that we should question authority.  ~a

[2021-07-30 17:44:43] - Paul: I am not opposed to "look into the evidence ourselves" but if you are coming to a different conclusion than the CDC I think I would generally trust the CDC over me.  Like I agree they aren't infallible but I don't think I'm less fallible? Is that a word?  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 17:34:38] - Daniel: So even if, for example, having virtual school instead of in person might reduce the spread of COVID by some small percent, that doesn't necessarily mean it's good policy if it's screwing up the education of children completely. -Paul

[2021-07-30 17:32:43] - Daniel: I think Fauci / the CDC is not infallible and they have made mistakes and/or been slow to adapt to the evidence and are influenced by politics and frankly I feel like their job isn't necessarily to weight the pros and cons of things but just suggest strategies to prevent the spread of diseases. -Paul

[2021-07-30 17:30:43] - Daniel: I mean, in a hypothetical where Fauci / the CDC said something like "even vaccinated people can't eat indoors at restaurants at all" but there were studies showing that transmission of COVID was very unlikely among vaccinated people in restaurants.... what would you do? -Paul

[2021-07-30 17:27:50] - Daniel: Ah, I re-read one of your posts and I think I get it now. Yes, I think the idea is to not just completely rely on Fauci and the CDC and look into the evidence ourselves. -Paul

[2021-07-30 17:25:33] - Daniel: I'm not sure I get your question? I think the point is to share knowledge, which I appreciate. Personally, I feel like I don't know as much about COVID as I feel like we should know by now. -Paul

[2021-07-30 16:05:48] - "the post" being the guys twitter post list not your's Paul - just to clarify.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 16:01:05] - I'm just confused what the theory is that underlies the post.  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 16:00:33] - Like the point seems to be to convince us that kids wearing masks doesn't do enough to be worth it but if CDC/Fauci/etc still say to wear them why do we assume that this guy and these studies are a better indicator than whatever CDC et all is basing their decision off of?  Assumed political interference?  Slow beauacratic decision making?  Assuming CDC doesn't have public best interest at heart?  -Daniel

[2021-07-30 15:59:03] - Paul: I haven't gone through them either but I'm curious as to the thought process behind it (which is a nebulous thing so can mostly be speculated at) but is the idea that the CDC/Fauci/etc hasn't seen these?  ignoring these? seeing them but still coming to a wrong conclusion?  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:54:12] - gotta go make / eat lunch with Alex.  Back in awhile~  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:44:58] - Paul:  I think I would be ok characterizing this as a "jerk move" for either public or private person.  But either way not one I would be super concerned with?  The follow up I guess is that sometimes people deserve jerk moves and then whether Tucker deserved it or not.  Which maybe underlies the previous part of the discussion already?  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:43:42] - Daniel: But if it helps, sure, we can assume you're a public figure or replace you with Obama or Biden or some public figure you agree with. -Paul

[2021-07-29 16:41:47] - Daniel: "Am I a public figure in this hypothetical?" Well, I guess we need to clarify your point. I am saying this is a jerk move regardless of who it is said to (public person vs private person, somebody I agree with or disagree with). I thought your point was that this wasn't a jerk move at all, but maybe it depends on if it is a public person or not for you? -Paul

[2021-07-29 16:37:40] - If we are discussing whether this was a jerk move or not on Dan's (I think that was his name right?) part then I think thats a fairly low standard so I don't think I would fight hard against that.  Saying its a jerk move to call someone out like that in front of their kid.  Sure.  I still mostly shrug though.  Lots of jerk moves happen all the time.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:36:14] - Paul: Am I a public figure in this hypothetical?  Acceptable? I guess.  Also acceptable for me to just ignore them.  Jerk move?  Mixed.  I mean in theory this person doesn't really have another avenue to express this opinion directly to me where they know I will hear it so I get them acting on that.  But obviously its not exciting for me because I wouldn't like it.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:30:55] - Daniel: So, if somebody did that to you, while grocery shopping with your family, you wouldn't at all think it was unacceptable or out of place or a jerk move? -Paul

[2021-07-29 16:14:03] - And I wouldn't label it as "harassment" / "ambush" / "accosted" or any of those words.  Tucker encountered someone who didn't like him and that person enlightened Tucker as to his opinion.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:13:01] - Paul: Disagree then I guess. I think calling Tucker the worst is an overstatement too.  But I don't think the encounter as I witnessed was something I would be overly concerned with either.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:11:25] - I wouldn't call it polite but his voice was an acceptable tone?  I think often in these types of videos people are yelling or waving arms around or generally seem more agitated.  So that would be my guess as to the distinction?  But yeah I don't think being polite was his top concern.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:10:38] - Daniel: Sure, we can drop the "following" part if it changes anything. I don't think it does. I think just calling somebody the worst human being known to mankind by itself is plenty by itself (and should be pretty undeniable). -Paul

[2021-07-29 16:09:48] - I don't know why I'm bad at these double posts in the last month.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:09:25] - We need to define our use of "follow" in this context.  If you "follow" him all around the store telling him he is a murdered that gets closer and at some point become harassment.  If you "follow" five feet for 10 seconds to finish your though paragraph and then conclude I think thats acceptable in the realm of a public figure.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:09:22] - We need to define our use of "follow" in this context.  If you "follow" him all around the store telling him he is a murdered that gets closer and at some point become harassment.  If you "follow" five feet for 10 seconds to finish your though paragraph and then conclude I think thats acceptable in the realm of a public figure.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:07:45] - daniel:  and I agree the carlson wasn't polite either, but that wasn't my point.  My point was ana's take on him being polite was absurd. - mig

[2021-07-29 16:07:37] - But I think there is space between this guy wasn't polite to Tucker and this guy harassed / accosted / ambushed Tucker.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:07:00] - Daniel: I can more understand the argument that as a public figure it can be expected, but I don't get the idea that his isn't a jerk move and harassment. Obama is out shopping with his family and I follow him around the store calling him a murderer is fine? -Paul

[2021-07-29 16:06:40] - mig: I would agree that the guy is not overly concerned with being polite.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:04:50] - Paul: We are being very pedantic here but the "following" I envision for being part of harassment does not include "following" someone for five feet as part of a 'conversation'.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 16:03:25] - Daniel: "did he?  The video shows him "follow" him like 5 feet?" You answered your own question. He obviously followed him to initiate the conversation, then Tucker made it clear he didn't want to talk and walked away and he continued to follow him. I mean, they're in a store, it's not like he could follow him that far. -Paul

[2021-07-29 16:01:01] - I think there are a lot of things that would have made it not ok - if it went on for some time, if he followed him to his car, or to a different store, or was yelling, or actually being aggressive but as it was it seemed pretty mild. -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:58:39] - If I was a public figure I think I would expect it?  If I was Tucker I would 100% expect it.  If I'm Kevin Durant I would expect it.  If I was Will Smith I would expect it.  If I was Maddow I would expect it.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:57:47] - Paul: "continuing to follow him around"  - did he?  The video shows him "follow" him like 5 feet?  Does he follow him more than that?  If not then yeah I don't think it rises to harassment for me.  /shrug.  Public figure gets recognized.  Person shares opinion with public figure.  Public figure then leaves and goes about day.  Doesn't seem asshole or harassment.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:55:42] - Daniel: You would be fine if somebody did that to you? -Paul

[2021-07-29 15:54:39] - Daniel: "What makes it an asshole thing to do? What makes it harassment?" Seriously? A stranger going up to somebody in a store with his family and telling him that he's the worst human being known to man and continuing to follow him around to talk about how horrible he is even though he asked you to stop? -Paul

[2021-07-29 15:54:38] - mig: Calling someone son isn't very polite.  I think if anyone here called you son you would rightly be upset.  I also think the idea of the "next person" is something to keep in mind but also seems tricky because there obviously has to be a line somewhere so as long as  you are currently on the ok side of it saying that someone else could go over the line seems a weak argument.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:51:37] - daniel:  some of ana's take was a little absurd.  I don't think someone saying, "don't fucking call me son" isn't very polite, and he was in fact being aggressive.  And cheering this on, as one of the panelist points out, just encourages more of this, and the next group of people who confront public figures may not be as physically restrained. - mig

[2021-07-29 15:51:30] - Maybe there is more to the video that I havent' seen?  Does he follow him out to his car?  Or around the store for an extended time?  I don't think telling him he is the worst person for less than 100 seconds amounts to a standard of harassment to me.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:47:13] - As a super basic example that I think is probably what is driving this video in question is Tucker actively trying to prevent people from getting the covid vaccine which just seems to be objectively making the world a worse place and isn't political and demonstrably gets people killed.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:45:46] - -Daniel

[2021-07-29 15:36:39] - Daniel: So to me, yeah, he's "allowed" to do this, but I think it's a real asshole thing to do and condemn him doing it and I hope others would also condemn this idea of normalizing the harassment of people that you disagree with politically when they're just out at a store with their family. -Paul

[2021-07-29 15:35:11] - Daniel: "doesn't seem unallowable" To me, it's not really an issue of what is allowable or not. As somebody said, there's a first amendment right. To me, it's about if it's a good thing to do or not. I mean, the Nazis had a right to march in Skokie but that doesn't make it a good thing. -Paul

[2021-07-29 14:31:46] - But randomly seeing Tucker in the store and being like oh man I'm taking this opportunity to tell this guy what a POS he is.  /shrug.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 14:31:03] - mig: I think a line would be actively seeking out Tucker to talk to him vs running into him at the store randomly.    Like if boyo had been outside Tuckers house to tell him he was the worst ever then ambushed would feel entirely accurate and would be not acceptable and feel much more dangerous.  -Daniel

[2021-07-29 14:28:09] - mig: I think I'm marginally more on the Ana side.  I think it probably comes down to definitions of things and where the line is.  If the guy punched Tucker that would be bad.  Telling him he is the worst person might be an overstatement but doesn't seem unallowable either.  They used the word "ambushed" and "accosted" and I don't think I would use  either of those words to describe it.  -Daniel

[2021-07-28 16:35:54] - daniel: Heh, yeah, I definitely got less interested when I heard that it has to be bought through the treasury directly. Not at all surprised it's a pain in the ass. -Paul

[2021-07-28 15:51:19] - She definitely falls into the risk averse category.  -Daniel

[2021-07-28 15:51:07] - a: Less risk.  Its for a cash  cushion for savings to help us  (Andrea) feel more comfortable with life.  -Daniel

[2021-07-28 15:43:47] - Daniel: why not vbtlx?  Just curious. Even if you want ibonds I feel like vanguard has some plans that hold fed bonds . . . ?  ~a

[2021-07-28 15:04:47] - The treasury direct website was annoying to me though.  When you log in you can't type your password.  Blew my mind.  -Daniel

[2021-07-28 14:56:45] - Paul: I actually bond I-bonds this week.  -Daniel

[2021-07-27 13:30:34] - a: Oh in my head you were back this week.  Travel safe then!  -Daniel

[2021-07-27 03:25:04] - Daniel: nope, sorry, im out of town until next week.  ~a

[2021-07-27 01:08:51] - a: sc2 now?  -Daniel

[2021-07-26 20:18:07] - still really seems like you should find a CPA Paul  -Daniel

[2021-07-16 18:46:57] - daniel:  my parents weren't poor, but also not very well off, but they put both me and my sister through private school (I would have gone to a private school if i didn't make it into TJ).  It's important to note that not all private schools are Sidwell Friends. - mig

[2021-07-16 18:19:04] - Daniel: But if you look at something like higher education, I think you can see stuff like lambda school which has the potential of providing a good education to anybody, even those who don't have money for a huge tuition. -Paul

[2021-07-16 18:18:13] - Daniel: It's hard to say because the system we have now is a weird combination, right? We have public schools and private schools. Because public schools already exist to fill the void of "free schooling", there really isn't a market for private schools there. -Paul

[2021-07-16 18:03:25] - Paul: But do most kids have tons of money to pay for private school?  Capitalism ending up with a better school is not the same as Capatilism ending up with a better school SYSTEM for all kids.  -Daniel

[2021-07-16 17:24:13] - daniel:  mostly biden dunking on socialism I thought was a pretty big deal, but even the dunking on communism is notable.  Hearing a democrat or anyone left leaning person denouncing communism in pretty frank terms is rare. - mig

[2021-07-16 17:21:52] - Daniel: "However I'm not sure that capitalism is going to make schools better for most kids" I am. But that's not even the point I am trying to make here. I'm just making the observation the for Education: Government involvement = High and Satisfaction / Efficiency = Low. I think the fact that so many people pay tons of money for private school (over free school) speaks volumes. -Paul

[2021-07-16 17:13:24] - paul: For schools I don't think people are against improving them or making them better.  However I'm not sure that capitalism is going to make schools better for most kids.  And I think things like food insecurity which capitalism definitely doesn't address has shown to have a big impact and argues for more socialism (free / subsidized meals) not less?  -Daniel

[2021-07-16 15:58:44] - paul:  no wait, i think you misunderstood (or i did).  daniel and i mostly agree on education?  we agree that its not fucked.  i said "public education isn't fucked" and he said "public education has turned out pretty great on the whole compared to back in the day".  aren't those the same or similar?  ~a

[2021-07-16 14:38:29] - paul:  yeah, i'm with daniel.  your examples are healthcare and public education:  healthcare isn't socialist, and public education isn't fucked.  our public education system is very average.  average for "developed countries", and above average for worldwide.  i'm not socialist:  the means of production/distribution/etc should generally not be owned by the community, but i sometimes wonder how we could make healthcare better.  ~a

[2021-07-16 14:33:25] - Paul: I don't think socialism is the thing thats leading to healthcare and education being screwed up parts of our economy.  I think them being the battlegrounds of politics are what make them screwed up.  Also for education I think public education has turned out pretty great on the whole compared to back in the day when there wasn't public schooling though I'm certainly not an expert on the topic.  -Daniel

[2021-07-16 14:28:21] - Daniel: To me, the best argument I can make against socialism in certain aspects of the economy is to point out the efficiencies of the "non-socialist" parts versus the "socialist" parts. What areas are the most socialized? Healthcare. Education. What sectors of our economy are the most screwed up? I would say healthcare and education are up there. -Paul

[2021-07-16 14:26:41] - Daniel: "Does Bernie even want full socialism?" I honestly don't know. You would have to ask him. I am pretty sure he embraces the "socialist" moniker, though (as does AOC and others). -Paul

[2021-07-16 14:00:36] - Should we have socialism for blenders? Or toaster ovens?  No.  Should we have socialism for healthcare?  Probably.  I'm sure there is room to debate both those positions honestly but the point being I think I can hold them without wanting the US to be a "socialist" country.  -Daniel

[2021-07-16 13:59:17] - I'm just not sure that the invisible hand / laissez faire always is great for everywhere system / part of our economy.  -Daniel

[2021-07-16 13:58:40] - I think I am pro some socialist policies but I wouldn't label myself as a "socialist" or wanting our overall system to be socialism.  Does Bernie even want full socialism?  -Daniel.

[2021-07-16 13:37:00] - mig: The part about socialism or him calling out communism?  -Daniel

[2021-07-15 16:18:57] - Paul: agreed. -Daniel

[2021-07-15 16:12:30] - Daniel: I think we come to the same conclusion using similar (but slightly different) reasons. I agree there can be a time and a place for the filibuster and I think its a good thing for there to be a tool where a passionate minority can force a majority to get a larger majority to get something passed. -Paul

[2021-07-15 15:54:21] - Pro democracy is a good principle but I don't know that it is the best principle.  So then some other principle could trump it by definition.  Or you could think that the democratic process is working to limit democracy for others so then one could still see themselves as pro democracy even while  filibustering.    /shrug.  I thought about that conversation more and decided it was more complicated in my head than originally.  -Daniel

[2021-07-15 15:52:15] - a: I think that has to be up to people to determine.  Like when a solider is supposed to reject orders.  Its not really a good situation.  I'm not  sure I like the precedent either but I also don't think there is  really a better answer since its basically a morality type question and there is only what each person decides based on their conscience.  -Daniel

[2021-07-15 15:43:09] - daniel:  "sometimes there are things or times where the principle of the matter is more important than respecting the democratic process"  i'm not sure i like this precedent because of what it'll mean.  i think you're arguing that its ok to ignore democracy when its for the greater good?  but who decides what is the greater good?  what if i override democracy while *enacting* a ridiculous-law instead of *rejecting* a ridiculous-law?  ~a

[2021-07-15 15:31:06] - And if a more realistic example was if you are black you can't vote also being something where we can agree that we should probably be rejecting the democratic process that led to that then again its questions of degree.  Where the laws that TX lawmakers aren't that but if you feel they are close enough in principle that they need to break quorum to reject them then I can see where that is coming from.  -Daniel

[2021-07-15 15:29:30] - So if we can agree that sometimes there are things or times where the principle of the matter is more important than respecting the democratic process then it becomes a question of what those things / times are?  -Daniel

[2021-07-15 15:28:20] - Paul: I guess as a return to the filibuster conversation, I think its inherently undemocratic but then I think the question becomes at what point do competing principles outweigh that?  Like as the extreme example if TX lawmakers wanted to pass a law to kill all Daniel's then rejecting that law might be more important than being pro democratic process.  -Daniel

[2021-07-15 14:11:18] - But yeah those incentives are basically why Fox News exists (and all cable news essentially?).  People started to min max what got viewers / clicks and it wasn't reasoned middle of the road news.  Its OUTRAGE and WTF IS THE OTHER PARTY DOING NOW etc. -Daniel

[2021-07-15 14:10:05] - Important? Almost certainly.  More likely to get clicks?  Maybe not.    Which is probably the problem you are referring to.  -Daniel

[2021-07-14 16:39:53] - daniel:  ah, interesting!  i hadn't considered that.  "ETFs rarely buy or sell stock for cash".  ~a

[2021-07-14 16:37:46] - a: https://www.fool.com/investing/how-to-invest/etfs/etf-vs-index-fund/ say not really a big tax difference and that ETF's have edge there too.  -Daniel

[2021-07-14 16:28:21] - daniel:  "There might be a tax difference somehow"  do you have details on this?  i'm in the dark about what tax differences there could be.  ~a

[2021-07-14 16:13:49] - daniel:  "Availability in 401ks"  true.  my fidelty 401k will let me buy etfs, but my ascensus 401k won't.  i like your points, they are all very true, but seeming pretty minor:  if given the choice . . . if there's an option, i feel like i'll always want the etf.  ~a

[2021-07-14 16:11:47] - daniel:  "commission fees"  true, but like you said, outdated.  commission fees were always super low though, so not only is this outdated it also seems minor.  "Partial shares" true.  you can sometimes have partial shares.  i have partial shares of some etfs, but i think they only let me buy partial shares when reinvesting dividends?  this seems pretty minor too.  ~a

[2021-07-14 16:09:37] - Daniel: Yeah, I just found myself going, "Huh?" way too often because so many things made so little sense even just inside the movie itself. So many instances where love and hatred seemed to be way too interchangeable.  -Paul

[2021-07-14 16:01:43] - Availability in 401ks?  I don't think ETF's are available to most people inside their 401ks.  Thats not entirely a fund vs etf thing though more just a 401k management thing. -Daniel

[2021-07-14 16:00:23] - a: Also there used to be mutual funds for more things than ETFs for things?  Again that has probably shifted over time so is probably less relevant.  -Daniel

[2021-07-14 16:00:13] - Daniel: fuck i forgot the worst one!  Frequent trading rules!  Most mutual funds won't let you buy a fund if you've sold any shares in the past 30 damn days!  Not so for etfs.  ~a

[2021-07-14 15:59:18] - a: I think when there used to be commission fees on trades all over the place that was a mark against etf's but those are mostly gone now.  Partial shares are probably an answer (the answer?) in that you can always but 200$ bucks of a mutual fund but you have to buy etf's in whole shares (that I'm aware of).    There might be a tax difference somehow but I'm not sure?  -Daniel

[2021-07-14 15:53:11] - daniel:  mutual funds or etfs?  bad things about mutual funds:  their price only updates once per day, you can only buy or sell them at one time at the very end of the day, their expense ratio is always HIGHER than etfs for the same products.  bad things about etfs:  *sometimes* there is markup (but it's almost always small and sometimes its negative).  why would i ever buy mutual funds if the same etf, with a lower expense ratio exists?  ~a

[2021-07-14 15:53:03] - daniel:  sorry if we already talked about this, but i don't remember what you said . . . ~a

[2021-07-14 15:50:20] - Paul: I was also disappointed - I hoped for more.  I think they made it to crazy for a someone who be more batman? and less superman?  If that makes sense.  I also laughed at the movie in a bad way more than any other MCU movie I think.  -Daniel

[2021-07-14 14:05:36] - Daniel: I saw it. I was disappointed. Way too many unanswered questions and plot points that made no sense. Thought they bizarrely tried to paint certain characters as horrible people and also sympathetic comic relief. -Paul

[2021-07-14 14:03:55] - Daniel: I hope so too, but I suspect we have different opinions on the politicians we're thinking of. -Paul

[2021-07-14 13:50:37] - Who's been able to see Black Widow yet?  Anyone have thoughts?  -Daniel

[2021-07-14 13:39:54] - a: I hope that at some point people stop voting for the politicians that try to create truly fucked laws.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 21:51:37] - daniel:  i guess we just have to hope that the truly fucked laws are rendered unconstitutional.  ~a

[2021-07-13 21:50:02] - daniel:  agreed.  i'm not sure the mental gymnastics required to argue for having fewer people vote, or arguing about making voting harder.  but sometimes the ends don't justify the means?  filibustering and forcing a non-quorum are fairly petty, and probably borderline illegal/immoral.  i think you only resort to that shit when you've truly lost the fight.  ~a

[2021-07-13 19:02:26] - I would also say that there are definitely D politicos (as well as all parties) that are also just interested in engineering wins rather than trying to actually represent the people.  However I think D's are more open to neutral party district allocation committees / algorithms etc.  So not perfect, but in my head better.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 19:00:29] - Paul: re: uncharitable to R's.  Most definitely its uncharitable but also I'm not sure its wrong.  I don't think R's are interested in accurately representing the will of a .majority of the people.  I think they are interested in engineering R's wins.  100% if Dan Patrick could just set the election results of TX he would.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 19:00:23] - Paul: re: uncharitable to R's.  Most definitely its uncharitable but also I'm not sure its wrong.  I don't think R's are interested in accurately representing the will of a .majority of the people.  I think they are interested in engineering R's wins.  100% if Dan Patrick could just set the election results of TX he would.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 19:00:20] - Paul: re: uncharitable to R's.  Most definitely its uncharitable but also I'm not sure its wrong.  I don't think R's are interested in accurately representing the will of a .majority of the people.  I think they are interested in engineering R's wins.  100% if Dan Patrick could just set the election results of TX he would.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 18:57:10] - Paul: I support the goals this "filibuster" is working to accomplish but I think any filibuster is inherently undemocratic cause yeah its whole point is to block the majority.  I don't know that I would say I support quorum busting / filibuster in general though.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 16:48:35] - Daniel: Also, is it fair to say that your response boils down to: Since it's Democrats doing it I support it but if Republicans do it in the future I will think it's wrong. -Paul

[2021-07-13 16:47:42] - Daniel: "I think R's would literally change the rules to only one voter gets to vote in the whole state as long as that one voter is the head of the republican party if they could" You don't think that's being a tiny bit uncharitable? Not to mention a bit hyperbolic in response to this specific situation? -Paul

[2021-07-13 15:11:09] - like a weird equivalent* to a filibuster.  So its probably not an effective tool for enacting the will of the people?  However given that I think R's would literally change the rules to only one voter gets to vote in the whole state as long as that one voter is the head of the republican party if they could I probably support it in this particular case?  But I can easily imagine a future where I wouldn't.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 15:09:01] - Paul: /shrug - seems like a weird filibuster.  I imagine at some point R's will do it too if they ever lose the majority here in TX.  -Daniel

[2021-07-13 13:51:13] - Daniel: "You need to find an  accountant" Yeah, I do sometimes wonder if I should try to find a fee-only (I think that's the term?) CPA or something which could help me out with some stuff. -Paul

[2021-07-13 13:44:10] - Paul: You need to find an  accountant  -Daniel

[2021-07-12 16:38:25] - Daniel: A Honda Odyssey (which we already own) can apparently tow 3,500 lbs, which isn't a ton, but seems to be enough for a smaller trailer. Of course, we don't have a trailer hitch right now. -Paul

[2021-07-12 15:40:41] - Also definitely not an expert though and could be wildly wrong based on the sample size of that expo.  -Daniel

[2021-07-12 15:40:08] - a: yeah motorhome / motorcoach vs trailer was what I meant.  From my one experience going to the expo for fun it looked like it was cheaper to get a trailer type rv + nice truck than motor coach style.  Maybe that doesn't work as well for a family though?  But for a couple would work I think.  -Daniel

[2021-07-12 14:54:36] - daniel:  "self driving".  what does self driving mean in this context?  is that like the difference between a "motorcoach" vs a trailer?  links.  if you guys saw nomadland, i feel like all of them just lived in vans . . . i know a few of the scenes from that movie were real people.  you guys should see nomadland, its an ok movie on a similar subject.  i'd probably just buy a van.  ~a

[2021-07-12 14:48:08] - daniel:  same question, if andrea discussed it with you.  ~a

[2021-07-12 13:33:14] - Andrea read White Fragility.  She said it was good / interesting.  -Daniel

[2021-07-09 18:54:23] - Paul: Hard to be fuel efficient and able to tow an additional 10k pounds. And people do love their fuel efficiency.    -Daniel

[2021-07-09 18:19:00] - Daniel: Yeah, I am a little disappointed that the Odyssey (and Teslas) don't seem to be able to tow more than like 3,500 pounds, which limits what could be towed. Seems like a pick-up is required for anything sizeable. -Paul

[2021-07-09 16:33:33] - Paul: We went to an RV expo here in San Antonio the year before the pandemic.  It was fun to just walk around look at all the craziness.  I think Andrea's dad recommended not getting a self driving kind cause they just made things more complex.  He said a nice pickup and a good towing RV was better / easier.  -Daniel

[2021-07-08 20:54:13] - Daniel: If you measure a bet in 2013 by value of the underlying asset in 2021 prices... then almost certainly. -Paul

[2021-07-08 20:51:32] - Paul: Does that make it your biggest USD bet then?  -Daniel

[2021-07-06 13:38:17] - a: "by just playing the numbers" What do you mean by this? What numbers are you playing? Also, congrats! There's a long way to go, but it's looking good for you (and Daniel) this year. -Paul

[2021-07-03 19:55:15] - a: Yeah, and it seemed like you and Daniel were arguing it. -Paul

[2021-07-01 17:58:21] - Daniel: Also, agreed on city roads being a different beast, but I think city roads are probably still the minority? Suburban roads and highways and other roads still seem to be mostly car focused with maybe the occasional bike lane thrown in. Even in those cases, though, I don't think things like stop lights and speed limits are geared towards bikes. -Paul

[2021-07-01 17:56:59] - Daniel: "I'm generally worried about them suddenly falling over or something and me hitting them on accident" Same here. I have this same horrible vision of them suddenly and inexplicably falling over as I pass them and me running them over, so whenever possible, I try to give them a ton of room. -Paul

[2021-07-01 17:25:57] - Back to the original discussion I don't often switch lanes entirely when going around bikers but I will often 'drift' over into the other lane (even over double yellow) if there is no other traffic.  I'm generally worried about them suddenly falling over or something and me hitting them on accident.  Which probably isn't rational but is my fear driving by them.  -Daniel

[2021-07-01 17:24:03] - paul: depends on the road and I would still say that cars are the primary use case for roads still but 'exclusively designed for cars' still seemed like a strong statement.  Highways / freeways yes.  Roads in DC with the set off bike lanes and stuff, no.  Bike lanes are becoming more and more common here in SA and I've seen at least one spot where there is a stop light here just for bikes.  -Daniel

[2021-07-01 17:10:02] - Daniel: "seems less and less true" I probably agree with this, but what percent would you say right now are roads designed for cars? 70%? 80%? I mean, the lanes are car widths, the speed limits are for cars. I get that we're doing more things like adding bike lanes but it still seems like the vast majority of road usage is by cars. -Paul

[2021-07-01 14:21:14] - agreed, daniel.  i was thinking the same thing.  car drivers have slowly returned to be but one road user. it doesn't need to be my debate. a debate is improved by a third, different, voice. otherwise it becomes paul's and my intransigent positions i'm sure, daniel, i've said some stupid bike shit that you disagree with! i feel like last night, you were signaling that paul was being (too?) generous in discussing bike stuff with me.  ~a

[2021-07-01 14:07:13] - This is more Adrians debate but "roads today are pretty much exclusively designed for cars" seems less and less true.  I think there was a period it was probably mostly true but that does seem to be changing even down here in TX.  -Daniel

[2021-06-30 19:02:00] - daniel:  major yikes since Eric Adams has already made accusations of foul play over the results. - mig

[2021-06-30 19:00:55] - mig: Oops indeed.  I"m glad in my life I've never worked on something so high profile that people would tweet about the bugs I made!  Yikes though.  -Daniel

[2021-06-28 16:35:58] - daniel:  i know you're partly tongue-in-cheek, but sensationalizing the news isn't always good for society.  ~a

[2021-06-28 16:32:33] - People having car accidents is old news.  Computers having car accidents is new news!  -Daniel

[2021-06-22 16:16:55] - Daniel: "You can get good returns without having to figure out which stocks are good or stressing about being wrong" On this, we 100% agree. I think index funds definitely have their place and most people should probably use them instead of picking stocks. It's a lot less work and less of a chance of screwing things up. -Paul

[2021-06-22 16:05:09] - a: Stocks are crazy!  Winning / beating Paul would be fun but I think my steady 8-10% returns for my indexes is a victory on some level itself.  You can get good returns without having to figure out which stocks are good or stressing about being wrong.  -Daniel

[2021-06-22 15:53:02] - never!  daniel should be nervous though.  it almost seemed like you had conceded to losing to daniel in 2021, so its fun to see you back beating daniel again, already.  ~a

[2021-06-22 14:51:02] - sorry no idea on the exact numbers* -Daniel

[2021-06-22 14:50:51] - paul: Yeah I was just making up an example for the idea about restricting hours / locations.  No idea but I think its the idea of being x minutes away  vs y (where  y is lower than x) and polls being open m hours instead of n etc.  -Daniel

[2021-06-22 14:41:20] - Daniel: "If you have shift work that is hourly being 30 minutes from the nearest polling place that doesn't open till 8am that is harder to vote than if you are 10 minutes away and it opens at 7am." https://www.elections.virginia.gov/registration/election-voter-faq/ According to this, polls are open for 13 hours. That seems like enough time for almost all workers, no? -Paul

[2021-06-22 14:35:20] - daniel:  I think that's been the thing I view as far more important in terms of making it easier to vote.  Fighting over voter ID requirements has always been an absurd battle in my eyes. - mig

[2021-06-22 14:32:16] - If you have shift work that is hourly being 30 minutes from the nearest polling place that doesn't open till 8am that is harder to vote than if you are 10 minutes away and it opens at 7am.  -Daniel

[2021-06-22 14:31:48] - Paul: I'm not a voting rights expert but I think generally it falls into three categories that I'm aware of.  Number / Location of voting locations which impacts how easy / long it takes to get to a polling place.  Hours of polling place.  Requirements for verification at polling place.  -Daniel

[2021-06-21 21:41:08] - daniel:  replied.  ~a

[2021-06-21 21:01:04] - Daniel: I'm really tired.   ~a

[2021-06-21 19:21:03] - a: Back to replying to the email?    -Daniel

[2021-06-21 18:36:58] - daniel:  i'm back, baby!  ~a

[2021-06-21 18:36:43] - a: You still out on SC2?  (also if anyone else wants in on sc2 let me know!)  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 20:57:36] - a: We do.  I thought the thing was tested but it was tested in the wrong spot.  So the tests passed and in my head we were good.  Alas, we were not.  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 20:55:27] - daniel:  do you have CI and unit tests?  i feel like these two in close-conjunction catch a lot of mistakes.  if the unit tests don't pass, then it won't build, and nobody gets to see it!    ~a

[2021-06-17 20:54:20] - mmm always a fun moment when  you realize something is broken and its your fault and you should have caught the problem before it made its way to others.  Woo!  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 18:35:15] - daniel:  mixing my potential future bonds into the mix, i've been using 4.4%.  ~a

[2021-06-17 18:23:23] - daniel:  i'm guessing you have at least 15% bonds.  so probably want to use between 5 and 6?    ~a

[2021-06-17 18:13:28] - daniel:  yeah, ok, 6.3 and 6.5 are both between 6 and 7.  so, i think we're pretty close to each-other.  the differences between 6 and 7 might be big, but also, the "real" answer might not even be in between those numbers.  ~a

[2021-06-17 18:11:29] - I could retire in 3 years if I get a steady 25% return!  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 18:10:59] - a: I normally use between 6 and 7 for my assumed rate of return.  But I've played around with it and looked all kinds of crazy numbers.  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 18:10:14] - I use nper to figure out how long it will take me to get to my target at my current savings level.  I figure out my target by taking my safe withdrawal rate and an estimate spending level to figure out how much I need.  So then I can play around with spending levels, safe withdrawal rate, monthly savings and see how it affects time to retire.  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 15:41:39] - daniel:  yes 6.3% is actually what i've been using for 100% stocks.  i agree, its up for discussion.  have you used a different value for 100% stocks?  ~a

[2021-06-17 15:28:47] - a: 6.5 is your assumed rate of  return after inflation?  Its a fun number to play around with cause it has a very strong impact.  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 15:01:46] - if you have any bonds (for daniel i guess), make sure you use a number lower than 6.5%.  ~a

[2021-06-17 14:40:31] - a: I use it in my spreadsheet I have for all my money stuff.  Handy indeed!  -Daniel

[2021-06-17 14:22:31] - daniel/aaron:  the biggest non-"it depends" i've seen in r/FI is the 4% rule (liquid accounts *at* retirement and multiply by 4%, and that can be your spendingWithTaxesAdjustedForInflation for 30+ years.  you cannot adjust this number in retirement if your accounts balances go up).  *some* people don't like that number and opt for a lower (safer) one.  ~a

[2021-06-17 14:05:13] - yeah i've been using daniel's link too ( r/financialindependence ).  ~a

[2021-06-17 13:56:51] - aaron: If you get bored and want to work on my side hustle work let me know!    -Daniel

[2021-06-17 13:49:20] - aaron: oo nice!  also https://www.reddit.com/r/financialindependence/ if you haven't seen that.  Though there definitely is a lot of "it depends" in financial planning.  -Daniel

[2021-06-16 21:03:45] - Paul's goal.  -Daniel

[2021-06-16 20:26:30] - daniel:  which?  paul's goal or my spending?  ~a

[2021-06-16 19:17:33] - Mine are all in that ballpark and I'm planning on retiring early.  Though as stated spending will play a big part in that.  -Daniel

[2021-06-16 15:54:13] - Also pretty sure my mortgage won't be paid off pre retirement.  -Daniel

[2021-06-16 15:52:46] - Paul: I would definitely label my retirement spending amount as guestimation.  I can look at our current monthly spending and see which things will still directly translate (utilities / groceries/ newspaper) and which won't (daycare / babysitting) but it will definitely be refined over time and try to get better as we get closer to actually trying to retire.  -Daniel

[2021-06-15 19:38:27] - paul/mig:  daniel mentioned he has a financial planner ( https://www.garrettplanningnetwork.com/ ) . . . do you guys have a financial planner?  ~a

[2021-06-15 17:31:05] - Nuance is hard.  People like answers, nuance doesn't always give that.  I realize that is somewhat the point, but the same way amazon ekes out all the efficiencies it can and websites wants clicks news wants viewers and if they have determined that nuance doesn't give viewers then I'm not sure there is a great answer.  -Daniel

[2021-06-14 18:17:32] - a: sc2? -Daniel

[2021-06-14 14:01:30] - Paul: Yeah my guess is not all time great.  I guess the chance at that would be somehow if the filibuster got removed and a bunch of stuff got passed that 50 years later or something everyone decides they love and so retroactively everyone thinks of Biden as some great moment in history or something.  But I think much more likely is just like a normal president?  Not great, not terrible.  -Daniel

[2021-06-09 16:45:44] - daniel:  yeah if i'm feeling sleepy, i'll just sleep.  don't wait for me if i'm not there at start time.  thanks!  ~a

[2021-06-09 16:43:17] - a: Also hope you feel better!  Downside to getting back out in the world and near other people.  Boo germs.  -Daniel

[2021-06-09 16:42:57] - a: if you are sick you don't have to - was just checking.  -Daniel

[2021-06-09 14:43:47] - a: You doing sc2 tonight?  -Daniel

[2021-06-09 14:43:34] - Paul: think mine has skills then experience then education but its been awhile since I've had to use mine.  -Daniel

[2021-06-07 19:40:12] - Daniel: Watching some of the Garrus romance scenes makes me really regret never playing FemShep. Garrus is the ultimate best bud companion for a male Shepard, but I have to admit that he's a great romantic interest as well. I get the appeal of Tali a bit, but she always seemed a little too much like a little sister to me. -Paul

[2021-06-07 19:15:43] - paul: skimming through the progress bar I think I would move garrus up as he is one of the few all three game options.  Tali / Garrus / Liara I think are the default top three because they are available across all three games.  Any other arc automatically feels lesser to me.  -Daniel

[2021-06-07 19:13:15] - paul: 48 minutes!  -Daniel

[2021-06-04 19:29:34] - a: I don't - haven't looked at something like that before.  -Daniel

[2021-06-04 18:41:21] - paul/daniel:  do you guys know of any public json (or xml/yaml) file formats for storing financial information (transactions, holdings, assets, liabilities, accounts)?  i'm looking for something like this or this, but like common to multiple systems?  something like qif, but . . . more expressive / general?  ~a

[2021-06-04 17:42:50] - a: Lol yeah that seems like a questionable ad.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 19:37:07] - daniel:  i think i saw stuff like "i can't spend money in my 401k until i'm 59.5" and "I'm not sure how more 401k helps me spend today" and was trying to argue against these things that are probably true for you, but wrong in general?  ~a

[2021-06-03 19:31:19] - daniel:  i don't plan on using sepp.  i was maybe just arguing the "math optimal way"?  ~a

[2021-06-03 19:30:42] - a: I think its fair that it might not be the math optimal way.  But its also not super time consuming where I have to figure out a sepp and deal with that so maybe its the lazy right thing?  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 19:30:09] - daniel:  something like 99% of my bitcoin transactions have been in taxable accounts.  ~a

[2021-06-03 19:29:28] - daniel:  i'm sure you're doing the right thing.  maybe i didn't add enough qualifiers.  there are a shit-ton of situations where having more money in a taxable account is a good thing.  ~a

[2021-06-03 19:27:35] - a: Right but outside of extremes I'm not sure I want to deal with a sepp to get 5k dollars.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 19:26:49] - daniel:  "I'm not sure how more 401k helps me spend today"  if i had a billion dollars in my 401k and $0 in my taxable, i'd start a sepp today.  ~a

[2021-06-03 19:26:37] - My taxable (non gambling money) is to bridge early retirement to 401k time.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 19:26:10] - a: I don't think thats true for me.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 19:25:50] - daniel:  more 401k creates less of a need for taxable.  ~a

[2021-06-03 19:25:19] - The assumption being that more 401k creates extra taxable?  But I'm not sure if that is true if the point of the taxable is to bridge time until you get to your 401k.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 19:24:48] - a: If there isn't extra money in your taxable bucket then I'm not sure having more money in your 401k still helps spend money today?  I get there are hoops you can jump through to spend 401k money today and that is where I wondered if those were better or worse than short term gains but outside of that I'm not sure how more 401k helps me spend today.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 18:27:49] - daniel:  "I'm not sure for me that having more $ in 401k means I need less in my taxable"  i guess this touches on my overall argument:  that it does.  having more money in your 401k means you need less in your taxable.  less than *what* might be the decision maker i think?  its hard (or impossible) to know how much money you'll need in either bucket.  ~a

[2021-06-03 18:23:52] - daniel:  and regarding the overall point:  "Infinite money in my 401k doesn't give me more money to spend now though"  completely ignores all the other numerous & probable situations you can find yourself in:  all of those situations where you don't have zero money in either bucket.  ~a

[2021-06-03 18:22:22] - daniel:  i disagree with your overall point, and disagree with you on the details.  you can get to your 401k before you're 59.5 using, like a bunch of methods, not even counting ways with penalties.  there's sepp, there's roth rollover ladder, there's 401k loan, there's hardship withdrawal, and i think there's a first time home buyer withdrawal (but i forget what the last one is called).  and those five are just off the top of my head.  ~a

[2021-06-03 18:16:36] - I guess the thing to look at would be whats the tax hit for withdrawing some amount of money from say a roth account early and is that less than short term capital gains?  I don't know the answer to that off hand.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 18:16:01] - a: Infinite money in my 401k doesn't give me more money to spend now though.  Money is fungible but between buckets its not?  I can't spend money in my 401k until I'm 59.5.  I think the assumption is that if I have more in my 401k then I need less in my taxable account thus can blow that money on a swank tv or w/e?  But I'm not sure for me that having more $ in 401k means I need less in my taxable.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 17:03:43] - daniel:  wellll, kinda?  if you ignore the whole psychology of it, you totally can.  if you do insanely well on the money you have in your 401k, then you don't have to rely as much on your taxable accounts.  worded differently, i'd far prefer to have $10 in my tax-shelter + $2 in my taxable, than $3 in each.  ~a

[2021-06-03 16:59:11] - a: I think its just that if I do well on a trade in a 401k I can't get that money to do something silly / fun for 10 more years.  If I do well on meme stocks now I can take out proceeds pay taxes and then buy a new 4k tv this year.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 16:50:00] - daniel:  yeah i get it.  there's a certain concept that i don't totally understand:  the psychology of money.  or, meta money?  where you're like . . . i sold my (insert fun thing) last year, and used that money to buy a (insert other fun thing) this year.  money is fungible, so it doesn't need to be that way, but psychology is weird especially when you're weighing other wants+needs (and sometimes including other people in the discussion) ~a

[2021-06-03 16:33:54] - a: Not all my trades are super short either.  I could see holding Ford for awhile to see how the EV pickup stuff shakes out.  Things like GME / AMC / etc I would be surprised if I held that for a year.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 16:32:06] - a: I totally get the point of that theory.  However if I'm to the point of gambling then I want to be able to blow my winnings on video games and tv's or some such if I get it right.  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 16:10:30] - paul:  maaaybe it should be!  it encourages a less volatile world.  but, i'd instead suggest daniel just make a small change:  do individual trades in an ira or 401k.  i make short-term individual trades on occasion:  rarely, i usually follow a more paul-like strategy.  but i always make them in a 401k or ira, so i pay 0% on each individual trade and pay taxes once, at a different time.  ~a

[2021-06-03 16:01:58] - a: Yeah I know.  Woo taxes?  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 15:57:29] - Daniel :"I don't think the cybertruck is going to be the EV of choice for most people who drive pickups" I think you could be right, however, I was also shocked by the number of Cybertruck pre-orders (around 1 million!? https://electrek.co/2021/05/25/tesla-cybertruck-reservations-1-million-electric-pickup-trucks/) -Paul

[2021-06-03 15:44:53] - daniel:  i'm sure you already know this, but might not be thinking about it right now:    you are making strictly short-term trades.  this is taxed very harshly.  compared to making these trades in an ira/401k, you're paying something like like +25% on the gains of your trades (this is the marginal rate, and assumes a lot about your situation, but is fine for a rule-of-thumb).  ~a

[2021-06-03 15:31:49] - paul/daniel:  i also think the cybertruck won't catch on (even though i hold tsla, and have zero shares of f).  i agree that nobody knows for sure.  ~a

[2021-06-03 15:06:21] - Paul: I don't think the cybertruck is going to be the EV of choice for most people who drive pickups.  However I suppose that will be figured out in the future!  -Daniel

[2021-06-03 14:26:12] - Daniel: Not yet, but I believe the Cybertruck is supposed to come out before Ford's electric truck. -Paul

[2021-06-03 13:44:07] - Paul: Does Tesla have any market share when it comes to pickups? Pickups are a pretty big deal.  Ford doesn't have to win the EV market for sedans to still be successful. -Daniel

[2021-06-02 18:16:08] - Ford! Though its less crazy.  I think electric pickups will be good for it.  We'll see~  -Daniel

[2021-06-02 17:30:15] - Sadly I didn't hold it till now I sold at like 27.  /shrug  Crazy stocks go crazy but I made a bit off it at least.  -Daniel

[2021-06-02 17:03:23] - Daniel: You own AMC? -Paul

[2021-06-02 16:04:48] - a: Small rando brag but in SC2 last night Paul, Mark, and I went like 6-0 against people playing 3v3.  It was a good run.    -Daniel

[2021-05-28 21:10:18] - mig: I don't think that is anywhere in the article?  Implied or otherwise?  It says that facebook is allowing it and someone else that they should be careful that hate isn't monetized.  So I think your conclusion that we can't talk about it seems a stretch.  -Daniel

[2021-05-27 14:04:06] - daniel:  sure, it's occasionally been reported on, but not nearly to the extent had this been an R administration.  Trump admin facilities got wall to wall 24/7 coverage, and press or congressional access to those facilities weren't denied that I know of.  I can only imagine the firestorm if they were at the time.  But after the initial reporting, it's been pretty much silence. - mig

[2021-05-26 17:38:48] - its being reported on.  (it being access).  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 18:14:22] - Daniel: Any concerns that VFFVX might have too conservative a mix of stocks / bonds for somebody who I assume is planning on retiring early? -Paul

[2021-05-25 17:50:18] - Paul: Yeah everyone asks about the voice  It wasn't 100% the same but its hard to tell going from phone to laptop mic.  I mean how different do we all sound in sc2 depending on which mic / mic settings are being used?  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 17:48:11] - Daniel: That's incredible. Did they sound like the same person? I've heard rumors of similar-ish things where parents would cheat for their newly graduated kids... -Paul

[2021-05-25 17:46:42] - Paul: Definitely same candidate - we only had one in the pipeline though  now 0.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 17:24:48] - Daniel: Re: Interview. And you're sure you didn't get the person mixed up with somebody else? I'm with Adrian. It's crazy somebody thought that might work. -Paul

[2021-05-25 16:52:56] - a: I'm going to have to go figure out cause I'm not sure but I think VFFVX might be my number 1?  Thats a guess before I figure it out.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:51:06] - a: You work for the cooler parts maybe?  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:45:36] - paul/daniel/etc:  your top 5 ticker symbols by holdings INCLUDING non-individual portfolio and retirement portfolio and crypto.  go!  ~a

[2021-05-25 16:35:18] - i also work for the gov, daniel.    ~a

[2021-05-25 16:34:44] - Oooo the cloud!!!  (We are trying to get our customer to start using cloud)  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:33:59] - a: I just work for the gov where we use tech from 10 years ago like its new.    -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:33:12] - daniel:  reminder that kafka was released 10 years ago.  ~a

[2021-05-25 16:33:09] - a: But I get the point of it and it seems solid.  Some day I think our app will use it to be that cool but we are a new app so currently are small and self contained.  So we just pass messages to ourselves.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:32:08] - a: ha - we currently aren't that cool with it yet but my boss wants to be that cool so he made us start using it now so he can try to say how cool we are for using it  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:27:11] - Yeah I guess if you do get hired its harder to fire you?  Fake it till you make it extreme version?  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:24:30] - a: So yeah apparently phone interviews are weak interview security I guess?  Naive me apparently.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:24:05] - a: I had a phone interview with the candidate last Thursday that went pretty well, they were able to talk about a lot of the tech and get into some details.  Boss scheduled a video call for today earlier today with the person and asked similar questions and answers suddenly were terrible.  Like last week had a whole multi minute convo about Kafka and how it works.  Today was like I don't know that.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 16:18:35] - daniel:  wow!  i figured we mostly moved to video-interviews?  it'd def be harder to fake a video-interview i think.  how was he/she caught?  ~a

[2021-05-25 16:16:52] - I think my boss and I just busted someone for either cheating on an interview or having someone else do a phone interview for them.  Kind of sad / crazy that is a thing. -Daniel

[2021-05-25 14:31:18] - Daniel: I've barely heard anything about it in over a month, I think (and what I do hear comes from non-mainstream sources like Reason). I gave the mainstream media credit earlier for pressing the administration on this, but they seem to have gone silent now. -Paul

[2021-05-25 14:28:53] - mig: Maybe its because I'm in TX but I still hear about kids on the border and the progress they are trying to do.    They talk about trying to improve through rate for the minors and getting them out of gov facilities into better places.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 14:04:09] - daniel:  "it does seem like the kind of thing to get easily politicized"  maybe this is a rephrasing of paul's thought process?  part of me feels like he'd get me more on-board if he stopped using the argument that "the cdc lied"  ~a

[2021-05-25 14:00:04] - Paul: I wasn't aware the CDC was in charge of an eviction ban.  I can kinda see the logic for them wanting to keep people isolated in a pandemic to limit spread but it does seem like the kind of thing to get easily politicized.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 13:55:55] - Paul: Re masks for vaccinated people I thought it was because they were initially worried about vaccinated people still being carriers and once there was more evidence about transmission rates thats when the recommendations changed?  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 13:46:56] - Daniel: And some people have suggested it's because they were worried about unvaccinated people taking advantage and not masking up so they wanted to get lots of people vaccinated first, which would be another one of those cases of prioritizing manipulating the public over presenting factual evidence. -Paul

[2021-05-25 13:46:02] - Daniel: Which, honestly, I believed because Rand Paul has fallen a lot in my eyes recently and he's just an eye doctor and what would he know about infectious diseases? But now it turns out he was right? And I know lots of other people have been making this point for awhile, so why did it take so long for the CDC to change? -Paul

[2021-05-25 13:44:59] - Daniel: Also... I still think the reversal on masks for vaccinated people was weird. I remember Rand Paul had a few heated interactions with Fauci where he was saying that masks for vaccinated people shouldn't be necessary and Fauci disagreed. I never watched those interactions, but the news coverage was pretty unanimous that Rand Paul was being an ignorant anti-science jerk. -Paul

[2021-05-25 13:42:40] - Daniel: And there are just flat out weird things that I have trouble explaining like the pause in the J&J vaccine and that the CDC is somehow in charge of the eviction moratorium. -Paul

[2021-05-25 13:41:53] - Daniel: So, I'll admit I could be incorrectly confusing some organizations with others, but the reasons I say that are: (1) The lying about masks (2) The moving goalposts for herd immunity (3) The changing social distancing requirements after input from teacher's unions... -Paul

[2021-05-25 13:39:48] - Daniel: Same here. I just became a spectre. -Paul

[2021-05-25 13:39:39] - Paul: I think the part about CDC being imperfect is reasonable but then the end of your conclusion I think gets less reasonable " AND prioritizes manipulating the public more than giving out factual information".  I think inferring motivations is harder and I'm not sure where this comes from.  The mask thing?  Or  is there something else that supports this?  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 13:37:48] - Paul: Yeah I'm playing through ME:LE slowly.  -Daniel

[2021-05-25 13:30:25] - Daniel: Are you replaying ME:LE? -Paul

[2021-05-24 16:07:21] - Daniel: I'm not usually tempted by the renegade options. While there are a few interrupts I wish I could do, most seem like needlessly being a jerk. I am ALWAYS tempted by femshep, though. One of these days... -Paul

[2021-05-24 15:56:15] - Paul: I'm making myself do the renegade fem shep this time.  Though I had to learn there is a difference between renegade jerk and just saying no to a quest.  I don't want to just say no but I want to be as much of a jerk about it as I can.  -Daniel

[2021-05-19 19:41:17] - daniel:  yah, its a misnomer if i've ever seen it.  its technical just like "numerology" is about math  or "astrology" is about stars  or "scientology" is about science  or "christian science" is about science?  ~a

[2021-05-19 19:39:56] - Why is that technical in any way? -Daniel

[2021-05-19 19:39:46] - I don't understand why the word "technical" is used for "technical trading" since it seems very tea leaves-esqe.  I made a chart.  I drew some lines.  I will now draw major conclusions off my lines.  -Daniel

[2021-05-19 01:57:37] - Daniel: I've gotten a lot less interested in the NBA over the past few years, but I can't blame it much on my team sucking since most of the teams I root for have sucked for a good long time. Was curious if it was entirely Rockets related for you or maybe partially something else too. -Paul

[2021-05-19 01:56:08] - Daniel: I've gotten a little better at spreading my overlords some early in the game to try to scout early attacks or check for proxies. Didn't happen in that game, though. -Paul

[2021-05-18 17:58:04] - Paul: Mostly the Rockets.  Losing Morey / DAntonio / Harden is a short period was painful.  I'm not optimistic on our owner which leads to a bleak outlook.  -Daniel

[2021-05-18 17:46:46] - Daniel: Does the overlord go over the gold on the way to the opponent's base? -Paul

[2021-05-18 17:46:16] - Daniel: "I haven't paid a lot of attention to the NBA this year though" Because the Rockets haven't been good? Or for other reasons? -Paul

[2021-05-18 16:59:18] - paul: In theory putting the proxy at the gold would have it discovered way more of the time since that would be where the overlord would fly to go to  our base.  -Daniel

[2021-05-18 16:58:47] - a: What was frustrating was his overlord wasn't moving towards our bases which is the more "normal" way to send out your overlord.  It was just flying off to a corner which normally wouldn't give any info but somehow this time did.  UGH.  -Daniel

[2021-05-18 16:57:32] - mig: They had a play in game for for the 8th seed last  year and it was popular.  I didn't realize they were expanding it this year.  I haven't paid a lot of attention to the NBA this year though.  I think the point is excitement!  Trying to capture some of the one and done of NCAA / NFL playoffs.  -Daniel

[2021-05-18 16:51:42] - paul/daniel:  I'm baffled at what the NBA is doing for this years playoffs (play in games for 7-10 seeds).  What's the point of it? - mig

[2021-05-18 16:46:11] - daniel:  omg!  yeah, i guess zerg players do have this bit of "random info" in the early game that the other races don't get.  here's a thought:  *should* your map and minimap keep information like this?  where none of your team's cameras were even observing the overloard?  its an interesting "should the rules change" type of question.  ~a

[2021-05-18 16:23:45] - Daniel: Nice! Should've gone for the gold. Probably less of a chance we would've seen it. -Paul

[2021-05-18 16:04:32] - I looked at the replay last night from Paul's map hack game.  Mark's overlord flew by the hatchery and just BARELY got vision on it.  I mean it was like 5 pixels of sight overlap or less.  UGH.  -Daniel

[2021-05-17 20:23:13] - I think if it happens its another defeat for civility in politics and a win for McConnels gambit re Garland where its literally get away with whatever you can in order to achieve the ends.  ("Ends justify the means").  -Daniel

[2021-05-17 20:21:35] - Paul: I think voting to uphold the MS is unlikely cause I think they know what a political shit show it would be.  My guess is 5-4 with Roberts and Gorshuch joining liberal side??  Not super confident in that though.  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 19:44:58] - daniel:  understood and i agree.  my feelings on this are mostly idealistic.  in some cases, i think judges hold lawyers/police to task on this (when treating each case with the same seriousness), but in many cases i'm sure they do not.  ~a

[2021-05-14 19:39:18] - a: I mean I get the theory but I don't think you can tell anyone that and have it actually be true.  Having a review process I think changes how people do their work. I get you maybe don't want that to be the case but I'm not sure that is going to happen  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 19:38:09] - daniel:  maybe my interpretation of "equal protection" is just wrong, i get it.  for some reason our justice department won't indict a sitting president, for instance, like wtf.  but that seems to be the point of it, right?  link  ~a

[2021-05-14 19:34:55] - Like I don't think people are trying to "rush" through regular cases but you are probably just more confident in your rote actions and willing to take some chance with a judge that is like 97% likely to work but maybe in Gaetz you want to get everything perfect to get to 99.9% when you get in front of judge.  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 19:33:58] - I mean maybe kind of?  But I think its pretty natural to go slower on a case that will 100% definitely be national news and covered by everyone vs the case that is not to make sure you don't make any mistakes / errors.  Should that be the standard given to everyone?  Maybe?  But I'm also not sure that is practical given human nature.  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 19:28:05] - daniel:  worded differently again, if your political cases are moving slower than your non-political cases because they're more complicated, that's totally fine.  but if not, maybe you're doing a "rush job" on your non-political cases?  ~a

[2021-05-14 19:26:07] - daniel:  shouldn't political cases move the same average speed as non political cases?  or worded more correctly shouldn't the fact that they're political not affect the speed of the case?  equal protection is literally part of our constitution.  ~a

[2021-05-14 19:24:18] - political cases move slow to avoid f'ing up and to avoid looking like its politically motivated?  Mostly just a guess though.  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 15:38:01] - mig: We could try to make it harder? But yeah basically the same problem where we are dependent on just trusting the people who are going to make poor decisions and hope it doesn't screw us India style.  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 15:25:51] - daniel:  the problem is that requiring proof of vaccination would be rendered meaningless pretty quickly.  These things are pretty easy to forge. - mig

[2021-05-14 14:51:58] - Paul: Which is why I think we just hope we don't end up in the worst case I listed below.  Or  start to require  proof of vaccination for things but I think thats been shown to be pretty unpopular.  So hope that the dumb people don't screw over the country?  Woo!  -Daniel

[2021-05-14 14:33:43] - " de-masking for unvaccinated people" - Best case nothing serious happens.  Medium Case - they just kill themselves.  Worst Case - New variants like India and we are all screwed again for another year or more.  So its hard for me to know the odds of those things are?  I think we mostly have to hope cause I'm pretty sure that if you are choosing not to get vaccinated you aren't going to choose to wear a mask.  -Daniel

[2021-05-13 19:02:37] - That was what Cuomo did in his manipulation.  Was trying to change how things were accounted to then change / skew the numbers.  Maybe somewhere that kind of something happened in FL as well and maybe could be  a story but also could just be banal where some committee had to decide what stuff counts as "covid related deaths" and what doesn't.  -Daniel

[2021-05-13 19:01:01] - If people were actually going in and  somehow editing database rows or whatever I would be surprised just cause it would seem the kind of conspiracy thats much harder to actually keep quiet.  -Daniel

[2021-05-13 19:00:12] - mig: Mostly agreed.  I think its probably more the more normal manipulation of all data / stats that gov and politicians do.  Like how are things accounted / do you present in total numbers or per capita etc etc.  I mean I think if she labels that manipulation thats kind of true?  But also not really a crazy huge deal.  -Daniel

[2021-05-13 18:53:28] - daniel:  i think the main thing that moves the needle for me is that there's be (to my knowledge) no real follow up reporting on florida's alleged data manipulation, while there hasn't been any shortage of reporting critical of DeSantis's handling of the pandemic.  If we are working from the premise that Jones allegations are true, that's rather strange. - mig

[2021-05-13 18:33:45] - mig: I'd agree the credibility has gone down as well.  I do think how you present data is important in big data situations though.  I do also think the public is willing to believe that politicians are willing to fudge numbers for their own  goals *cough* Cuomo *cough*.  -Daniel\

[2021-05-13 17:27:07] - a: I found a hundred dollar bill once in middle school next to a street curb.  I kept it.  I think the window for giving it back to the original owner is basically a window measure in seconds.  Past that its pretty much impossible to tell.  -Daniel

[2021-05-12 14:15:28] - paul:  i already told daniel, but one of the people who replied to that petition (he just said "yes") is on my primary ballot  ~a

[2021-05-11 13:54:38] - a: I think there's a decent chance this is the year Daniel finally wins one. I'm still 100% confident in my strategy long term, but 2020 was an insane year. So much performance pulled forward. Wouldn't at all be surprised to see a flat or even down 2021 for my portfolio. Even now, my portfolio is at the level I originally projected for 2028... -Paul

[2021-05-11 13:53:09] - daniel:  3rd place!  🥉  wooo.  go, daniel, go.  you've passed the top 25% and are now in the top 20%.  i doubt it'll last until july 1st (the halfway mark), but its fun you got this far.  ~a

[2021-05-10 17:35:32] - jeeze, is daniel going to be in 3rd place later today???  there's a small chance he'll be above talia.  daniel, next year you should pick etfs so we don't have this problem.  vemax -> vwo, veusx -> vgk, vpadx -> vpl, vlacx -> vv, vsmax -> vb.  ~a

[2021-05-07 15:59:25] - a: Its hard to take our challenge and broaden that out to your philosophy on how the stock market works and the best way to approach it.  -Daniel

[2021-05-07 15:58:54] - a: In Paul's defense I don't really expect the stock market challenge to really sway his beliefs the way it didn't really sway mine when you guys did well for 3 years or whatever its been.  -Daniel

[2021-05-07 15:18:59] - a: Daniel is crushing me because, after 3 years of growth stocks crushing the index funds, it makes sense for them to have a 3 month breather. -Paul

[2021-05-07 15:14:06] - https://m.xkcd.com/927/  XKCD for everything.  -Daniel

[2021-05-07 15:13:07] - paul:  now tell us why daniel is crushing you.    ~a

[2021-05-05 21:59:15] - daniel:  i remember or oracle handling timezones pretty badly. - mig

[2021-05-05 20:28:47] - -Daniel

[2021-05-05 20:22:02] - Daniel: Oh, wow, I was just cursing them as well this morning. Why do you hate them? -Paul

[2021-05-05 20:16:23] - I would just like to share that I hate time zones.  -Daniel

[2021-05-04 18:52:22] - a: Woo!  This definitely does seem different than previous years.  Maybe just more participants or tech sector not doing as well like you pointed out before.  I don't know that Paul or I will ever switch sides on active v passive investing but at least I have some actual results (if only 5 months) that back me up (vs Paul's several years I guess of other challenges).  -Daniel

[2021-05-04 18:38:40] - daniel:  5th place in the stock market challenge today.  congrats!  i know that your mutual funds are going to drop at the end of the day, but i think you still will be in 5th place after that because gurkie is in a distant 6th place.  ~a

[2021-05-04 15:54:55] - Daniel: Right, I only mentioned it here because I saw it pop up on google news, although maybe that's because I saw it on twitter? Not sure how customized google news is. -Paul

[2021-05-04 15:52:49] - paul: Never heard of it.  I don't really follow twitter or anything though so unless / until twitter things cross over into other news sources I generally am unaware of them.  -Daniel

[2021-04-30 18:18:22] - Mine was also pfizer. Yeah, I've heard of worse reactions (like Daniel's), so I count myself lucky it was only one day of discomfort. -Paul

[2021-04-30 18:01:08] - a: Mine was pfizer.  -Daniel

[2021-04-30 17:59:19] - daniel/paul:  pfizer-biontech or moderna?  sorry if you've already told me, i have a short memory.  ~a

[2021-04-30 17:58:10] - a: My 2nd shot didn't kick in until almost 24 hours.  I got stomach cramps that lasted almost a week and sucked (apparently not very common) and the regular flu like chills / fatigue/ headache stuff for two days.  -Daniel

[2021-04-29 16:22:58] - man I even refreshed to try and avoid double posting cause it was lagging on my end for a second.  Oh well.  -Daniel

[2021-04-29 16:22:31] - mig: I don't think people stopped caring - Journalists have not yet been permitted inside the camps since President Joe Biden took office in January, although the White House says they will be.  Thats the part from the article that should probably be pressed.  I think Biden has said its something they are working on.  Maybe people trust that is more true than when it was trump?  -Daniel

[2021-04-29 16:22:01] - mig: I don't think people stopped caring - Journalists have not yet been permitted inside the camps since President Joe Biden took office in January, although the White House says they will be.  Thats the part from the article that should probably be pressed.  I think Biden has said its something they are working on.  Maybe people trust that is more true than when it was trump?  -Daniel

[2021-04-27 14:40:19] - daniel:  i've been to providence.  it's a pretty small city.  but, like the wyoming and vermont populations are so ridiculously small:  their entire states are smaller than dc (population-wise), which is already a pretty small city.  ~a

[2021-04-27 14:37:32] - I'm surprised that RI has two districts.  Thats kinda crazy on some level.  -Daniel

[2021-04-27 14:37:12] - It would be neat to help be part of a TX shift to more purple but we shall see!  -Daniel

[2021-04-27 14:28:47] - https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/26/politics/census-reapportionment-2020-takeaways/index.html Texas gains two electoral votes thanks to Daniel and Andrea moving there. -Paul

[2021-04-26 15:21:07] - I don't know that re-org'ing the curiculum to get rid of Algebra I /II or Geometry matter if those concepts and stuff all get folded into the other classes but it does seem odd to not allow  students to progress if they go faster.  -Daniel

[2021-04-22 16:10:58] - mig: I get the reading / case for it being incitement but I think given the chauvin verdict earlier this week and a lot of people talking about that in terms of accountability vs justice that I would read it as referring to that.  But Lebron did delete it so that seems to acknowledge that it wasn't good either in its intended way or being misread.  -Daniel

[2021-04-21 21:12:06] - daniel:  sure, I'm not saying we can't have a conversation about ultimately whether the shooting was justified.  I'd like more details to come in.  But I think it's also mega-fucking-bonkers to talk about how police somehow shouldn't be trying to prevent someone from getting stabbed like the Valerie Jarret tweet seems to be implying. - mig

[2021-04-21 21:09:48] - In terms of answers to the question "Why did you shoot that person?" the answer of "She was literally moments away from stabbing someone" is a pretty good answer.  Now there could be a lot of other context there but thats the luxury of time part I mentioned below that I don't know if the cop had.  -Daniel

[2021-04-21 21:08:36] - mig: Sure but thats where I think people smarter than me I guess would need to weigh in on the subject.  I don't think this case is the poster child case certainly for limiting police shooting but I think can still be part of the conversation.  -Daniel

[2021-04-21 21:07:27] - Yeah definitely not like Chauvin and situations with immanent harm are certainly more difficult to parse cause you don't have any luxury of time.  But I think there is also room to after the fact question if four shots are the answer society is best served by.  -Daniel

[2021-04-21 21:05:00] - daniel:  and while attempting to make a non-lethal shot is an understandable notion, you're upping your risk of missing and accidentally hitting a bystander. - mig

[2021-04-21 21:03:40] - daniel:  https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EzgtqSHUUAEpXed?format=jpg&name=small forewarning it's a little disturbing. - mig

[2021-04-21 20:57:33] - -Daniel

[2021-04-21 20:51:58] - daniel:  what's the alternative?  I'm looking at the photo of the person who was shot looking like she's about to knife another girl and I'm not seeing any what the other course of action is. - mig

[2021-04-21 20:31:41] - I don't know if its anti cop or not but I think the idea that shooting someone multiple times might not be the answer.    -Daniel

[2021-04-21 14:53:28] - I think there are a lot of people that would not have found Chauvin guilty which is why I was surprised there wasn't one on the jury.  -Daniel

[2021-04-21 14:16:41] - Daniel: I haven't been following the trial at all, so I don't think I have much of an informed opinion. I'm not too surprised at the verdict in the sense that everybody seems to have already decided before the trial began that a guilty verdict was the only acceptable one. Having said that, I also wouldn't have been surprised at something like guilty on manslaughter but not murder. -Paul

[2021-04-21 14:12:00] - daniel:  "someone on the jury willing to back Chauvin"  although i agree with your assessment, it is a bit of a simplification?  to "back chauvin" you'd have to explain to the rest of the jury why you think he wasn't being "negligent".  i dunno how jury's work, but sometimes i think you aren't anonymous. backing chauvin probably not an easy task.  ~a

[2021-04-21 14:05:21] - anyone else surprised by the Chauvin verdict?  I think (having not actually sat through the evidence)  I would have voted guilty too but I am kind of surprised that there wasn't someone on the jury willing to back Chauvin.  -Daniel

[2021-04-21 13:47:39] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_currency - This has the Euro pretty solidly as number 2 by a wide margin so I think that would probably be the next up if something happened to USD.  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 19:49:40] - daniel:  "central banks would want a gov controlled currency"  ok, i'm going to switch sides here, but:  why?  why do central banks want a government controlled currency?  especially a government controlled currency of a government that is hostile towards your central bank?  ~a

[2021-04-20 18:50:42] - I think central banks would want a gov controlled currency.  Euro / Pound / Yen / Something created by Saudi Arabia / something adopted by OPEC.  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 18:02:19] - daniel:  paul will say "no" to the euro, because he hates how liberal europeans are, but i think you're probably right.  something like 40% of the non-us economy is in europe.  ~a

[2021-04-20 18:00:34] - Euro?  I think that would be my first guess without a ton of thought.  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 17:58:35] - Daniel: But, yeah, it's hard for me to think through how a dollar collapse would affect things seeing as it is the reserve currency. What would take its place? Yuan? Bitcoin? Gold? Nothing? I need to re-read "What has government done to our money"... -Paul

[2021-04-20 17:57:37] - Daniel: I am overweight (compared to traditional recommendations) on international funds in Vanguard, I believe. Also, some of my largest holdings are internationally based: SHOP (Canada), MELI (Argentina), SE (Signapore). -Paul

[2021-04-20 17:56:04] - paul: currency collapse would be pretty bad.  A generator and potato seeds might be a good bet then.  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 17:55:29] - paul: international investing?  or does a us currency fiasco mean you think overseas currencies would get jacked too?  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 16:58:37] - Daniel: So I want 80-95% of that money to still be in maximum money making mode while I live off that super safe money. Maybe my problem is having too much faith that stocks will eventually give me a positive return? -Paul

[2021-04-20 16:52:39] - paul:  "When I retire, I don't need 100% of my money to be 'safe' or even 'safer'"  i don't want to speak for daniel, but i doubt he is suggesting otherwise.  i'll say that i don't plan on having 100% of my money in bonds in retirement:  quite the opposite:  i'll have ~1% of my money in bonds for the majority of retirement. (current plan is to bond tent from 55% down to 1%).  ~a

[2021-04-20 16:48:52] - Daniel: I agree with pretty much everything you said. I guess the way I look at it is this: When I retire, I don't need 100% of my money to be "safe" or even "safer". In theory, I need something like 5-20% of my money to be "safe" (depending on how long you anticipate a market pullback might last and how much you anticipate withdrawing). -Paul

[2021-04-20 16:25:21] - Are you just discounting the risk?  Or just want to be greedy?  Or focused on passing along more money to the generation to your own detriment?  Or something else?  Cause the idea of bonds is to have something in the middle where you can grow a little with less risk.  But you seem to be discounting that as a use case.  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 16:24:06] - Paul: You are very focused on the growth part but there is a risk part especially in the shorter term.  So the idea is if you are near your retirement date your need to grow should be outweighed by your risk avoidance.  -Daniel

[2021-04-20 15:07:39] - daniel:  yes.  a bond is a loan.  a mortgage is a loan.  its like just semantics at a certain point?  ~a

[2021-04-20 15:06:52] - a: All bonds are is just loans / debt right?  Like people borrow money and agree to pay back at certain rates?  -Daniel

[2021-04-19 17:33:53] - daniel:  yes, i think so.  ~a

[2021-04-19 17:33:42] - daniel:  yeah, but even the 2020 fund decided to use 0% cash/cash-equivalents.  ~a

[2021-04-19 17:33:00] - CDs vs TIPS is probably because of inflation protection?  I guess?  That I don't know though.  -Daniel

[2021-04-19 17:32:22] - CD's are to safe for a long term growth fund.  Bonds are just the middle ground between stocks and cash / cash equivalents.  So if  you are trying to have a long term growth fund that is less volatile than all stocks then bonds are a way to do that.  -Daniel

[2021-04-16 17:44:04] - daniel: its interesting that you're coming to the conclusion that (in general.  in "normal" times) tips have lower return than bonds.  i've skimmed the data and i did not come to that conclusion.  the 15-year total return, including distributions, on vbtlx and tip are both EXACTLY 4.4%/year and the benchmark indexes that they attempt to replicate are the same too!  like, exactly the same return 2005-2020 (which includes 2008).  ~a

[2021-04-16 17:36:29] - If you are trying to figure out like TIPS vs a 10 year Treasury bond then I dunno.  Probably some math based on cost and inflation risk.  -Daniel

[2021-04-16 17:34:47] - With 0 research on this I would have thought TIPS would be more like 1-3% return depending on where inflation was at and be pretty safe.  I would think bond funds would average like 3-6% with more risk (and stocks like 7-?% with even more risk).  So TIPS underperforming bond funds seems right to me since they are closer to the "Cash / Cash Equivalents" part of  asset allocation.  -Daniel

[2021-04-16 17:19:22] - daniel:  i'm comparing it to vbtlx/vtabx (aka bndw).  which is like 60%ish government.  so, yeah, i guess i could see that tips is lower risk, and lower reward.  but like, it's not a perfect analogy though, because tips is also from the same guys who print the usd.  so they're definitely allowed to cheat very hard in the whole risk/reward calculation.  also historically, tips do NOT outperform/underperform bndw in risky/unrisky scenarios. ~a

[2021-04-16 16:30:32] - TIPS vs bonds isn't something I know a ton about either.  TIPS is treasury though so in my head would have a lower return even though the point is to beat inflation right?  Like just on the risk / return spectrum if TIPS is lower risk then in theory should be lower return.  Or are you comparing to other treasury bonds?  -Daniel

[2021-04-16 16:28:44] - a: I'm not super worried about Vanguard but I get the idea.  II think Blackrock / Schwab / Fidelity would be the firms on my list I would look at next.  For me I have my half of retirement mostly in Vanguard and Andrea's half mostly in TSP for gov so its not quite all the eggs in one basket.  -Daniel

[2021-04-16 15:20:15] - daniel:  i'd also like to talk about other non-paul stuff:  bonds vs tips.  i'm, like, out of my element here and not sure why anyone would NOT pick tips here?  i read about it and people talk about liquidity.  which is a concept i only have a surface understanding of.  i.e. it seems like the liquidity of both should be fine for individuals  ~a

[2021-04-16 15:10:30] - daniel:  do you worry that you're trusting too much in vanguard?  i understand that the money is mostly in trusted hands . . . but still, could it be a problem if vanguard had some sort of crisis?  i noticed that 85%+ of my money was in vanguard, so i moved a bit of my 401k/ira money (no capital gains), away from vanguard and into ishares, aka blackrock.  i know a lot less about ishares, but the expense ratios are similar.  thoughts?  ~a

[2021-04-15 19:05:39] - daniel:  👉🧍👈  ~a

[2021-04-15 18:55:47] - a: Can you point at your gut bacteria?  -Daniel

[2021-04-15 18:46:12] - daniel:  do pets have to be animals?  can i have a pet plant?  or a pet bacterium?  i looked up the definition, and it looks like (with aaron's help) i've totally broken your metric.  i declare my gut-bacteria as pets.  ~a

[2021-04-15 18:43:38] - aaron: You definitely win now.  -Daniel

[2021-04-15 18:32:01] - daniel: i had an ant farm! ...but i biked a lot. and all my ants died - aaron

[2021-04-15 16:01:30] - I'm not always as cynical as miguel but in this case I'm pretty much in agreement.  The only context I would add being that their power grab is in response to another power grab?  But I don't know if that really matters any.  -Daniel

[2021-04-15 15:42:58] - Daniel: Got it, makes sense now. Thanks. -Paul

[2021-04-15 15:03:24] - I'm saying a politician taking about balance while  talking about adding justices to the supreme court doesn't make sense to me either.  Talking about adding justices in order to swing the balance makes sense.  I'm not advocating for anything as a goal though.  -Daniel

[2021-04-15 14:59:24] - Daniel: I'm not sure I understand. You are saying "balance" shouldn't be a goal, but control should be? Or that is clearly what they are trying? -Paul

[2021-04-15 14:51:36] - any talk of balance doesn't really make sense to me either.  I think they want to keep the total number of justices odd.  But for 4 vs 2 I'm with Miguel that the point would be control.  -Daniel

[2021-04-14 21:28:11] - daniel:  i reject your new changes.  i think its safe to say that you guys are both at about -500 and i'm sitting pretty at about -25,000.  though i have a hard time estimating my mileage when i was like 12.  ~a

[2021-04-14 20:51:43] - a: Crap.  Miles biked in the last week?  Is this how politics work where you haggle over metrics to make them tailored to your  desired outcomes?  -Daniel

[2021-04-14 20:37:43] - daniel:  i'm like 99% sure we'll all be in the negatives.  i'd hate to meet the poor soul who wasn't in the negatives.  ~a

[2021-04-14 20:28:03] - What if the metric is number of pets plus number of children plus companies started minus number of solar panels minus number of miles biked.  I think that is a good metric.  -Daniel

[2021-04-14 19:41:28] - Daniel: Yes. I was 90% joking. We all know the best measure of success is number of kids, where I am comfortably ahead among people who frequent the message board. -Paul

[2021-04-14 19:06:08] - daniel:  yes.  "market cap" is the "worth" value that most people use.  and market cap is 100% based on the price.  (basically, price times shares, but my eyes glaze over when people start talking about the difference between "float" and "shares outstanding")  ~a

[2021-04-14 19:04:58] - a: Is the company worth number based on share price?  -Daniel

[2021-04-14 19:04:07] - Disappointment seems harsh.  Capitalism isn't the only lens to define success.  I know you probably don't mean it literally but just in case!  -Daniel

[2021-04-14 15:37:40] - daniel:  if i lived near one of these really old reactors (wtf, many of these reactors are 45 years old), i'd be pushing really hard for an IMBY (a reverse nimby?); for them to start building a new reactor on the grounds of the old reactor.  ~a

[2021-04-14 15:33:22] - daniel:  nuclear power has a nimby problem?  what could you possibly be talking about?    if you sort by "construction start" or "commercial operation" in the us, it looks reeeeal bad.  watts bar, the "new cool" reactor:  construction started in the fucking 70s.  this is bad because old reactors, that should get shut down, are probably being stretched way too long.  ~a

[2021-04-14 15:27:25] - On the barely mentioned topic of nuclear energy - are you guys familiar with kurzgesagt youtube channel?  I think the case for nuclear is growing but has such a NIMBY problem that I'm not sure if any new plants actually get built in US.  -Daniel

[2021-04-13 17:41:57] - Daniel: And I think there's a time and place for it, right? Like if you're a comedian, then sure. But if you're a supposed respected thought leader in a position to potentially change minds.... I wish those people would do a little less snarky commentary and a little more genuine attempts to change minds. -Paul

[2021-04-13 17:40:20] - Daniel: I agree, and I want to be clear that I am certainly not "holier-than-thou" about it. I am just as guilty as anybody and sometimes I just want to rip off a snide remark at somebody I disagree with that has no intention of changing minds and is just about scoring "points". I get it! It's super satisfying. -Paul

[2021-04-13 17:38:26] - Its hard to extend that same patience to an adult even if it is the right thing.  -Daniel

[2021-04-13 17:38:09] - Paul / a: I think there is an element of all these things where its hard to communicate something to someone in a patient and understanding way especially when inside you think they might be bonkers.  On a much smaller scale its hard for me to always have patience with my kids who I love and understand are small people who don't know everything and I'm supposed to be helping them.  -Daniel

[2021-04-13 15:04:41] - Daniel: So this whole nit-picky wordplay is right in my pet-peeve wheelhouse of: Of course we should be questioning science. That's the whole point of science! Questioning things and testing them. -Paul

[2021-04-13 15:03:47] - Daniel: Also, I don't know if you were on the message board back then, but I am pretty sure I had a very similar dispute about science with.... Pierce? Somebody else? About how saying stuff like "science is true" and "don't question science" is like the opposite of what science actually is or should be. -Paul

[2021-04-13 15:01:24] - Daniel: Probably not? I don't actually know if he has replied to Steak-Umms. Maybe I'm just weird for thinking it's cool how a random steak (is it even real steak?) company can get so much publicity over making real and legit and well-thought out criticisms of a scientist over what science is. -Paul

[2021-04-13 14:40:27] - maybe meh is a better description than bleh.  -Daniel

[2021-04-13 14:37:24] - Calling NDT for saying science is true because science evolves seems bleh to me.  Like I get the point I guess?    But mostly it just seems like most things where the statement "Science is true" is not 100% given specifics but is true enough for casual / general / twitter use?  -Daniel

[2021-04-13 14:31:59] - Is there a way to see the twitter back and forth without tons of other  twitter replies in the way?  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:32:23] - a: Managing supply cap is almost certainly more important.  He doesn't advocate for that level of attention to mineral lines every again.  Yeah its just the start of the game where its like you aren't doing anything else right now so might as well optimize.  I generally just think about what I'm going to do any try to focus on not screwing that up though  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:30:24] - Paul: Probably just forgetting?  He was doing it in the diamond games I was watching recently.  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:25:10] - Daniel: I was actually talking about the thing even before that, literally in the first second of the game, where you grab 1-3 workers on one end of the starting "L" shape and send them to one of the mineral patches at the end to speed up that initial worker spread. I've definitely seen a few platinum games where he hasn't done that and I wonder why. -Paul

[2021-04-12 15:19:24] - But its a small thing that he talks about mostly because there is so little else going on in the first 15-30 seconds of the game.  Like you gain maybe like 50 minerals or something at max out of it.  Maybe less I don't remember.  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:18:39] - a: As part of that at the very very start of the game all your workers I think are rallied to the same patch then spread themselves out over time.  Vibe says you can grab some and split them off to a different patch to accelerate the process.  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:17:32] - a: At the very start of the game where there isn't much going on in the first ~30 seconds or so he talks about making sure you have two workers per patch in your main mineral line so they are working optimally.  I often don't do this but occasionally try.  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:08:36] - Paul: Either he is focusing  on other stuff or doing it faster now and not explaining it as much.  I've seen him send workers to different patches still in the higher videos.  -Daniel

[2021-04-12 15:06:42] - Daniel: In B2GM 2021 in some of the gold videos, Vibe mentions splitting your workers at the very beginning but now that I am watching plat videos he doesn't seem to do it anymore. Any idea why? -Paul

[2021-04-07 14:34:49] - a: "is there at least some kernel of truth here?" Probably. If your point is that it's not a random selection, that is almost certainly true. The circle of people I interact with skews heavily towards the left. I agree it's not representative, but it does mirror stuff I see online (Twitter, mostly) and articles I've read (like that college story Daniel posted). -Paul

[2021-04-07 14:22:58] - Daniel: "NBA isn't a law / policy so I'm not sure I understand the comparison" Didn't know we were restricting to law/policy. I'm positive taxes affect races disproportionately because the races aren't "equal" in terms of wealth and income. Asians and whites almost certainly pay more in absolute terms. I also believe most gun laws have outcomes which punish minorities more than whites. -Paul

[2021-04-07 13:42:25] - I think I get the overall point that there could exist a law that disproportionately affect one race for non racist reasons but I think especially in the realm of voting lots of courts have decided that does count and is a problem.  -Daniel

[2021-04-07 13:41:05] - Paul: NBA isn't a law / policy so I'm not sure I understand the comparison.  Do gun control laws affect races differently?  If so I would wonder if that was because the laws were targeted in some way or if there were underlying factors that led to that.  Same with taxes it seems more like it would be an issue with making education / opportunity better would address the issues.  -Daniel

[2021-04-07 01:49:50] - Daniel: Is the NBA racist? Gun control laws? Taxes? All of those affect different races in different disproportionate ways or have outcomes that are disproportionate to racial breakdowns. -Paul

[2021-04-07 01:48:22] - Daniel: "Isn't that like the definition?" To many, I think it has become that way. I don't think that unequal outcomes means something is racist. Otherwise... what ISN'T racist? I'm not sure if anything in the world has outcomes that are completely even according to race. -Paul

[2021-04-06 17:44:54] - Paul: Your question seems to imly you don't?  Isn't that like the definition?  Does there need to be a malign intent for a law/policy for it to qualify?  I mean I guess if person A punches person B and person B was Hispanic then that punch disproportionaly affected one race and I'm not sure that is racist.  But for policies / laws I think so?  -Daniel

[2021-04-06 16:45:36] - Daniel: Depends on why it disproportionately affects one race. Do you think all things that disproportionately affect one race is racist? -Paul

[2021-04-06 16:39:47] - Paul: What word would you use for "disproportionately affect one race"?  -Daniel

[2021-04-02 17:02:25] - paul/daniel/aaron:  trump is the worst.  ~a

[2021-04-02 16:55:32] - Daniel: "I imagine there is some reason that people keep doing it" Because I think people are drawn to it. Most people don't want to read a sober, reasoned, nuance argument about how Trump did some good things but more bad things when it came to COVID response, but lots of people want to hear about how stupid he is and the awful things he did. -Paul

[2021-04-02 16:36:20] - I think we would agree less hyperbole is good, but I imagine there is some reason that people keep doing it.  Polarization is probably good for MSNBC / Fox as then the viewers are less likely to switch networks etc.  -Daniel

[2021-04-02 16:35:35] - I wonder if there a tipping point where the hyperbole effects you one way or another.  In either case I wouldn't think its a big effect.  Sort of like anchoring in psychology?  /shrug  more of a theory / idea.  Maybe that would help explain / be a factor in increased polarization of the US?  More hyperbole used which helps people drift one way or the other.  -Daniel

[2021-04-02 14:27:47] - daniel: with regards to hyperbole not affecting my opinions, it's sort of like 'foot in the door' versus 'door in the face' negotiation tactics. if i hear something bafflingly unreasonable, it pushes my opinion further in the opposite direction - aaron

[2021-04-01 21:09:36] - Daniel: Because I could not anticipate negative numbers! Um... because Google sheets isn't great with conditional formatting (or I am bad at using it) and it wasn't easy to make it work the way it makes sense (where negative is red and positive is green). I can try to fix it, though. -Paul

[2021-04-01 20:19:51] - Paul: random question but on the fantasy investing spreadsheet how come you have the gradient for the performance column go from white to dark green instead of red to green?  -Daniel

[2021-04-01 13:42:33] - Daniel: I've been watching Vibe and trying to mimic, but I got crushed by somebody who basically medivac dropped me into oblivion and then a zerg who basically steamrolled me (I know this is heresy, but I think I lost that because of micro). -Paul

[2021-04-01 13:41:28] - Daniel: I had to get up to drop something off at 8am, and I didn't want to start work yet, so I got some games in. -Paul

[2021-04-01 13:34:15] - Also if you already played another five games this morning that means you got up earlier than you needed which is bonkers.  -Daniel

[2021-04-01 13:33:52] - Vibe isn't the be all end all but I think he can definitely get you past silver.  Plus also there are weird things with the promo's right now (based on watching Vibe on twitch) so might be worth just looking at your MMR to see what it is and not your actual league.  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 21:34:55] - a: Technically yes.  There isn't zero risk and I don't know specifically  how planes compare to restaurants just that planes haven't been quite the death trap many initially imagined.  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 21:25:30] - daniel:  "because of a plane's filtration systems, your risk of catching the coronavirus on a flight comes almost entirely from the people sitting around you"  so then your link agrees with me?    ~a

[2021-03-31 21:04:28] - https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/10/20/925892185/do-masks-really-cut-your-risk-of-catching-covid-19-on-long-plane-flights  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 20:39:51] - a: Yeah, I would think flights would be the worst, but apparently they aren't? Maybe it's for the reasons Daniel said. I have no idea. But it seems to fly (pun intended) in the face of the whole enclosed area and 6 feet apart deal. -Paul

[2021-03-31 19:50:22] - daniel:  huh?  do you have a link on that???  aren't you sitting 6 feet away from like three dozen people?  ~a

[2021-03-31 19:48:17] - Paul: I'm not 100% but I think the theory on flights is that they already have pretty heavy duty air filters in place to try and deal with air issues already.  Restaurants don't I believe.  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 18:45:41] - daniel:  congratulations!  or boo, now you have autism, depending on your politics.  ~a

[2021-03-31 18:33:03] - Daniel: Congrats! -Paul

[2021-03-31 18:10:06] - Also randomly got my first shot today.  Woo.  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 18:09:36] - "If you eat McDonalds for a month you will get heart disease and get fat" which have no impact - do they have NO impact?  I think they don't make you change your mind in the moment but over time you might start associating the two concepts (fat & McD's).    I don't think its 100% or anything and maybe is different for different people but I'm not sure its 0 impact long term across the board.  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 17:52:09] - Daniel: Ah, I misunderstood your point. I thought you were arguing for the efficacy of hyperbole. You are arguing for... appeals to emotion? -Paul

[2021-03-31 17:48:09] - Paul: ?  I don't think Honda makes holocaust comparisons or even that Honda uses hyperbole (though I'm sure some ads do) but I think the effect is similar is that some element of positive or negative association sinks in over time for a thing / concept.  -Daniel

[2021-03-31 17:43:10] - Daniel: What would hyperbole be for a Honda ad? Buy Honda, because Toyota will gas your relatives? -Paul

[2021-03-31 17:06:52] - " I'm generally not a fan of hyperbole if you're trying to change minds on an issue. If that's what they're trying to do, I think it is ineffective. "  - I'm not sure I agree.  I think its probably like advertising where it doesn't make you love Honda right off the bat or anything but ads over time when you do start to think about it you are starting from a place where Honda's are already good in your head.  -Daniel

[2021-03-30 15:30:06] - daniel:  "tax bill of $800,000 despite only making $45,000 in net trading profits" ooooof.  yeah, this is uncommon, but totally possible.  basically any situation you have a big unrealized loss paired with a realized gain.  its another reason why my "play" money ironically is all in my ira/401k:  i'm just sick of having to worry about taxes  ~a

[2021-03-30 15:19:34] - https://www.forbes.com/sites/shaharziv/2021/03/26/robinhood-trader-may-face-800000-tax-bill/?sh=7ef0c4d667c7  in the same vein as confusing tax rules.  Yikes!  -Daniel

[2021-03-29 21:21:11] - daniel:  i tried to find confirmation of this on irs.gov and only got fucking confused, so you might want to ignore everything i said previously.  i've been reporting this kind of thing on my 1040 schedule D (the thing that 1099-B feeds into), but maybe that's wrong.  ~a

[2021-03-29 21:01:29] - daniel:  its (similar to, or just is i'm not sure) a barter transaction.  barter transactions are taxed.  it counts as a taxable event.  you are required to consider the (usd) "value" of the two things being traded for the purposes of sales tax and capital gains.  ~a

[2021-03-29 20:59:42] - how does buying a tesla with bitcoin work for taxes?  Does it count as a taxable sale of bitcoin to USD?  Or does that only trigger if you go straight from bitcoin to USD via exchange or whatever?  -Daniel

[2021-03-27 02:20:10] - Daniel:  vgt, year to date has had negative return, and mostly we pick tech stocks?  I think it'll change by the halfway mark unless there is a major drop.  ~a

[2021-03-26 19:28:49] - Is there some reason why the stock challenge didn't go well for so many this year?  Just early and things will even out?  Just seems like a lot of negative - more so than normal.  More players?  -Daniel

[2021-03-25 18:08:57] - Daniel: "I'm curious if there is literally anything you would support" Maybe? Probably? I'm still confused why I, the person saying that it's a really difficult problem with no clear solution is the one who is supposed to come up with a solution. I'm not sure what to tell you. I reject the idea that I need to have the perfect solution to all of life's problems. -Paul

[2021-03-25 18:03:53] - Daniel: "I guess based on the last statement it seems like you think its not worth solving" Huh? The statement where I compared it to terrorist bombings makes you think that I think it's not worth solving? I'm not sure how I gave that impression. -Paul

[2021-03-25 17:58:17] - I guess based on the last statement it seems like you think its not worth solving which I think is something a lot of people would disagree with.  I guess the "worth" is the key part and what one would have to give up in order to 'solve' it and what that would be 'worth'.  -Daniel

[2021-03-25 17:56:42] - Paul:  You are the one who always says things won't work so I'm curious if there is literally anything you would support.  So I guess I'm less interested in offering ideas for you to shoot down than seeing if there is literally anything constructive you think could work.  -Daniel

[2021-03-25 17:54:32] - Daniel: Can you think of any rules you would support that would deal with terrorist bombings? -Paul

[2021-03-25 17:54:05] - Daniel: "specifically for rules that would help deal with mass shootings do you know of any that you would support" Not really. Do you have any that you think would work? I like the analogy of trying to prevent mass shootings to trying to prevent terrorist bombings. They're both relatively rare events that are really hard to predict. -Paul

[2021-03-25 17:52:14] - Paul: I understand your point about gun deaths being a larger issue but I specifically for rules that would help deal with mass shootings do you know of any that you would support?  Or do think no such rule exists?  -Daniel

[2021-03-25 16:53:59] - Daniel: "Are there any new gun rules you would support that you think would do something?" I mean, a lot of rules would do SOMETHING. An outright nationwide ban would maybe cut gun deaths over the long term.... assuming it didn't ignite a full on revolution or civil war (only half joking). Also, does it have to be gun rules? I think ending the war on drugs would go a long way to cutting gun deaths. -Paul

[2021-03-25 15:24:05] - "mass shootings" (however you want to define them)  - NPR had some expert guy on who defined them as four or more people shot in the same incident.  -Daniel

[2021-03-25 15:22:20] - Paul: Are there any new gun rules you would support that you think would do something?  Or do you think nothing would help therefore all new rules are bad?  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:52:50] - Daniel: Okay, got it. I think we're in agreement (on the Pulse shooting, at least). And I just want to be clear that I don't think we can ever prove that anti-gay or anti-Asian motives weren't present. I just think that for something like pulse, when (to me) the shooter clearly presents a motive and there is seemingly no evidence supporting an anti-gay motive except the over-indexing of victims... -Paul

[2021-03-24 18:43:05] - Paul: Yes it suggest something else might be the case.  Which is why I said cloudy.  I was also on board with the possibility that ATL wasn't specifically racist either.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:42:33] - Paul: I think you are right that I'm reading the anti-gay part into it.  I think thats a fair point.  The three paragraphs talk about the possibility that he was gay.  I'm connecting that to an religious / conservative Muslim upbringing possibly leading to an anti-gay stance.  Which is this me reading between the lines.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:40:31] - Daniel: "it certainly seems reasonable to investigate the possibility" Sure, but what if you investigate and find no evidence? I'm not saying it's proof that it's NOT something, but doesn't that seem to indicate maybe anti-Asian or anti-gay wasn't the motive? -Paul

[2021-03-24 18:39:07] - Daniel: What three paragraphs contradict that statement? I see a few trying to argue that he was gay, but none that argue he was anti-gay. -Paul

[2021-03-24 18:38:59] - paul:  yeah what daniel said.  ~a

[2021-03-24 18:38:36] - Paul: You definitely could have an attack on a group that wasn't motivated by animus towards that group.  But if an attack on a group happens it certainly seems reasonable to investigate the possibility.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:37:31] - Its not perfect evidence and there is disagreement on the conclusion by FBI in the next paragraph so I wouldn't say its conclusive.  But saying no evidence is weird.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:36:43] - I don't know if he was or not.  Thats why I said cloudy.    " there doesn't even seem to be any evidence it was anti-gay "  There are like three paragraphs on the wiki article which contradict this statement?  I'm confused.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:33:54] - a: Sorry! -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:33:28] - daniel:  "not...not...anti".  i think you said it right, but i had to read that a bunch of times.  ~a

[2021-03-24 18:32:47] - Paul: Yeah I was going to say its interesting how we read the same thing (wikipedia) and have different conclusions.  I think his motive is cloudier but I'm not sure I would say probably not likely anti-gay.  I think there is reasonable doubt to present against it being anti gay but there is also stuff there to support it.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:30:38] - Daniel: Heh, spoiler tags are an interesting idea. I agree that the first person to respond kind of "ruins" it. Before looking on wikipedia, my memory told me it was a fairly obvious anti-gay hate crime. After reading wikipedia, I think that the motive is no longer "obvious" and probably not even likely anti-gay, but I was curious what others both remembered and thought after reading wikipedia. -Paul

[2021-03-24 18:24:51] - paul:  i remember the pulse nightclub shooting.  looks like daniel and aaron posted here about it, but nobody discussed it in detail.  if you're asking us to use only our memories, i didn't remember the details:  but i would NOT have said it was a "vanilla" hate crime.  looking up stuff, it was a gay club, and the shooter was involved with (swore allegiance to?) abu bakr al-baghdadi and was mad about stuff happening in iraq and syria?  ~a

[2021-03-24 18:24:24] - Paul: I didn't have his motive right right according to Wikipedia though it does seem cloudy some?  Sort of? -Daniel

[2021-03-24 18:21:23] - Paul: We need spoiler tags so we can answer without giving it away (or not) for others.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 16:12:31] - a: I hadn't.  https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/mbzggv/why_has_r_gone_private/ has info as well.  -Daniel

[2021-03-24 01:32:04] - Daniel: I know a few people who seemed completely obsessed with every stupid tweet and dumb speech he made. It felt like every time I spoke with them the convo would start with: "Did you hear what Trump said?" -Paul

[2021-03-24 01:31:08] - Daniel: "Gotta get that $" Sadly, I agree that plays a role... maybe a big one. Outrage drives clicks and subscriptions and money. Just look at how well the NY Times and MSNBC did during the Trump administration. People were drawn to how ridiculous he was and bizarrely wanted to hear all about it. -Paul

[2021-03-23 18:04:52] - Everyone body wants attention because attention at some point = $.  Websites, news papers, politicians, political causes, charities.  Gotta get that $.  -Daniel

[2021-03-23 18:03:34] - Partly maybe (probably?) because there is so much stuff out there now that is easily accessible you have to be very noticeable to generate attention.  This leads to clickbait, less local news, and pumping outrage - none of which are great but there isn't really a great answer for either?  -Daniel

[2021-03-23 18:00:33] - I'm sure there are other reasons too.  I don't think its a simple thing.  I think if it wasn't somewhat effective though then it wouldn't continue but I bet that both pro gun and anti gun people end up netting $ after crap like this which is pretty sad but probably true (no evidence of that just a guess).  -Daniel

[2021-03-23 17:59:33] - Paul: I mean there are different factors I think that go into it across the broad spectrum of 'the public'.  Some is just emotional because people are emotional and have emotions.  Some is trying to capitalize on that emotion to try and build political momentum because right then is when people are paying attention / thinking about it.  Some because they think the other side is going to do so they better do it too.  -Daniel

[2021-03-22 15:22:06] - In random googling cause it was a new term for me - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression_Olympics#Current_hierarchy implies that definitely some people have a hierarchy!  -Daniel

[2021-03-22 15:19:43] - Thats from the article you posted  Paul.  Seems relevant.  I think there is always some type of context.  Its about listening to people and trying to understand them I think.  I don't know that there are easy answers when the problems are this layered and complex.  -Daniel

[2021-03-22 14:58:53] - Daniel: That would be nice in theory, but that's not typically how the "people are unequal" thinking gets put to use. Instead, it's about determining what people can and cannot do based on their race. Can race X create their own school club? Can business advertise they are actively looking for group Y? Can somebody of race A play a character of race B? -Paul

[2021-03-22 14:21:42] - I don't think knowing people aren't being treated equally means you have to have a hierarchy.  If you know that A!=B and C!=A and D!=F and C!=E you know there are things to work on but you don't need a hierarchy to tell that.  -Daniel

[2021-03-22 14:08:17] - Daniel: "people don't get treated equally" I would specify that it's not that people don't get treated equally, but races that don't get treated equally (not my opinion, but what I believe is the "woke" opinion). And with that being the case, wouldn't there have to be a hierarchy? Otherwise, how do you know who is getting treated worse or better? -Paul

[2021-03-22 14:00:14] - Paul: I think the idea is that everyone is equal but that people don't get treated equally so to be aware of things  (the structural stuff etc) in order to better get to where everyone is equal.  But I'm not sure there is a hierarchy.  -Daniel

[2021-03-22 13:47:56] - Daniel: "I think we also need a better term than 'woke hierarchy'" What term would you prefer? I think "woke" is fairly specific in what it describes. -Paul

[2021-03-22 13:47:30] - Daniel: "Isn't the point of woke hierarchy that everyone is supposed to be equal?" I would argue the point is actually the exact opposite: that people aren't equal because of white supremacy and structural racism and everything else. -Paul

[2021-03-22 13:39:32] - Paul: Isn't the point of woke hierarchy that everyone is supposed to be equal?  Also if we need a better term than 'far right' I think we also need a better term than 'woke hierarchy'      -Daniel

[2021-03-19 20:17:55] - daniel:  certainly would not agree this is an example of "internalized racism" (not sure if that was your point thought). - mig

[2021-03-19 20:13:38] - mig: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cBEwQHjdw14  I don't know that I'm an expert or want to defend it in depth though.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 20:10:49] - daniel:  not to derail, but i find the concept of internalized racism to be a bullshit concept. - mig

[2021-03-19 20:07:21] - a: Mostly just based on my googling they seemed all about religion and gender issues not race based ones.  /shrug.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 20:05:56] - daniel:  how?  i guess i don't follow.  taliban might not be racist if you pick a certain specific definition of racism?  ~a

[2021-03-19 20:05:41] - paul: I think its fair that its not a well defined term.  I think its anyone past the "normal" right in the US but that isn't well defined either.  Like is the Tea Party far right?  Or just on the far side of the normal right?  Anyone to the right of Romney?  I would agree its not a well defined term.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 19:54:03] - a: I'm not 100% - I tried to do some quick googlling but it might need a deeper search but I think maybe the Taliban isn't racist?  maybe?  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 19:27:50] - daniel:  yes, good point.  he picked the word "hate" though.  ~a

[2021-03-19 19:26:49] - a: Maybe the semantic difference is "hating" your own race but https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internalized_racism is a thing.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 15:24:15] - I don't know that we have to determine the most important - but if we know that things are important people can spend energy towards addressing them.  Different people will work on different problems but I think people want to know they are working on something that matters.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 15:18:31] - daniel:  i'll endorse "definitely suggestive of racism"  ~a

[2021-03-19 15:18:03] - I'm with Adrian on why it matters.  I also agree with Paul that I'm not sure that given a small sample size I'm willing to conclude "definitely racist" but would be more at "definitely suggestive of racism".  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 14:03:26] - Paul: Yeah I agree.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 13:58:39] - Daniel: And I'm like, "Can we at least slow down a little bit before blaming everything on our former President and politicizing every tragedy as being another sign of white supremacy?" -Paul

[2021-03-19 13:57:49] - Daniel: I'm not saying we can't speculate what the motives are. I just saw way too many people (and not just randos, but politicians and journalists and blue checkmarks on Twitter) immediately leaping to "another clear example of racist anti-Asian violence thanks to Trump's Kung Flu comments". -Paul

[2021-03-19 13:56:27] - Daniel: My match was against another bronze person who seemed pretty good. If I had to guess, he played at gold level, so maybe that happened to both of us. Or maybe I'm just that bad. -Paul

[2021-03-19 05:51:30] - Paul: On bronze 3 I watched Vibe tonight and he said there were bugs with MMR and a lot of people were either being put in bronze 3 or masters 3 for some reason.  So that might explain you and Dewey.  -Daniel

[2021-03-19 05:50:54] - I think I'm with Paul somewhat that we should wait to conclude it was a racist attack and throw around statements about how he was racist.  I do not think we have to wait / its to early to be like 6/8 victims were Asian and hatecrimes had a big uptick in that demographic last year so its entirely possible there is a racist angle here that is worth investigating. I also do think there are many public figures to quick to the first part.-Daniel

[2021-03-18 19:40:10] - NPR reported about the non asian victims so its not getting ignored completely but I think the focus has definitely been on the potentially racist part.  I don't know if I was a family member if I would be upset or not about national narratives leaving out my love one.  Its hard to say and probably depends on the people in question if they think that is good or bad.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 19:24:02] - Presumably law enforcement will help to figure that out.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 19:23:44] - a: I'm not entirely sure I follow which way you are arguing.  Is it relevant that he picked a massage parlor instead of a strip joint?  I don't know that we know (which is somewhat the point I think) but if it turns out he picked massage parlor specifically in order to get more Asians then it would substantiate racist motivations.  I mean maybe he picked them because they were in bike riding distance and he hates cars?  I dunno.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 19:07:02] - daniel:  do we know if he frequented strip clubs?  i'm not sure that's a relevant complaint otherwise.  ~a

[2021-03-18 18:52:03] - Paul: I mostly agree with that I don't know its concluded their were racist motivations for the ATL shooting but the point that did sway me some was if you are just going for sex workers why not a strip joint or something instead of the massage parlor which is more likely to be asian?  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 18:04:24] - Daniel: Yeah, but depending on how much of 2021 that covers, that could be a deceleration from 2020 (I didn't see if that was up until mid-March or something shorter like only January). -Paul

[2021-03-18 18:03:28] - a: Daniel's numbers are why I was suspicious that the journalists had "something" and weren't just lazy. If you have such striking numbers like an increase of 1,900%, why not use it? That's not just being lazy, that's almost missing the whole point if your story is focused on rising anti-Asian violence. -Paul

[2021-03-18 18:01:49] - The report does have the line "Stop AAPI Hate received reports of 503 incidents that occured in 2021."  - So that does suggest its continued into 2021.  But yeah I think its been something trending that is getting talked about a lot currently.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 17:57:39] - Daniel: Ah, okay, so the increase happened back in 2020 and is (mostly) just getting reported on now? That makes more sense, as I was wondering why there would be an increase now. -Paul

[2021-03-18 17:55:12] - Those stats that Adrian posted are the ones cited here and by NPR so I think that is the best answer.  Thats an org that tracks it and says its increased. So I guess if you think they are lying / wrong but otherwise I think thats the main source.    -Daniel

[2021-03-18 17:53:55] - from https://time.com/5938482/asian-american-attacks/ -Daniel

[2021-03-18 17:51:56] - Daniel: Sure, I don't doubt at all that there have been incidents all around the country. I just wonder if it's an increase or not. Also, everybody is pointing to the shooting in Atlanta as being anti-Asian violence but it sounds like there is no(?) evidence that the shooter's motives were racially based. -Paul

[2021-03-18 17:43:54] - which isn't like national statistics but just as one more concrete example at least.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 17:43:30] - https://www.reddit.com/r/sanantonio/comments/m4z4nt/awful_hate_crime_in_san_antonio_go_show_some_love/  Thats the one I saw for SA.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 17:41:49] - paul/daniel:  i tried to find the increase they're referring to, and none of the articles i found seem to want to source that info.  i don't doubt they found something.  but i'm not sure what it was they found.  ~a

[2021-03-18 17:41:21] - Paul: I've read about more incidents occurring in the last couple of months.  I think something was talking about Oakland specifically maybe?  I know a restaurant here in SA was vandalized for being 'Asian'.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 17:41:19] - Paul: I've read about more incidents occurring in the last couple of months.  I think something was talking about Oakland specifically maybe?  I know a restaurant here in SA was vandalized for being 'Asian'.  -Daniel

[2021-03-18 16:26:35] - daniel:  agreed.  you can refuse to accept the certified results only if the certification is like . . . fraudulent or something, right?  this seems like not the case.  ~a

[2021-03-18 16:19:01] - mig: It does seem concerning that she took it to congress and not courts.  If there is some reason that the vote totals should be changed it seems like Iowa courts would be the ones to determine that.  -Daniel

[2021-03-17 16:25:55] - daniel:  technically, that might be a felony if kids were able to legally vote. - mig

[2021-03-17 16:25:30] - mig/daniel:  coercion is also an issue with adults.  the smartest quartile of 12 year olds is smarter than the dumbest quartile of 30 year olds.  i completely made that fact up, but seriously, most of the situations you're going to come up with are going to apply to adults that are allowed to vote.  and those adults will be WAY less affected by the results of the vote (because of remaining life expectancy).  ~a

[2021-03-17 16:24:17] - Pretty sure I could Alex to vote for anything I wanted for literally an oreo.  -Daniel

[2021-03-17 16:20:36] - daniel:  trump is allowed to vote in florida.  he barely knows math.  and economics and tax policy definitely go over his head.  ~a

[2021-03-17 16:03:19] - a: SIX?!  Whoa.  Alex is seven and barely knows math.  I don't know that economics or tax policy or things like sharing is good have totally taken root yet.  -Daniel

[2021-03-17 15:51:53] - daniel:  we allow many adults to vote that have the foresight and understanding of a six year-old.  so . . . 6?  maybe 8?  i dunno.  what do people in the "election ink" countries do about age?  ~a

[2021-03-17 15:50:20] - daniel:  hmmm.  i don't know.  ~a

[2021-03-17 15:49:54] - a: "kids should probably be able to vote"  - how young are you going with kids there?  -Daniel

[2021-03-16 20:54:07] - a: I think cost/complexity/ and furthering the 'big brother' notion.  (but mostly partisanship (and racism))  -Daniel

[2021-03-16 20:42:14] - paul:  so, there are dumb/unethical/bullshit reasons.  i agree with you and daniel on that.  but are there any GOOD reasons?  if no, that's fine, i get it.  but i'm wondering what is something someone who was arguing against making it automatic say?  ~a

[2021-03-16 20:27:09] - a: Doesn't seem likely to pass.  I think I break with the Dem party at large when it comes to DC voting rights.  I think a better solution to giving DC more rights is to shrink DC and give it to MD or VA but none of the parties involved want that.  But yeah I don't think that legislation is going anywhere.  -Daniel

[2021-03-16 19:17:42] - daniel:  in many ways this could reduce bureaucratic complexity.  how many fewer lawsuits would we have regarding voting discrimination and restricting the voting rights of protected groups?  ~a

[2021-03-16 19:15:54] - daniel:  "there is overhead to registering everyone and bureaucratic complexity"  is there?  we have computers now, are you sure there is bureaucratic complexity compared to what we do already?  ~a

[2021-03-16 19:12:26] - I guess non partisan and non racist reasons aside there is overhead to registering everyone and bureaucratic complexity.  It could be dealt with but I think it would probably be more than now?  -Daniel

[2021-03-16 19:12:18] - daniel:  "then I think you are left with registering?"  i don't agree.  you're left with registering as a fallback, but there are tons of ways the state governments have info on where we live right now:  drivers license, state tax id, and if you have neither of those, you could register.  ~a

[2021-03-16 19:09:21] - a: Partisanship isn't a good reason maybe like ethically speaking (though depends on your stance) but it can be "truthfully valid" since it can be true that registering more people is bad for a party in a given locale.  -Daniel

[2021-03-16 19:08:13] - -Daniel

[2021-03-16 13:58:15] - Daniel: Could be right that it is capitalizing on the newsworthiness instead of the... new genitalia? I was going to say chromosome but I guess that doesn't work here. I guess hopefully that's the case? Not sure making decisions on directors based on them making news for something unrelated to directing is a great thing either. -paul

[2021-03-16 13:56:27] - a: Re: Fantasy Investing.... even Daniel is beating me! -Paul

[2021-03-16 13:51:54] - First directing post transition I guess?  No idea if he directed stuff before he was he?  -Daniel

[2021-03-16 13:51:05] - Paul: Depends on the lens?  I get your point but there is also the idea of just going with someone who is currently in the press / getting more press as a way to get the project free press.  I bet people will write articles about Page's first directing project etc.  -Daniel

[2021-03-13 01:01:34] - paul:  i wasn't being sarcastic.  daniel:  whether its optional seems irrelevant.  it fails at least 2/3rds of the lemon test.  ~a

[2021-03-12 17:28:43] - a: I don't know that it does since it makes everything optional?  It doesn't enforce that you have to do it.  Just that you can if you and the students are willing.  /shrug.  -Daniel

[2021-03-12 16:18:05] - daniel:  fwiw, our population is only 2.5x theirs.  so if what you say about 5x is true, our budget is still *much* higher than theirs (per person).  2x?  ~a

[2021-03-12 16:10:40] - a: Hmm no I wasn't looking per person.  I see the logic there.  -Daniel

[2021-03-12 16:08:04] - daniel:  "our annual budget is 5x that of Japan"  really?  per person?  we've been looking at vaccine data per person, so i feel like budget needs to be viewed per person, as well, for the same reasons.  ~a

[2021-03-12 16:05:17] - Paul: Quick googling says our annual budget is 5x that of Japan.  I imagine there are a lot of places that manifests but I imagine it creates space to reallocate $ to vaccine purchase as well.  -Daniel

[2021-03-12 15:54:44] - daniel:  chile is actually what i fucked up.  it was the "same color" as the EU and thought it was the EU.  ~a

[2021-03-12 15:54:26] - daniel:  "one place" is just the highlighted places.  ~a

[2021-03-12 15:54:01] - Isn't the EU like one place behind us?  So its not like they are super far behind?  What surprises me on the graph is Chile.  I didn't see that coming.  -Daniel

[2021-03-12 15:38:53] - Daniel: "We were 4th already on Jan 20th" Wouldn't that imply Biden didn't have much to do with it, barring Pierce's idea of a secret negotiation between Biden and companies before he took office? "I imagine its the product of being a rich first world country that can afford to buy early  rounds of the vaccine" The EU isn't doing nearly as well. -Paul

[2021-03-12 15:30:49] - First World privilege!    -Daniel

[2021-03-12 15:29:31] - I don't know if its 100% biden but I think he helped a lot in pushing and ramping up goals / expectations.    We were 4th already on Jan 20th.  I imagine its the product of being a rich first world country that can afford to buy early  rounds of the vaccine.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 18:55:35] - Paul: I'm unfamiliar with it.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 18:54:13] - Sorry that was @Mig.  I've been bad that that lately.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 18:53:48] - When you say phrases like "I don't recall any sort of concern" I'm never sure if you mean here? the internet in general?  NYT/wapo?    USA Today is reporting it and Twitter suspended their account so its not like it was deemed ok.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 18:03:36] - daniel:  I mean, it was practically the theme of the 2016 Clinton campaign.  Every criticism was responded to with some form of, "man you all just don't want a woman president." - mig

[2021-03-11 17:58:22] - Mig: I agree - is it just random twitter / reddit people that say stuff like or does it actually appear in articles somewhere?  I think the area we would disagree on would be nuanced and what counts as "reflexively deployed".  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 17:46:19] - daniel:  sure there's plenty of legit criticism, and that's fine!  but when it starts to venture into the teritory of "clown in blackface", "feckless cunt", or amos and andy mockery, that's kind of where my line is drawn. - mig

[2021-03-11 17:38:02] - I've seen tons of criticism of those people and would totally believe that there is racism / sexism directed towards them but I would agree that its not ok.  I don't like Thomas as a judge but its the same ballpark as not liking Kavanaugh as a judge.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 17:30:45] - daniel:  partial hyperbole, partial seriousness. - mig

[2021-03-11 17:10:47] - mig: I mean its hard to tell sarcasm vs sincere in text so not sure where that is falling mig but I would disagree.  A) at the term "woke cult" B) that only those in A are people C) that they are then free targets.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 16:00:50] - We'll see if my super concentrated portfolio can build me any wealth  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 15:53:43] - Daniel: Yeah, the "YOLO" comment was mostly tongue in cheek. "they think it is their only path to actually being able to retire" There's a really interesting saying I have seen that says something like you should have a concentrated portfolio to build wealth and a diversified one to protect it. -Paul

[2021-03-11 15:51:32] - Also I'm interested if NYT has done anything about a reporter that is lying.  I would think NYT would want to protect its own reputation which depends on the reporters it associates with.  In that either NYT seems to be slipping there or disagrees with his characterizations.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 15:48:12] - But I do think that criticism of public figures and journalists is fair game.  Also that  Greenwald and NYT journalists should both not be getting death threats or harassed.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 15:47:30] - mig: I'm unfamiliar with the NYT reporter talked in the article but I think in terms of internal consistency there is an issue in the article where in the beginning he is frustrated by her calling out people for harassment / violence and equating that to criticism but at  the end of the article talks about how he gets death threats and that you should just be ok with that as a public figure.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 15:09:21] - YOLO would have been actually changing my 401k / IRA's into GME.  I've seen reddit screenshots of people doing something like that and while on one hand if they think it is their only path to actually being able to retire I understand taking a shot it still makes me queasy a bit for them.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 14:52:52] - YOLO'ing seems a strong term for my position but I do agree.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 14:45:03] - a: But I also agree it is crazy pants that Daniel is the one YOLO-ing gamestop. -Paul

[2021-03-11 14:40:25] - a: lol - I think that is fair.  -Daniel

[2021-03-11 14:39:52] - the crazy scenario that i couldn't have possibly predicted was that daniel would be the one of us that bought into gme.  ~a

[2021-03-11 14:36:43] - paul:  i'm not totally sure what point i'm trying to make, fwiw.  other than, i guess, a toned-down version of an argument that matt herndon or daniel would make.  ~a

[2021-03-11 05:33:12] - interesting article about the GME saga and how people are using call options to make a stock go up more than would be normal otherwise.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/georgecalhoun/2021/03/10/gamestop-the-second-surgeanatomy-of-a-gamma-swarm/?sh=3a5c36d74225  -Daniel

[2021-03-10 18:13:54] - Daniel: That's a game I don't feel qualified at all to play. Like you mentioned during SC: When do you decide when to get out? I guess the answer is before everybody else? I just don't know personally how to answer those questions. -Paul

[2021-03-10 18:13:04] - Daniel: I agree there is some reasoning behind the movement of the stock. I guess my issue with it is that the reasoning mostly seems to involve guesses regarding the diamond hands or paper hands of a bunch of random people on reddit and/or if hedge funds want to fight back or not. -Paul

[2021-03-10 17:50:09] - Daniel: Yeah, perfect timing because now it is like $200. -Paul

[2021-03-10 17:30:07] - lol now its crashing.  /shrug  -Daniel

[2021-03-10 16:58:26] - So it seems less to do with the actual company and more a function of wallstreet shenanigans around the stock that retail investors are trying to get in on?  I wouldn't defend it as safe but there is at least some reasoning there (says the one who owns some GME but also isn't buying anymore).  -Daniel

[2021-03-10 16:56:54] - GME currently 330.  While I agree that the fundamentals for the company don't align with the price I do think there can be an external to the company reason for it to be high.  Currently in this case it seems to be trying to force the shorts to buy more.  I don't know if that will work out or not but it seems understandable.  -Daniel

[2021-03-08 15:41:26] - mig: I think its definitely a good thing to look into and spend more time on.  I've seen lots of theories / ideas on the subject.  I know there were area's of TX that Trump did way  better than expected so it would be interesting for people to spend time on why that is and try to figure out actually.  -Daniel

[2021-03-04 15:10:09] - a: Maybe it will change sure - but it does seem dumb to stick with a term that came from academia if the people that its supposed to be including don't like it.  -Daniel

[2021-03-03 20:08:52] - daniel:  speaking as a minority who's been turned off democrats for the largely foreseeable future, the democrats need to look at this way more seriously, and not just when it becomes a polling liability.  The "but teh magas" isn't a good excuse, and it's wearing thin. - mig

[2021-03-03 20:07:32] - paul/daniel:  "It seems fairly clear, based on Shor's polling, that Ivy League–educated white liberals' messaging on an assortment of issues falling under a category I have termed 'woke excess'"  does it???  you . . . wanna tell us how you came to that conclusion?  did i miss a link to shor's polling or something?  ~a

[2021-03-03 20:06:31] - paul/daniel:  i'll also agree, generally the left has gone off the deep end.  on the other hand:  "the trouble is that many racial minorities don't actually share that view" is a cool opinion, and all, but it'd be good to see some actual sourcing of that.  you're literally talking to a pollster . . . so what did the polls say?!  ~a

[2021-03-03 19:33:53] - Paul: I think I would agree with "animating the left over the past year or two might be turning people off." to some extent (~those articles I posted earlier this week~).  I think its an issue the left definitely needs to deal with.  I don't think its all of the left in the way that Jan 6th didn't represent all of the right but its still something the right needs to deal with.  -Daniel

[2021-03-03 19:07:46] - Daniel: The idea being that maybe, just maybe, some of the actions and rhetoric that had been animating the left over the past year or two might be turning people off. -Paul

[2021-03-03 19:06:48] - Daniel: Especially with regards to the people who took a look at Trump and the Republicans and Biden and the Democrats and decided that somehow Trump and the Republicans were the lesser of two evils. -Paul

[2021-03-03 19:05:59] - Daniel: Apparently Facebook doesn't allow copying a link to specific posts? Or I am too much of an idiot to figure it out. It was from November 7th, right after the election, and I basically suggested (after congratulating my liberal friends on their victory) that maybe the slim margins against somebody as horrible as Trump should be a little humbling. -Paul

[2021-03-03 18:33:25] - Not in a bad way - just was funny to me to have some many elements that seemed potentially interesting / their own discussion all mushed up.  -Daniel

[2021-03-03 18:32:20] - That is like a clickbait message board post.  I didn't see your facebook post, I don't know who Bjorn is and comparing woke democrats to Trump all in one statement!  -Daniel

[2021-03-03 15:23:35] - daniel:  i've been using cfiresim closed source and cfiresim open source (source) to test out plans.  ~a

[2021-03-03 15:22:00] - daniel:  i'm just now starting to figure out the bond tent, so i'm totally not sure.  i've spent some time looking at a long retirement:  maybe as long as 45 years?  if so, the bond allocation might get up to 55%, then after 18 years get down to ~0%.  this is very speculative, and i'm still learning/tuning/etc.  ~a

[2021-03-03 15:17:18] - a: So then I guess another related question is do you have a target for when you want to retire?  And how high % wise are you going to aim for with your bond % (top of tent)? -Daniel

[2021-03-03 15:09:25] - daniel:  a bond tent is a two dimensional shape: there's the bond rate at retirement (high), then you have the bond rate for later retirement (low), and finally there's how quickly you go from one rate to the other. the three of those numbers depend on how long retirement will be.  how long will your retirement be?  35 years?  45 years?  which?  (if you're worried about living too long, i do not:  geriatric spending often goes way down).  ~a

[2021-03-03 05:31:32] - Also tenting as a verb is weird to type.  -Daniel

[2021-03-03 05:31:23] - a: when you talk about a bond tent in your future (pretty sure you have) how high are you thinking of going with bonds in your allocation?  70% bonds at retirement?  50%?  35%?  20%?  I've been looking into it and there doesn't seem to be great concensus on bond tents being the definite way to go, though they do definitely have support.  Also I didn't see any type of concensus on how high to tent for those that were tenting.  -Daniel

[2021-03-02 15:10:26] - Daniel: I have no idea how it works either. -Paul

[2021-03-02 15:00:53] - Paul: Is there a downside / reason not to?  I have no idea how all that works.  -Daniel

[2021-03-01 22:09:58] - Paul: I am vaguely aware of https://bigbangtheory.fandom.com/wiki/Bazinga.  Benzinga is a nope for me.  -Daniel

[2021-03-01 19:54:26] - Daniel: On the WaPo? I think I generally agree with his premise, but wasn't a big fan of his delivery. It felt both unconvincing AND not made with enough conviction. I haven't read any of Kendi's stuff, so it's kinda unfair of me to pass judgement, but everything I've heard about his stuff makes me think I wouldn't agree with it. -Paul

[2021-03-01 19:41:52] - Paul: what are your thoughts on it?  I only know Kendi from one thing last fall where I got in a debate with my sister.  -Daniel

[2021-03-01 19:41:28] - daniel:  yah.  i did notice janet yellen:  "very difficult implementation problems."    ~a

[2021-03-01 19:40:39] - a: We'll see.  I think you guys made strong points against it when it came up.  Maybe they have better ideas than I do!  -Daniel

[2021-03-01 19:34:55] - daniel:  probably won't pass, but your thing is getting more press.  ~a

[2021-03-01 19:30:14] - Daniel: Finished the WaPo article too. Again, I'm curious of your thoughts. Were you familiar with Kendi's work in the past? -Paul

[2021-03-01 18:56:00] - Paul: I think both to some degree.  I think Kanoute can be bothered about bias / interactions with police while also recognizing what led to it without labeling folks as racist.  I think the school went through a mostly reasonable process though probably should have tried to do more at the end but probably just wanted to let it drop I guess.  -Daniel

[2021-03-01 18:41:01] - Daniel: Do you think Oumou Kanoute or the school administration was in the wrong for how they handled things? -Paul

[2021-03-01 18:20:18] - -Daniel

[2021-03-01 17:38:15] - Daniel: Surprisingly, I seem to be able to read both your articles. Finished the NYT one (I had heard it mentioned on a podcast too). Curious your thoughts. -Paul

[2021-02-28 19:51:47] - Though they both are on paywall sites so not sure - maybe they are on other sites or discussed on other sites?  -Daniel

[2021-02-28 19:51:20] - And https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/not-all-anti-racist-ideas-are-good-ones-the-left-isnt-being-honest-about-this/2021/02/22/c83d4870-7179-11eb-b8a9-b9467510  was a different article Andrea sent me which I thought was interesting and would be of interest.  -Daniel

[2021-02-28 19:50:53] - On a different note here is the article I mentioned during SC2 the other night: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/24/us/smith-college-race.html  -Daniel

[2021-02-28 19:50:34] - Paul: I don't know what all Cruz could have done or not done entirely but as a specific example w/o trying to draw any other value judgements AOC raised money and volunteered at a soup kitchen.  The volunteering is always hard to judge its impact / benefit but she raised like 3 million for TX charities.  -Daniel

[2021-02-28 03:15:32] - Daniel: The levees breaking are a good distinction. I didn't know they were a federal government responsibility. Still, that was probably not done on GWB's watch, right? -Paul

[2021-02-26 20:04:40] - daniel:  yeah, i didn't even realize that.  the more i think about, it the more i think:  there's like a bunch of material differences between katrina->gwb vs texas->biden.  ~a

[2021-02-26 20:00:28] - Its been awhile since Katrina so I may not be remembering all this directly but I think it was levee failures which was a fed responsibility and the response afterwards for which he got criticism.  TX power is very directly controlled by our state and not fed (thats like the underlying point of all of this) and TX is very heavily R run.  -Daniel

[2021-02-26 19:18:33] - Daniel: "One approach seeks to narrow the range by trading off highs (and lows) and the other allows for higher (and lower)" Yes, this is a much better way of saying what I was trying to say. I guess my thinking is that my retirement number already feels like it has some huge margins of error, so I don't see much point to narrowing the range of outcomes to that number. -Paul

[2021-02-26 15:07:51] - So for her I don't think an extra year or two (or more?) is a big 'price'.  -Daniel

[2021-02-26 15:07:14] - a: Depends how much one likes their job / working.  Andrea and I talk about retiring early but there is a very low chance Andrea actually fully retires.  She needs / wants to be productive in some capacity so even if its a different thing that pays less or something I don't think she will just stop.  -Daniel

[2021-02-26 15:03:56] - daniel:  his plan requires working an extra year.  do you consider that a fair trade?  ~a

[2021-02-26 15:03:23] - I think Paul's theory is right that its all probabilities and the trade off he is making but I think there is a larger range of outcomes in his approach which is the point.  One approach seeks to narrow the range by trading off highs (and lows) and the other allows for higher (and lower).  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 17:24:05] - though the 10% in the example again feels like a ton.  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 17:23:40] - a: I also pushed back on 4 being too high for me so we were going to settle on one for the moment but I was trying to read more about it to figure out how I felt about it.  https://www.kitces.com/blog/managing-sequence-of-return-risk-with-bucket-strategies-vs-a-total-return-rebalancing-approach/  makes a case for having some and just rebalancing as a way to use it which makes sense to me.  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 17:17:44] - She suggested 1 - 4 years of living expenses.  I was reading about it online and it seems a thing where some people definitely have large cash cushions.  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 17:06:51] - Daniel: I've thought about it some, and don't really like the idea of a significant cash cushion. I get the risk of sequence of return, but my hope is to retire with enough cushion to offset any problems with early market drops. If not? Then maybe adapt by living more frugally in early years or even going back to work. Lots of optionality. -Paul

[2021-02-25 17:06:25] - daniel:  what percentage in cash did your financial planner suggest for first part of retirement?  ~a

[2021-02-25 17:02:40] - daniel:  i plan to include cash (money markets) into my retirement simulator, but have not done that yet.  ~a

[2021-02-25 17:02:14] - daniel:  "bond tent idea eliminating a need to have actual cash"  short answer:  yes.  longer answer:  even in the beginning of retirement, i will have very low amounts of cash (more than 0%, and much less than 1%).  there are times where cash is useful, in the short-term, but only rarely see last graph (i made the last graph).  ~a

[2021-02-25 16:56:57] - I think I just cruised around https://www.garrettplanningnetwork.com/ looking through their listings.  I originally was looking in San Antonio but realized especially with the pandemic that was silly so expanded to just wherever.  We ended up with a lady in NC.  I would just go read websites / bios / etc to try and find someone who seemed in the right ballpark.  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 16:52:29] - a: I think I'm generally pro the idea of a bond tent.  Specifically for cash though are you thinking of the bond tent idea eliminating a need to have actual cash (or cash equivalents)?  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 16:49:27] - daniel:  i use these two images to base most of my thoughts on bond tent and sequence of returns risk:  image 1 and image 2 (both from fiphysician.com).  ~a

[2021-02-25 16:46:42] - daniel:  how did you find a financial planner.  i'm thinking of hiring a financial planner in the next few years.  ~a

[2021-02-25 16:46:18] - daniel:  "Is this something you guys have though about any?" meeee.  whenever i talk about "bond tent" its because i'm very focused on "sequence of return risk".  any fire-calculator (back tester) will include the sequence of return risk, but ironically, i don't see much talk there about a bond tent.  ~a

[2021-02-25 16:41:48] - But its hard to judge that against losses early on in retirement due to bad years immediately following retirement.  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 16:41:22] - On a non direct inflation topic (though maybe related in some ways) I had a call with a financial planner yesterday and one of the topics was the amount of cash cushion to have for the first part of retirement to try and avoid sequence of return risk.  Is this something you guys have though about any?  I'm not sure how I feel about it yet since it seems to have a large opportunity cost to have a large chunk of cash not doing anything.-Daniel

[2021-02-25 16:39:23] - a: Ha - I had stopped paying attention to it.  Gogo rocketships.  -Daniel

[2021-02-25 16:36:16] - daniel:  gme/amc today and yesterday, wow.  ~a

[2021-02-24 14:17:25] - Daniel: It's amazing to me that Talia's best performer is Noodles and Company and her worst is Amazon. -Paul

[2021-02-23 21:56:06] - Lol - only person I'm ahead of is Talia now  -Daniel

[2021-02-23 15:00:06] - daniel isn't looking so bad on the stock market challenge today!  he's beating (or tied-ish) with half the field.  that's so crazy.  ~a

[2021-02-19 19:26:35] - Paul: Nice!  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 19:24:08] - Daniel: We played direct strike in your honor on Wednesday and I crushed Mark and Adrian. Also, we won like 5 games of 3v3 in a row. -Paul

[2021-02-19 19:23:43] - Daniel: Glad to hear things are getting back to normal now that Cruz has returned to save his people. -Paul

[2021-02-19 15:39:51] - a: Yes - we talked about that but then you have to open the door to the outside - and when you are trying to save all the degrees suddenly opening the door is less palatable.  But yeah using snow for toilet water / cold source is definitely a thing that lots were / are doing.  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 15:13:50] - The other  bonus for my household is that we have an extra fridge in our garage.  Even with the power out it maintained a very cold temp (cause the garage just got cold) so we were able to rearrange and keep a lot of our cold stuff ok.  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 15:09:40] - daniel:  not quite the same, but i had a broken heater one winter, and had about a week before i was able to fix it.  it was ridiculous.  i remember taking hot showers (you didn't have this luxury, with what i'll assume is an electric water heater) and wearing tons of clothes/blankets.  i don't remember what temperature my house got down to, but i was able to see my breath indoors which was weird.  ~a

[2021-02-19 15:05:06] - a: Temperature wise our low was 47 ish?  My mom got down to 44 I think.    We made a blanket fort around our gas fireplace to make a little warm room.  That got up to about 55 which felt nice at the time    -Daniel

[2021-02-19 15:01:50] - daniel:  nice!  gas stove and gas fireplace are nice for situations like this.  still, it sounds harrowing, to me, not having power for multiple days in the winter regardless of the details.  ~a

[2021-02-19 14:58:09] - I wouldn't describe our personal situation as harrowing but I do think it was worse for others.  We have a gas stove and gas fireplace so were able to utilize those.  People on reddit posted about being out of power for 65+ hours.  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 14:57:00] - a: Groceries in general are going to be a pain for the next week or two.  Everyones cold stuff pretty much got jacked so lots of people need to restock (which also includes grocery stores).  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 14:56:02] - a: Our bathtub is filled just in case our water goes out.  We have some bottled water and are boiling water to use for things like washing dishes / brushing teeth / etc things.  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 14:53:06] - daniel:  yikes.  sounds harrowing.  i'm glad things are getting back to normal!  i'm guessing you probably aren't able to buy bottled water anywhere  ~a

[2021-02-19 14:52:09] - Monday / Tuesday were the worst because power just got poofed.  Wed was better cause it was couple hours on couple hours off which is manageable.  Thursday was pretty normal power wise but was just catching up on everything from earlier this week.  -Daniel

[2021-02-19 14:50:56] - a: Getting back to normal.  I think today in theory should be the last day I think for danger of losing power.  There are some issues with water supply now because apparently a lot of pipes broke and froze and now thawing and leaking again.  So hard for utility to maintain pressure everywhere in the system.  -Daniel

[2021-02-18 15:21:22] - daniel:  how's life?  ~a

[2021-02-16 22:17:39] - paul/daniel:  i'm also working on a new feature that is still simmering:  bond tent!  the idea that your bond/equity mix should be constant during retirement seems to go contrary to the data.  ~a

[2021-02-16 21:06:15] - paul/daniel: i made some changes to my retirement simulator!  biggest change is it now supports a bond/equity mix.  if you have python, it's pretty easy to run:  git clone https://github.com/arichnad/retirement-simulator in that directory:  python3 simulate.py --equity-percent=75 35 4  (this does a 75% equity + 25% bond mix, for 35 years, taking out 4% of your starting balance per year, adjusted for inflation).  ~a

[2021-02-15 14:31:57] - Daniel: If your argument is that Trump's initial policy was worse, then you'll get no argument from me and the article agreed. But I think it can be true that X levels of family separation is bad AND 0.5X levels of family separation is still bad. -Paul

[2021-02-15 14:30:13] - Daniel: So in some cases family separation policies are good? That's a level of nuance I don't ever recall seeing previously. "Children suffered lasting emotional damage from the separations, and the policy was criticized as grossly inhumane by world leaders". -Paul

[2021-02-14 23:01:43] - If you guys really can't tell the difference between separating literally all the families vs leaving it as an option if they think the children are in danger or whatever that just seems like you being obtuse on purpose.  -Daniel

[2021-02-13 16:42:44] - Daniel: So.... family separation is okay as long as it's not done in every instance? Or done in moderation? I guess I'm not sure what the big distinction is. The rhetoric from when Trump was in office was that the policy was like the Holocaust so this kind of nuance now is puzzling. -Paul

[2021-02-12 20:37:11] - mig: I mean in the case of abusers its obviously not monstrously evil?  So I'm not sure where we coming from with that stance.  If you add the work systemic in front then sure I think we can start from that stance.  Its an important word that makes a lot of difference b/w the two policies.  -Daniel

[2021-02-12 19:13:43] - daniel:  if we're coming from the stance that "family separations are monstrously evil". that's a distinction without a practical difference. - mig

[2021-02-12 18:50:51] - I think "Family separation remains an active policy" is technically true though misleading in the spirit of things vs 'Systematic Family separation no longer an active policy though family separation can still occur'.  The first implies no change which doesn't seem accurate.    -Daniel

[2021-02-12 18:48:35] - paul: "remains an active policy" seems like a potentially misleading statement when the article itself lays out the differences.  Its still on the table but is no longer systematic.    FTA: "To be clear, I have no interest in drawing a false equivalence between what Trump did and what Biden is doing".    -Daniel

[2021-02-11 17:50:41] - Daniel: Sure, and we'll never know. It just seems odd to me to think that a violent mob (urged on by the President who is facing a lost election) murdering politicians in the line of succession would somehow appear more legit than said President doing pretty much anything else (like his attempts to strong arm elections officials). -Paul

[2021-02-11 17:19:58] - Paul: In the case that members of Congress are murdered and so that now Congress' position is one of support for Trump.  Maybe the military  intervenes but also maybe not cause the executive and legislative bodies are in agreement?  I don't know.  -Daniel

[2021-02-11 17:11:51] - Daniel: Which is which? It seems like Congress is less likely to say yes after the capitol attack... unless they say "no" because all of the "yes" votes were murdered, in which case I go back to that being pretty bad looking too. -Paul

[2021-02-11 17:07:35] - I think the difference is the position of Congress.  In one Congress says no you are wrong to trump.  In another *maybe* they say yes! you are right.  -Daniel

[2021-02-11 16:22:27] - a: yeah I don't think I am that far away from you.  I think its probably a question of degree and how you word it.  What are the chances Jan 6th leads to fall of US?  I don't know but certainly less than 50% (just to pick a big safe number that hopefully even Pierce could agree to).  But anything greater than 0% seems like a big deal since we haven't had that in a long time.  -Daniel

[2021-02-11 15:54:30] - paul:  "where Trump declares himself the next president regardless of the election results"  the indirect method has a higher chance of success.  the direct method has major problems:  one of which is that the military would have turned on him quickly if he went direct-coup.  (where i disagree with pierce and daniel is how likely/plausible the indirect plan could have succeeded)  ~a

[2021-02-11 15:53:22] - daniel:  i understand your point.  i'm not sure.  i just wanted to rule out really unlikely scenarios.  ~a

[2021-02-11 15:29:02] - I think that is the point about the veneer of legality that Pierce was alluding to below.  If Trump throws it all out the window then maybe people do object or stand in to do something.  But if the mob kills people and Congress is suddenly backing Trump staying on as pres then its suddenly a lot more grey for the military to be all NOPE.  -Daniel

[2021-02-11 14:26:44] - I'm also not as confident as Adrian that R's would still vote the "right" way if they had majorities in both houses and Trump and a mob outside.  -Daniel

[2021-02-11 14:25:41] - I don't think its likely Jan 6th leads to America failing but I do think its the most plausible failing point we've had since the civil war? That I can currently think of.  -Daniel

[2021-02-10 21:39:48] - Paul: re anthem there might be contractual issues?    I'm under the impression that like the DoD pays for all those anthems?  So there might be something where Cuban has to via  league agreement.  I'm not 100% on that though.  -Daniel

[2021-02-09 16:44:27] - Ted Cruz telling ICE to get cages ready during transition is wrong.  Ted Cruz talking to media about how he is going to go nuts on caging kids jan 21st as a deterrent to immigration and ICE seeing that and starting to buy cages probably ok.  -Daniel

[2021-02-09 16:42:51] - I do think there is some wiggle room to talk about what your policies will be and what not.  I'm also not sure the examples listed were equivalent (one telling a company the US will in the future pay them appropriately vs one telling a us gov agency to start doing something).  -Daniel

[2021-02-09 16:41:02] - a: I think paul is right to some degree here.  There is a transition but you do have to be careful to not act as pres yet.  Its one of the (many) things that Trump got in trouble for early on (his behavior during transition period).  -Daniel

[2021-02-05 14:46:47] - mig: It does look good and has been awhile so might be fun to go through them again.  -Daniel

[2021-02-03 21:30:45] - daniel:  adjusting tax brackets is inflationary:  why are our tax brackets adjusted for inflation?    ~a

[2021-02-03 21:26:06] - a: I think the more nuanced answer would be its a factor to consider in adjust minimum wage.  Like raising and lowering the prime rate isn't a yes / no its a how much and when and over what time.  Minimum wage is probably similar.  -Daniel

[2021-02-03 21:21:33] - daniel:  this is half true, but using this logic, would you agree we should never change the minimum wage?  ~a

[2021-02-03 21:20:41] - a: Adjusting the minimum for inflation is itself inflationary?  -Daniel

[2021-02-02 19:53:48] - daniel:  two words, pink sheets  ~a

[2021-02-02 19:48:42] - Daniel: Hopefully that's a joke. I was more thinking about Gamestop and how I personally wouldn't have touched that at all during this time but I can see how it could be tempting to try to profit on it either going up or down. Personal experience is often the best teacher. -Paul

[2021-02-02 17:34:21] - paul: maybe I should take a look at these penny stocks?  Is that my take away there?  Paul's investing advice is great!  -Daniel

[2021-02-02 17:06:54] - paul:  this is a very interesting perspective!  i like it.  it seems like it explains my experience "transacting" in bitcoin.  i had to day-trade for years before i decided day-trading was dumb.  daniel will have to learn the hard way, like we did, decades ago.  ~a

[2021-02-02 17:03:38] - Daniel: Which is just my way of saying to try not to get too discouraged if things don't work out early on. You can think of it like tuition. I think a handful of companies I invested in decades ago when I was starting filed for bankruptcy. -Paul

[2021-02-02 17:02:32] - Daniel: https://twitter.com/BrianFeroldi/status/1356647169818841097 Some investors I follow and respect think you almost have to make a series of mistakes early on to really learn what works and what doesn't. Like, you can be told not to do penny stocks a hundred times, but until you try a few times and mostly lose money, the lesson won't sink in. -Paul

[2021-02-02 16:48:14] - daniel:  worded differently:  high risk high reward scenarios are not always gambling.  they're sometimes gambling.  ~a

[2021-02-02 16:47:54] - daniel:  what you're doing may be gambling, but my individual portfolio has never (almost never) included gambling decisions.  i won't invest in something that includes hoping for a bag-holder.  i would only invest in a company where i would see a long-term viability.  ~a

[2021-02-02 16:46:07] - Definitely still gambling though.  -Daniel

[2021-02-02 16:45:57] - a: Up still but definitely less as gamestop came back down.  I decided I was ok just letting that ride out and if its lost thats fine.  Its been educational to pay more attention and have the vested interest to see how more things work on a detailed level.  -Daniel

[2021-02-02 16:38:50] - daniel:  how has your "gambling" been doing this week?    ~a

[2021-02-02 16:15:29] - Daniel: Tuesday and Wednesday both work about equally well for me, I think. Wednesday might be slightly better. -Paul

[2021-02-01 17:19:30] - Daniel: It's often said that the best time to start investing was yesterday and the second best time is today.... but whoever said that might not have seen what was going on with Gamestop. -Paul

[2021-02-01 15:45:57] - daniel:  by another measure, volume traded in the s&p500 (which doesn't even include gme or amc) was higher than any week between 2011 and 2019, inclusive.  ~a

[2021-02-01 15:41:27] - daniel:  2020 was a pretty volatile year, because pandemic.  but if you ignore 2020, last week (the week starting 2021-01-25) was more volatile than *any* week since 2011, according to the chicago board options exchange volatility index (vix).  ~a

[2021-02-01 15:36:07] - I think I picked a crazy week to look at the stock market and think that maybe I'm ok gambling a smaller amount in it.  I mean maybe every week is crazy for some reason.  But last week definitely seemed crazy.  -Daniel

[2021-01-28 17:02:46] - Personally I don't know enough to know how to regulate (or if this whole debacle warrants regulation) but I do agree with the concept that if the hedge funds took the risk of shorting over 100% of a company that ought to be on them if it comes crashing down.  -Daniel

[2021-01-28 17:01:34] - https://shortsqueeze.com/shortinterest/stock/term2.php?s=GME Capping out for the 52 week change from low 9999.99%  lol.  -Daniel

[2021-01-28 14:27:53] - Paul: I agree that on the surface it seems suspect though I also do admit its possible that the discord wasn't cracking on people making threats towards Melvin employees or some shit (I have no idea if thats what was happening but I could see it as plausible at least) -Daniel

[2021-01-28 14:16:27] - Daniel: I think you may have chosen the wrong week to start investing in individual stocks. -paul

[2021-01-28 04:15:07] - Yeah I don't think there is a lot of love in there for people affiliated with citron but there were definitely mod posts up about not doxxing and not posting about anything IRL.  Maybe discord didn't have that same discipline?  -Daniel

[2021-01-28 02:34:48] - WSB is back up on reddit but apparently got banned from discord for "hate speech" (cue Paul's music) though I'm really sure since I didn't go to their discord but from reading the reddit the last few days they don't seem big on hate speech other than calling themselves "retards" left and right.    -Daniel

[2021-01-27 20:44:44] - i don't like things to go ding when i'm trying to write a unit test / method whatever.  I like that I just refresh and see where we are at.  Maybe a tab blinky thing or something?  I have no idea what goes into that feature though.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 20:30:46] - paul/daniel:  i noticed recently that nobody besides me seems to be using the "toggle listening for notifications" feature here.  do you not use it because it doesn't work?  (i know there are at least two significant bugs)  or do you not use it because of another reason?  thanks!  ~a

[2021-01-27 20:28:26] - daniel:  Q "is the WH concerned with the stock market activity, we're seeing around gamestop, and now with some other stocks as well, ... have there been any questions with the sec about how to proceed?" A "i'm also happy to repeat our first female treasury secretary: [we] are monitoring the situation, it's a good reminder though that the stock market isn't the only measure of the health of the economy ... K shaped recovery ..."  ~a

[2021-01-27 20:21:46] - a: How so? I continue to be super entertained.  I saw on wsb that Powell was asked about it.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 19:40:18] - a: In this case I guess twitter given that its their policy and yeah that does allow for bias.  I do think there is room where the policy could go bad and lindell might be an example of that.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 18:22:49] - daniel:  the only questionable part would be "false or misleading information".  false is one of those weird words when we're talking about unknowns and grey areas.  ~a

[2021-01-27 18:21:59] - daniel:  ok, it is true that a lot of people went to jail over election meddling.  no votes were overturned, but i guess that goes to our original point:  that this was more about the thumb, not about the . . . arm that pulls the voting lever machines?    would talking about this on twitter be allowed today?  i feel like it would be:  link again.  ~a

[2021-01-27 18:18:06] - Also https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-asked-russia-to-find-clintons-emails-on-or-around-the-same-day-russians-targeted-her-accounts the video there is literally him asking.  So yeah.  I think there is more evidence on the side that 2016 was influenced than 2020 was stolen.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 18:16:20] - I don't think there is a court finding that 2016 was stolen.  But I think there is much more evidence that has been through court to support that 2016 Trump had connections to Russia and was coordinating? (not sure the right word there) with them to some degree.  Vs the courts opinions on the evidence in regard to 2020.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 18:14:51] - https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-bannon-associates-factbox/factbox-here-are-eight-trump-associates-arrested-or-convicted-of-crimes-idUSKBN25G1YU    Those aren't all about 2016 but it has four that I counted that were about Russia and the connections b/w them and Trump.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 18:04:07] - daniel:  "Courts disagree"?  do they?  i know that the 2016-fraud cases info came from the US-intel community, but i'm not sure it went through any courts.  (the 2020-fraud cases did go through the courts, of course)  ~a

[2021-01-27 18:02:48] - Paul: " I honestly think it's a lot closer" - Courts disagree?    -Daniel

[2021-01-27 18:02:09] - I think that Trump is arguing what I put below.  I do not think Pelosi was arguing the same.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 18:00:18] - Daniel: All I am saying, and I really will leave it at this for now, is that for as much as you think that 2016 might've been stolen and that people who think 2020 was stolen are idiots.... just imagine there is somebody out there who thinks the exact opposite and I'm not sure the facts back up that one of you is 100% right and the other 100% wrong. I honestly think it's a lot closer. -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:57:02] - Do you agree that Trump is arguing that there is a conspiracy afoot that is actually changing vote totals / stealing votes / double voting in order to make him lose?  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:56:55] - Daniel: I don't think the election was stolen, no. Did Trump solicit and receive aid from Russia? Maybe. But the investigation didn't uncover any smoking guns in terms of Russia stealing the election in my opinion (even though I do think he probably should've been removed from office). -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:55:28] - (Though I don't remember as much about 2016 being stolen but influenced instead but thats just my memory) -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:54:57] - Maybe even both sides used the word "stolen" but what they mean is very different.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:54:26] - I don't think 2016 was stolen in that Russian agents were changing vote totals in FL. I don't think anyone does.  But I do think as adrian put there were thumbs put on the scales as it were and that had an impact.  That is what people are talking about.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:53:24] - Paul: You don't think Trump solicited and received aid from Russia?  Despite the evidence?  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:52:21] - Daniel: "what is true also matters" Agreed. And the 2016 election wasn't stolen any more than the 2020 one was. -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:51:08] - " I think that applies to both sides" - if it were actually true.  Its not just about the "saying" - what is true also matters.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:44:49] - Paul: " possibly think they are patriots trying to prevent the election from being stolen" - they 100% thought this.  Its why they were posting pictures and stuff as they were doing it.  They were also 100% trying to overthrow the gov.  They were just idiots so failed.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:43:22] - Dem lead invasions of the capital: 0.  Investigations proving Trump & co colluded with Russia: Many.  Investigations proving Biden stole election: 0.  Rep lead invasions of the capital: 1.  Those numbers do matter.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:39:01] - Daniel: "Its we have been discriminating for a long time" Sure, that's a perfectly reasonable justification, but it doesn't change the fact that it is discrimination based on race. Again, I think the issue here is that when it comes to one side, the only "truth" lots of people want to see are that they are evil and have the worst motivations, and when it comes to the other side then all they want to see is that they are noble... -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:38:04] - Paul: wat.  Taxes aren't theft?  I also don't know which both you mean.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:37:03] - Daniel: Both can be true. Just like how taxes can be "money we agree to pay to government to live in our society" and also "theft". -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:34:46] - Which isn't the same thing as "discriminating based on race" -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:34:25] - There is context when it comes to hiring so it isn't "is it ok to discriminate? it depends on the race.".  Its we have been discriminating for a long time and continue to do so if we don't actively try to do something about it so lets try to actively do something about it.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:33:03] - oops - i was trying to edit that still.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:29:14] - Its the truth.  Its not a take.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:28:49] - Daniel: "The other is literally trying to overthrow the gov of the country" That's your take, but I'm sure that isn't their take. They probably think they're protecting the government from being stolen. -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:28:35] - *worse at consistently applying political principles. -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:28:07] - Paul: "consistent political principles that apply equally" I would agree but also don't think I am not doing.  I do think politicians suck at this on both sides too.  I do think R's are worse.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:26:41] - Daniel: If I told you that a mob attacked and killed innocent people to advance a political goal and asked you if it was bad, the answer shouldn't be: "Well, what was the political goal?" Or, if I asked if it's okay to discriminate based on race, it shouldn't be: "Depends on the race". Or if it's okay for Twitter to ban certain political speech, it shouldn't be: "Right leaning speech or left leaning speech?" -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:26:11] - Paul: "WHAT your political stance is, violence against innocents to advance your political goals is wrong." - Agree.  No one argues the riots parts stemming from BLM protests are good.  (I mean probably someone would / has - its the internet after all).  However one stems from expressing anger at being killed by police / gov and is anger boiling over (which is bad). The other is literally trying to overthrow the gov of the country? -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:24:49] - Daniel: But this is my whole point, I think it is important to have consistent political principles that apply equally and not just whiplash from one side to the other based on which group is being targeted. I think the latter is really dangerous and polarizing. -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:23:00] - Daniel: But I'm sorry, I don't really care WHAT your political stance is, violence against innocents to advance your political goals is wrong. -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:22:25] - Daniel: "Like the rioting part is bad in both cases but they aren't equivalent at all in scope or justification" Not surprised you think I'm crazy, but I likewise think it is crazy the amount of sympathy the BLM riots got. Not only were they utterly self-defeating (driving people away from supporting the cause and ruining communities they were supposed to help)...-Paul

[2021-01-27 17:16:22] - Daniel: Fair, that's probably more accurate. -Paul

[2021-01-27 17:03:59] - Just to make it more targeted and less classist.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:03:44] - Paul:  I would say Wall Street instead of Rich.  They are all about Musk in there and he is rich af.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 17:03:04] - Daniel: I've seen some people comparing WSB to Occupy Wall Street in that both seem to be motivated by a "screw those rich people" mentality. -Paul

[2021-01-27 16:42:40] - a: I had a busy morning - so didn't get to check till recently.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:42:20] - daniel:  i'll argue paul's side on this one though.  "angry" is an understatement of what happened.  many were glorifying violence.  many were being violent.  at least 25 people were killed.  ~a

[2021-01-27 16:42:13] - Bitcoin is bonkers too - I hadn't checked recently.  I do enjoy reading about it some over time but yeah its more abstract maybe since it doesn't quite have the drama of the GME story.  Which is probably for the best.  I imagine within a month no one will care about GME anymore except for the lesson that people learn from this craziness.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:41:02] - daniel:  i figured you'd have something to say about paul's comments last night.  they seemed . . . inflammatory.  ~a

[2021-01-27 16:40:12] - Paul: "attack on the capitol was, I feel the same about the BLM riots earlier in the year" - this is crazy.  One group was trying to kill law makers because they wrongly believe an election was stolen.  The other is angry that police keep killing them?  Like the rioting part is bad in both cases but they aren't equivalent at all in scope or justification.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:39:41] - daniel:  now that i've finally convinced myself that i can't (or otherwise won't) make money on gme's stupid price, i don't care what gme's price is at.  it's now just a number just like any other.  this is probably how most people feel about the bitcoin price.  ~a

[2021-01-27 16:37:59] - a: Thats all I know too.  Yeah I meant I think he was further on the safe side than Kaep in a vacuum. -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:37:18] - GME continues to be bonkers and entertaining.  Reading about it and listening to some stuff there is definitely an element of this that is just anger at Wall Street which is interesting.  People found a way to fuck a hedge fund and that seems to be enough to motivate the action - making money is still important but I think the other part fuels the economic irrationality part.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:37:02] - daniel:  ah interesting.  i couldn't find any of lindell's tweets (like i couldn't find any screenshots / lists of deleted tweets).  what did lindell say exactly?  i assumed (maybe incorrectly) that he was merely questioning the legitimacy of the election.  did he go past that?  ~a

[2021-01-27 16:34:32] - I also don't think I would have banned him either?  At least I don't think so right now.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:34:13] - Re Twitter I wonder if this is similar in aspects to the what is art / porn conversation of what is glorifying violence / inciting violence.  I definitely don't read Pelosi's tweet as doing either, I don't think I read Kaep's tweet that way but remember it being close? on the line?  The myPillow guy I think is further from the line in vacuum but the context of him supporting a martial takeover and Jan 6th do make it worse.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 16:31:37] - Paul: Yeah I'm not interested in options / calls / etc.  I think I'm to lazy to fully understand that enough to feel comfortable doing it.  I do think to some extent I will be trying to time the market by definition though.  I mean isn't that the point of active investing?  Buy low / sell high and all that.  I don't plan on day trading and hopping in and out of things though.  -Daniel

[2021-01-27 15:05:02] - Daniel: I think Adrian makes most of the good points I would make. I assume you know the other advice I would give: diversify and don't use risky options or try to time the market. -Paul

[2021-01-27 03:41:43] - Daniel: I don't claim to have all the answers. It would be nice to have it be an open dialog. -Paul

[2021-01-27 03:41:17] - Daniel: "So should I  just go to PvtM and buy your stocks Paul?" I've always thought the smartest thing would be to maybe use PvtM as a starting point to investigate companies that sound interesting and then make your own decisions from there. Or even tell me why I'm wrong or suggest other companies. -Paul

[2021-01-27 03:38:10] - Daniel: "In what feels like a philosphical win of sorts for Paul..." I'm simultaneously happy and nervous... because what if you lose money and blame it all on me now? -Paul

[2021-01-27 03:21:48] - a: And just to repeat, I'm guessing you and I (and maybe even Daniel) probably agree 80% in terms of how much of this speech is stupid, misguided, maybe even dangerous. I'm guessing we all agree on all of these Republican examples. -Paul

[2021-01-27 03:02:20] - Daniel: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html The idea that Trump stole the election was definitely pushed by the Democrats. I don't see how anybody can claim otherwise. -Paul

[2021-01-27 02:58:52] - Daniel: I don't have a horse in the race. I generally dislike both parties equally. So I don't try to make excuses for one side or always look for the bad on the other side. What I hate is the hypocrisy. That it's wrong and dangerous and undemocratic for Trump to claim the election was stolen but not at all when the Democrats claim it. -Paul

[2021-01-27 02:55:32] - Daniel: So as mad and as unjustified as you think the attack on the capitol was, I feel the same about the BLM riots earlier in the year. Think Trump and company are being lying sore losers about the election? I felt the same about Hillary and the Democrats 4 years earlier. -Paul

[2021-01-27 02:51:32] - Daniel: "I'm also never sure given the format of the message board how serious you are" I'm usually pretty serious (I tend to say in advance if I'm just being devil's advocate). So, I think what will help you understand is that all the anger you feel at Republicans and all the non-benefit of the doubt you give them... is the same way I feel about Democrats (and Republicans). -Paul

[2021-01-26 22:49:28] - a: That is a good question.  I think one everyone tries to figure out to some extent?  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 22:45:52] - Or just get value by being entertained at the fact that WSJ is quoting redditors from wsb which is pretty funny.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 22:45:12] - a: I guess it depends on which way one is trying to capitalize on the stupid.  Buy  shares if you think the stupid is going to keep stupid up or buy shorts if you think the stupid is going to stupid crash.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 22:39:34] - a: Yeah I've wondered what they are thinking.  Like yay?  But also if you are counting on wsb for your valuation thats a big yikes.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 22:39:01] - a: buy shares?  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 21:22:39] - daniel:  i was literally about to type out a comment about roth-ladder.  it's not easy, but you can get money out of your ira before 59.5 (roth-ladder isn't even the only way).  you'll still want a taxable account balance regardless. ~a

[2021-01-26 21:22:21] - a: You going to retire from  your own company?  Got to do something with your $ at some point!  Though probably not a lambo for you (https://www.pedalsure.com/blog/most-expensive-road-bikes-all-time  ??)  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 21:21:10] - a: true-ish unless i need the taxable money to cover early retirmement for some period of time until i reach 59.5 or have established a working roth ladder, but I do get those are pretty specific to me concerns.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 21:19:49] - daniel:  if you're thinking its gambling, you're probably not going to make sound investing decisions.  this aside, you are right, you can't withdraw from your ira to buy a lambo.  if you have a large taxable and tax-sheltered balances though, you can always withdraw from taxable balances to buy a lambo if your individual stocks do well in your ira.  right?  ~a

[2021-01-26 20:48:27] - a: That assumes I don't want gambling winnings though right? (At least for awhile).  If I'm trying to gamble and want to buy a lambo or whatnot then it has to be taxable right?  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 20:44:14] - a: Good point on the IRA.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 20:31:57] - daniel:  i recommend using a $0/trade broker, if you can.  there are so many now.  also, i recommend using traditional ira or roth ira money if you can:  you will avoid having to worry about the tax implications of your trades (i.e. you'll pay much less in taxes).  if that means literally putting your side-hustle into boring equities (low tax), so you can use ira money for individual stocks, i still think this is maybe best?  ~a

[2021-01-26 20:30:24] - daniel:  congrats!   i say make your own decisions.  (since way before pvtm) i've been buying some of the stocks that paul discusses, but not all of them.  ~a

[2021-01-26 20:22:37] - So should I  just go to PvtM and buy your stocks Paul?  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 20:22:18] - In what feels like a philosphical win of sorts for Paul - I think I'm going to take some of my side hustle money and invest a portion in actually picking stocks.  I think its enough that if it does something it will actually be cool and not so much that in the overall place in my life I don't super mind losing it.  So yay gambling?  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 16:36:09] - paul:  i'm with daniel.  what pelosi did and what lindell did aren't even on the same ball-field.  i just checked, the policy didn't exist in 2016, so pelosi couldn't have been violating a policy that didn't exist.  (link to policies in 2018)  ~a

[2021-01-26 16:23:24] - Paul: I'm also never sure given the format of the message board how serious you are in all your assertions or just casually / more light heartedly making some of these claims.  If you honestly can't tell the difference b/w Mr My Pillow still going on about the election being stolen vs Pelosi's hijacked comment I'm not sure what to do with that.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 16:21:10] - Its also in the context of Pelosi was pushing for action from Congress / DOJ and Trump /Mr My Pillow are trying to get people to invade the US Capitol so again, not the same thing.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 16:11:04] - I don't think Pelosi meant literally stolen in a sense of people miscounting.  I think she did mean hijacking the process and getting help from foreign powers that you aren't supposed to.  Again also the difference is what is true and provable (court cases / investigations that didn't get laughed out of court vs trumps that did).  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 15:48:01] - Daniel: https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/864522009048494080 Lots of people were making the claim that the election was stolen. Is "hijacked" close enough or do I need to find one with exact word "stolen"? -Paul

[2021-01-26 15:43:19] - Paul: Close!  Except I don't think the claim that was spread about 2016 was stolen but improperly influenced / Trump cooperating with them.  Which also wasn't untrue.  So yeah.  Not the same.  -Daniel

[2021-01-26 04:41:12] - Daniel: https://www.wsj.com/articles/citadel-point72-to-invest-2-75-billion-into-melvin-capital-management-11611604340 The funny thing is that the person who bought at the absolute top probably will end up losing a lot less than many of the short sellers have. -Paul

[2021-01-25 22:10:33] - a: https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/l4sg3u/can_i_get_a_flair_for_buying_gme_at_the_literal/  Yup entertaining!  -Daniel

[2021-01-25 22:09:45] - daniel:  "entertaining"    ~a

[2021-01-25 22:08:17] - GME finally came back down some.  Its a very entertaining saga for me to follow.  -Daniel

[2021-01-25 19:28:56] - paul: Depends on definition of smart?  Good for the citizens in terms of their ability to know truth?  No.  Good for the network to make profit?  Yes.  -Daniel

[2021-01-25 16:06:47] - Daniel: Even the twitter sections I frequent (ie, not day trading people but long term investor types) are all talking about it. General consensus is that this is crazy, won't end well, but also a little schadenfreude at Citron. -Paul

[2021-01-25 16:05:22] - Daniel: "Did your daughters not get excited about her?" Not that I know of. Talia was into Elizabeth Warren when she watched some of the debates with me, but I have no way of knowing if her gender had anything to do with it. Both girls went over to Gurkie's mother's house to watch the inauguration but from what I heard they were pretty bored (I wasn't there, was working). -paul

[2021-01-25 16:03:04] - Daniel: I know I've read some articles about how certain political groups "value" different things (like fairness / equality / justice / truth) more than others and that can affect career choices, but I don't know how scientific that is. -Paul

[2021-01-25 16:02:04] - Daniel: "Do you wonder why that is?" A little, sure. I assume it's a personality thing. Whatever same impulses that drive somebody to be more left leaning also drives them to want to be journalists (or the opposite: the impulses that drive somebody to be more right leaning repel them from wanting to be journalists). -Paul

[2021-01-25 16:00:34] - The GME story is bonkers now.  I checked NYT business front page (Andrea gets it) to see if it was on there.  It wasn't but I almost expected it to be.  -Daniel

[2021-01-25 15:53:35] - I think Harris' record is important too and its not great from a progressive view point.  I'm not arguing against that point. I do think her skin color is important in other ways but less concrete ways.  Its more a symbol that the club of leaders of america is open to people with different skin colors / genders.  DId your daughters not get excited about her?  Alex definitely was stoked and asked questions about being a lady in charge.-Daniel

[2021-01-25 15:51:22] - Paul: I think the knee / neck joke would be in worse taste because its a much more obvious reference to a specific person / instance.  I don't think her joke is great but again I think people making starving / hydration jokes more generally so no I don't think its as bad but I get thats a subjective call that is probably fed by both of our overall biases.  -Daniel

[2021-01-25 15:49:27] - Paul: "majority (perhaps vast majority?) of journalists are liberal."  - Do you wonder why that is?  -Daniel

[2021-01-25 15:18:52] - Daniel: "I'm curious about WHY you think the media has a bias" There's two different ways of reading this question, so I apologize if I am answering the wrong one but I think the simple answer is the majority (perhaps vast majority?) of journalists are liberal. -Paul

[2021-01-25 15:07:51] - Daniel: I'm not sure how the Trump reference has relevance? Both things can be right: Trump was a giant asshole who said horrible things and Kamala comparing barely having time to squeeze in a cycling class with a prisoner dying of thirst is ugly. Why would the Washington Post edit it out otherwise? Would you feel the same way of Ted Cruz joked about how missing golf was like not being able to breath with a knee on your back? -Paul

[2021-01-22 18:57:09] - mig: you know that's not what Daniel was implying. I think he's just making the point that we're talking about wildly different scales of offense. - pierce

[2021-01-22 18:08:16] - daniel:  so because Trump was awful we are not allowed to criticize democrats? - mig

[2021-01-22 17:06:55] - Paul: I would agree that the media has a bias.  I'm curious about WHY you think the media has a bias vs why I would say the media has a bias.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:55:28] - Paul: Because I truly and genuinely believe that what is in those articles isn't that bad and isn't even in the same universe as trump.  Maybe she's as terrible and I just don't know, but those articles don't make a case for that to me in any way.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:53:10] - I think people make the please sir may  I have some more joke a lot.  Maybe one can argue that its always in poor taste but it doesn't rise to gross with me.  Again she wasn't making any direct comparison to someone actually dying of thirst.  I think calling it gross right after coming out of the era of Trump is poor calibration of adjectives.  If that is gross what adjective describes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNXgjnBpxGI?  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:53:05] - Daniel: The media was this was with Romney and Bush too. -Paul

[2021-01-22 16:52:36] - Daniel: AND that the media so very clearly has a bias in how they cover politicians and it is WAY beyond just a uniquely Trump thing. Trump was awful and the media was openly antagonistic. Great! But don't actively try to cover up for other politicians who are just less awful. Hold their feet to the fire too. -Paul

[2021-01-22 16:50:37] - Daniel: My point is that Kamala Harris is pretty awful when it comes to lots of criminal justice stuff that liberals claim to value (especially in this BLM / George Floyd moment we just had) and beyond that she seems to not even have any sympathy for prisoners. -Paul

[2021-01-22 16:49:13] - Daniel: I can believe she wasn't actively trying to make fun of prisoners dying of thirst, but it does seem to be a particularly gross comparison to make of associating prisoners dying of thirst (especially when you're a prosecutor with as mixed a record as she has regarding incarceration) with... barely having time for your cycling class. -Paul

[2021-01-22 16:43:36] - Paul:  If your point is that Kamala isn't perfect and has some serious flaws, then also sure.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:41:15] - If the goal here is to show how the media treats people differently than Trump sure.  Cause Trump was fucking crazy and did way worse shit on the regular.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:40:40] - And didn't actually laugh at actually jailing parents because again she didn't actually do that.  She laughed about telling her staff to 'look really mean' presumably to try and be taken seriously.    -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:39:27] - Paul: I think the point I would take away from the milwaukee thing is that inmates aren't regularly dying of thirst and that when one did it was a problem that was correctly labeled as bad, people were punished, and things were fixed.  Again I don't think she is making fun of actual prisoners in the first article.  The article about jailing parents is also dumb because she didn't actually want to jail parents? -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:27:57] - Daniel: The point is just to show, for the millionth time, how the vast majority of the mainstream media is really interested in ferreting out and repeating every misstatement from certain politicians and covering up the same for others. -Paul

[2021-01-22 16:26:39] - Daniel: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/3-milwaukee-jail-staffers-charged-dehydration-death-mentally-ill-inmate-n847521 Yes, inmates die of thirst. If there was nothing wrong with it, why was it removed? Would you have the same opinion if it was Trump who made those comments? -Paul

[2021-01-22 16:24:45] - I don't really care about the move one way or the other but also "but its disappearance suggests something about the Post, and about the way traditional political media are preparing to cover Harris now that she's one heartbeat away from the presidency." seems like a reach too.  Like its trying to imply without having to actually say what its implying that there is some conspiracy.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 16:23:42] - a: Cause reading it she's just making a joke about how ridiculous her own lack of control feels to her?  I don't read that as her making fun of prisoners dying of thirst?  Are prisoners dying of thirst?  I'm not sure what your point here is Paul.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 15:55:13] - daniel:  sure, the pdf wasn't meant to be the all "proof" but also supported by the very obvious fact that vaccine distribution has been happening nationwide on a nontrivial scale. - mig

[2021-01-22 15:45:34] - daniel:  agreed.  1/2 million doses per day isn't nearly enough, imo:  we're going to need to scale up a bunch.  but, we are beating many other countries at vaccine deployment (per capita).  ~a

[2021-01-22 15:42:54] - I think pointing out that vaccines were shipped / delivered  implies planning on some part is true and seems a stronger case than the pdf below.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 15:24:33] - paul:  "Couldn't you show the thing? Like Miguel did?"  that's a counterexample.  a counterexample only works to show evidence against absence, not for absence.  and as pierce and daniel already pointed out, the counterexample is lacking.  ~a

[2021-01-22 15:01:52] - That said maybe there is some other doc somewhere that would be more of a current plan so /shrug maybe its out there.  -Daniel

[2021-01-22 15:01:20] - mig: Reading through that I'm also fine with the characterization that Biden/CNN/Pierce are putting forward.  It looks like they laid out the start of what a plan would be but then didn't go anywhere with it.  That pdf doesn't really provide a plan that Biden can build off of here in January.  -Daniel

[2021-01-21 16:15:15] - a: I could believe that there are many people who could have done it if instructed but perhaps thought  someone else was doing it since they weren't instructed.  Something like that?  But since no one was instructed then it just didn't happen.    -Daniel

[2021-01-20 15:52:27] - daniel:  it was probably an actual stock option grant?  just because people buy back private shares or unexecuted options when people leave, doesn't mean its not an actual option.  there's also a concept of "phantom shares", though . . . it could have been that?  ~a

[2021-01-20 15:45:19] - But I've never bought individual shares of anything.  I've sold some individual shares of a few things after inheriting them though.  -Daniel

[2021-01-20 15:44:33] - a: Oh good point I technically did have some sort of stock option thing when I worked for a previous company though I'm dubious on it as an actual option (company was private and whenever someone quit the owners just bought back their options - so functionally was like a weird bonus type thing?)  -Daniel

[2021-01-20 02:45:49] - Daniel: Not that anyone asked me, but I'm mostly on the side of keeping it simple. For most that probably means index funds. For me, it almost always means simple, old-fashioned buying shares and holding (not loaning them out or selling shares I don't have). -Paul

[2021-01-19 22:16:29] - daniel:  if it matters, i mostly don't know about it either.  mainly, i'm just trying to learn.  but i'd hardly call any of this "fancy".  billions of dollars are sold short every day.  billions of dollars are sold on the options market every day.  the futures market is in the billions of dollars per day as well.  ~a

[2021-01-19 22:09:50] - I generally consider myself at least somewhat knowledgeable about financial things but don't actually know that much about buying and selling stock in fancy  ways and have totally failed at following this conversation.  -Daniel

[2021-01-19 18:59:29] - daniel:  i would not.  gme's total market cap is only 2 billion.  there's a reason "pump and dump" is illegal:  small numbers of people, betting large amounts of money, can move a single stock.  ~a

[2021-01-19 18:58:13] - pierce: I would be hesitant to credit wsb with any real noticeable effects in any stock.  -Daniel

[2021-01-19 18:48:34] - pierce: Wallstreetbets is not a place for sound investment philosophy.  Its about YOLO and bankrupt or big wins.    -Daniel

[2021-01-14 20:28:19] - Paul: Yeah I think big picture wise its pretty bad to have to pull a politicians twitter account.  On a smaller scale Trump being frustrated/upset over losing twitter gives? provides? schadenfreude.  I'm not sure the verb to use in front of schadenfreude.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 21:35:15] - Stupid golden state.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 21:35:07] - Paul: Thanks, its been awhile coming.  I hoped somehow Rockets would pull it together but last week and last two games against the lakers were bad.    -Daniel

[2021-01-13 21:19:54] - Daniel: https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1349463753465720836 Sorry. -Paul

[2021-01-13 21:12:06] - daniel: FWIW, if you think it might be depression-related that person may benefit from some supportive words right now, that this isn't the end of the world. I don't know how your team is affected so there might be a lot of negative feedback piling onto their self-loathing. - pierce

[2021-01-13 21:10:33] - Daniel: And it's not like he was "on-site" or in other meetings or whatever. I think the idea was just he wasn't working at all except for maybe a few hours a week at most. I have no idea if it was a situation where he was somehow able to get all of his work done or not, but I also got the impression it had been going on for years. -Paul

[2021-01-13 21:09:24] - Daniel: When I was in high school, I had an internship with the Army over the summer working with civilian engineers. There was one guy who I maybe saw in the office about once a week for maybe an hour or two. I got the impression from everybody else that that was normal and he just was hardly ever there. -Paul

[2021-01-13 21:09:20] - daniel:  did it not come up when his stuff was carrying from sprint to sprint? - mig

[2021-01-13 21:05:50] - Pierce: Fair enough.  Yeah I don't know if it applies or not but does at least give a possibility.  And true enough on vagaries ability to get by.  I just wouldn't have thought for so long.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 21:03:36] - pierce/daniel:  yeah, i think its probably super common.  even when not wfh.  having regular mini demos are nice because it clears the air for everybody.  not every project does regular mini demos.  they probably should.  ~a

[2021-01-13 20:56:21] - I mean at some point things are due right?  I mean I don't think I'm under a microscope or anything but my manager does talk to us and we do mini demo's and talk to testers and make progress etc.  So like what project just has nothing for six weeks?  Its bad on him and he is going to have consequences but it also makes me question the manager / project as well.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 20:44:31] - daniel:  C) how common do we think this is in our covid-wfh world?  ~a

[2021-01-13 20:39:41] - A) How did that person think that was cool to just not do anything?  B) Why did it take 1.5 months for anyone to notice?  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 20:39:07] - Some guy at my work is in trouble for apparently not doing any work since end of November but telling everyone he was fine and didn't need any help.  (not on my project or anyone I know personally) Boggles my mind some how that comes to pass.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:43:54] - Daniel: I believe party affiliation trends are lower for both parties, but it hasn't really shown up at the ballot box yet because of all the reasons I'm sure we're all aware of (two party system, first past the post voting, etc). I don't really see that changing significantly until we get more widespread ranked choice voting. -Paul

[2021-01-13 17:40:21] - daniel:  nobody wants to go to jail.  ~a

[2021-01-13 17:39:34] - Its also interesting to me that I havent' read about a true believer type being arrested yet.  Maybe its out there and I missed it.  But I would have expected a couple of people to be arrested and totally own it like "yeah I wanted to get in there and protect america by killing pence!" etc.  They all flip immediately to OOPSIE DAISY.  I've never been caught up in a mob so while I know its a thing maybe its stronger than I anticipate? -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:29:58] - So I always wonder at what point do R's actually shift / change their platform in some way.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:29:36] - Paul: I was thinking of the recent slide as starting with the Tea Party but as I alluded to there are elements that go WAY back past that.  I think they will return to "normal" as well to some degree but I think that "normal" is the trend of R's shrinking as a party.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:27:15] - pierce - SC2 doesn't have to be twitchy.  Just focus on macro and A move your army!  Its what I do like 75% of the time.    But I do take your point that its not a at your own pace kind of game.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:27:00] - Daniel: ie, no major splits or collapses in the party. I would love to be wrong and see the demise or splintering or whatever of the Republican Party, but I just don't see it happening. Tribalism is too strong. -Paul

[2021-01-13 17:26:20] - Daniel: Question, is your statement of "on the this descent as a party since at least the Tea Party" inclusive of the Tea Party or not? My prediction (which is worth little to nothing) is that we will all be shocked by how quickly things return to "normal" in that the Republican Party stays a major national party averaging ~50% of the vote in most elections. -Paul

[2021-01-13 17:19:05] - Does Trump / Capitol Riots finally split the party enough to force reform or do they continue to embrace this style? philosphy? strategy?  not sure the right word to use there and continue to shrink as a share of national voters.  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:16:31] - -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:10:38] - paul: Yeah thursday for sc2 (9pm est for pierce if he plays )  -Daniel

[2021-01-13 17:05:14] - Daniel: We're doing Thursday for SC2, right? Pierce, you should join us! -Paul

[2021-01-13 16:01:24] - But as Mig pointed out https://i.pinimg.com/originals/14/c7/50/14c750b27e44c61e4ed7b417703231d1.jpg from AWS.  Hence courts? -Daniel

[2021-01-13 16:00:13] - To paraphrase Adrian I think AWS' position isn't that you have to be perfect but that you have to try and AWS felt that Parler wasn't even trying.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 21:22:00] - daniel:  for reference, the crowd had become uncontrollable and barriers were breached at 13:30.  pipe bombs were found.  13:49 is when capitol police chief asked the dc national guard for immediate assistance.  windows were broken at 14:15.  ~14:18 is when pence was removed due to security concerns.  it could be that boebert didn't know these things, but i'm just giving context.  ~a

[2021-01-12 21:18:12] - daniel: I'll be fair that the term "livetweeting" does suggest more than two tweets. but "The Speaker has been removed from the chambers." is so specific and immediate that it's suspect from someone who has expressed such visceral hate for her opponents. - pierce

[2021-01-12 21:09:54] - daniel:  effectively (my uncharitable translation) 14:17:  pelosi is in the chambers, if you want to find pelosi she's here.  14:18:  ok, now pelosi is no longer in the chambers, if you want to find pelosi, look for her elsewhere.  again, i see it both ways, it seems like it possibly was an honest mistake.  ~a

[2021-01-12 21:07:23] - I kind of believe she might have tweeted an actual location if she knew it.  But she didn't so the characterization still bugs me in some small way.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 21:06:37] - a: I agree that its breaking opsec but also I would have to check the time on it.  Like originally did they realize they needed to be having opsec?  I get that she doesn't get a lot of benefit of a doubt here but it doesn't seem that different than the news that Pence was whisked away either.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 21:05:05] - daniel:  that's it.  that her location wasn't in the chamber is enough:  its breaking opsec during an enemy attacking.  you'd get a court marshall if you did that in the military while an enemy was attacking.  but i get your complaint, the details are vague.  vague, but enough info for an attacking army.  ~a

[2021-01-12 21:04:11] - Like lots of people talked about Pence being taken away but no one says they were telling people where Pence was.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 21:03:12] - a/ pierce: Do you guys have deleted tweets or something that Boebert sent out?  I've seen other places use very similar phrases as "livetweeting pelosi's location" but all I can find is the tweet where she says Pelosi left the chamber.  Which I don't think I would label as "livetweeting pelosi's location"  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 20:50:45] - daniel: lauren boebert, the qanon believer who was livetweeting pelosi's location during the attack, represents basically the entire western half of colorado. that's not really relevant to your point about the number of people but it's just a staggering amount of geographical area for someone so bonkers. - pierce

[2021-01-12 20:09:20] - paul:  i think daniel pierce and i are standing up for civil liberties.  generally the government doesn't have the right to force you who to associate with?    ~a

[2021-01-12 19:44:24] - daniel:  yeah, thanks to gerrymandering, we can't say that they represent mostly rural districts.  ~a

[2021-01-12 19:42:56] - a: What should blow our minds is how many people those house rep's accurately represent.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 18:57:24] - but that assumes we're in the "years after" phase of this incident, and we're not. as daniel linked, it's reasonable to think of this as an ongoing situation until trump is removed or biden takes office. so it'd be more of a parallel if democrats had argued that the national security response was an overreach while 9/11 was still happening. - pierce

[2021-01-12 16:15:41] - So its some determination that "not enough" is being done to address some level of violence / inciting violence posts on the platform?  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 16:02:23] - daniel:  "what percent of platform needs to be used for violence to shut down the whole thing"  no, this is the wrong way of thinking about it according to amazon.  i can't find amazons release so i'll get the words wrong but basically it's that parler wasn't able to (or otherwise wasn't) addressing the issue with violence.  its a lack of addressing issues:  percentage of issues resolved vs percentage of platform used for violence.  ~a

[2021-01-12 15:57:09] - Paul: I mean shutting down Parler I think was targeted - at shutting down Parler.  Which I do think its fair to wonder what percent of platform needs to be used for violence to shut down the whole thing and how much of parler specifically was actually used for violence?  I don't know the answer to either of those.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 15:31:11] - Daniel: I hope the actions we're taking now to respond don't become common operating procedure going forward. -Paul

[2021-01-12 15:30:36] - Daniel: Sure, if there are credible and immediate threats, then I can see the rationale for some temporary and targeted actions. Trump's ban doesn't seem temporary, and shutting down all of Parler doesn't seem targeted. 9/11 was brought up before in comparison. Well, we took a lot of actions in the wake of 9/11 to protect us from immediate threats and a lot of those are still around 19 years later. -Paul

[2021-01-12 15:02:28] - after Congress again in the upcoming days.  -Daniel

[2021-01-12 14:43:21] - Daniel: I am tentatively able to do any day. -Paul

[2021-01-12 05:46:22] - Paul: You ignored the sc2 email  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 20:44:09] - I guess it would depend on what communication happened between AWS and Parler (were there previous warnings? etc) and what proportion of all Parler was the hate / violent speech they are being shut down for.  I don't know specifics but if the hate/violent speech wasn't all there was on there I guess it comes down to how long / how many chances they have to "clean up their act" so to speak.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 20:20:56] - daniel/etc:  ok, i'll play the other side then.  its good parler got deplatformed.  if they are violating AWS's terms of service about violence, and are not able to stop violating their terms of service (as amazon has stated) then they've done the right thing (maybe devil's advocate here, i'm not sure).  parler can and should sue amazon, to resolve the dispute. and they have. now we'll let the lawsuit finalize the matter. NN is unrelated. ~a

[2021-01-11 19:34:55] - daniel: yes. - mig

[2021-01-11 19:30:00] - I agree  (with everyone?  what?!) that Parler is more interesting / more concerning in its deplatforming.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 18:51:06] - paul:  i'm not daniel, so i'll say it is advocating violence.  and that twitter should consider if it falls in their policy.  i'll also say, though, that it's nonspecific, nondirect, and nonimmediate.  ~a

[2021-01-11 18:41:12] - Pierce: Ah, yes, sorry. I was responding to Daniel but maybe I should've just let it drop. I just couldn't believe he didn't see it as a call to violence. -paul

[2021-01-11 18:35:53] - daniel: according to the blog post, the later tweets were evaluated in the context of his behavior over the last few weeks and the incidents on the 6th. the ban wasn't about those later tweets taken in isolation. - pierce

[2021-01-11 18:29:20] - a: Also non of the stuff on the day of the insurrection was specifically why he was banned.  It was the last two (that Friday after) according to the statement where he was continuing on the path after all the preceding events from the insurrection.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 17:52:45] - Daniel: "When democracy leads to stolen elections, revolting is the only logical reaction.    The cries for peace will rain down, and when they do, they will land on deaf ears, because your violence has brought this resistance.  We have the right to fight back!    MAGA" Would that be inciting violence? -Paul

[2021-01-11 17:51:23] - Daniel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932021_Minneapolis%E2%80%93Saint_Paul_racial_unrest#George_Floyd_protests,_May_26,_2020 Not sure if it is relevant, but I looked at the date of the Kaepernick tweet (May 28, 2020) and checked for protests, and that is the same day that protesters set a police station on fire. -Paul

[2021-01-11 17:47:36] - I think if Kaep tweeted that out after BLM was storming buildings and trying to assassinate politicians it would probably be read differently as well.  Context matters for how words are interpretted (which I think makes you sad ).  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 17:46:41] - Paul: I disagree that Kaep is inciting violence?  I'm not sure how you get to that is the only way you can read it?  Cause it has the word revolt?  Cause it says we will fight back?  I think "We have the right to fight back" is close but also seems much more vague and less specific in terms of protests?  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 17:44:39] - https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html This is twitter's statement.  So they thought his last two tweets were "highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021"  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 17:32:17] - Daniel: And if that is the answer, did Trump? Would sure be nice if we could go back and see what he tweeted. -Paul

[2021-01-11 17:31:46] - Daniel: Okay, so I guess I don't get how Kaepernick's is any different. His tweets were pretty clearly after some violence at BLM protests had already happened, and I don't know how to read it as anything other than advocating more violence. Isn't that exactly what Trump did? Is it because he didn't name a time and place? -Paul

[2021-01-11 17:21:22] - Just suspended pending deletion for a couple of tweets during the insurrection.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 17:20:49] - a: I think I posted Twitters justification for the ban earlier - it says in light of the first attack it felt Trump's last two tweets could be read as incitement to violence during / at the inauguration. So then the ban.  So he wasn't banned for tweets the day of the insurrection.    -Daniel

[2021-01-11 17:07:00] - Daniel: Maybe you got banned from Twitter. -Paul

[2021-01-11 16:34:50] - daniel:  works for me (desktop).  bring up the developer console (f12 on chrome/chromium) and see any errors?  you can ignore the warnings, and you can ignore this error:  "the source list for content security policy..."  ~a

[2021-01-11 16:30:47] - mig: Yeah usually refreshing works but today its been a no go - can't see any tweets (desktop).  Bleh.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 16:28:41] - daniel:  i’ve seen that happen on viewing some accounts.  refreshing usually works but sometimes it takes several tries. - mig

[2021-01-11 16:23:30] - Anyone else have an issue with twitter where you go to the twitter site and twitter loads but instead of the  tweet content it just says there was an error please retry?  I can't see any tweets today and not sure whats up with that.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 16:01:22] - Daniel: And, to be clear, I don't want Kaepernick banned for that. That's kind of the point. We can all get behind hating the stuff that spews out of Trump's mouth, but if we start banning him for that, it's hard to justify NOT banning Kaepernick for those tweets. I worry about where the censorship will be pointed next. -Paul

[2021-01-11 15:59:46] - Daniel: https://twitter.com/Kaepernick7/status/1266046129906552832?s=19)? I was referring to this tweet in terms of Kaepernick inciting violence. This sounds like it goes beyond protesting police brutality...  -Paul

[2021-01-11 15:40:53] - Maybe I missed something specific he said but my general understanding was protesting police brutality?  Did he say something more specifically violent at some point?  I tried searching and it was a ton of stuff just about his protests in general.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 15:38:41] - daniel:  i dunno about incitement.  Certainly advocating it though. - mig

[2021-01-11 15:37:53] - Paul: Did you say Kaep was inciting violence?  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 14:48:20] - Daniel: "legal sanctioned violence" Which is why I think Twitter would be best served to just sticking to removing illegal speech instead of deciding what speech it finds acceptable and which it doesn't. The more serious argument on this is the Kaepernick example. It seems like pretty direct incitement of violence to me. Why wasn't he banned? -Paul

[2021-01-11 14:44:55] - Also Biden sending the military somewhere is legal sanctioned violence.  Which I guess could be argued is immoral in a different way maybe but not illegal.  -Daniel

[2021-01-11 00:35:55] - Daniel: As much as we say there's plenty of other platforms and ways to communicate, Twitter has a much larger share of the social media market than any bakery has of the bakery market (and Facebook and Twitter have tended to move in unison a lot lately). -Paul

[2021-01-11 00:31:44] - Daniel: I like to think I am consistent on the gay wedding cake point: Twitter and the bakery are allowed to do what they want. I wish Twitter wouldn't ban people and I wish bakeries wouldn't discriminate. The reason why I might seem more upset over this is because there's a ton of bakeries, but really only one Twitter. -Paul

[2021-01-09 23:27:31] - daniel:  for the record I don’t necessarily share paul’s viewpoint, I just found the ACLU statement interesting. - mig

[2021-01-09 20:10:10] - There was a point made comparing twitter/trump to the bakery and the gay couple with the cakes awhile back that I thought was interesting since I think in general our positions might have all(?) been flipped on that some.  So another thing just to think about I guess as we go through all this.  -Daniel

[2021-01-09 20:09:03] - There isn't really a point to that sentence specifically just a thought.  -Daniel

[2021-01-09 20:08:50] - mig: (and paul) I get the theory of the arguement but its an interesting place to put Twitter (and other social medias) where them banning people is 'a big deal' where we get worried about Free speech implications.  Like anytime a platform gets successful then it somewhat becomes a victim of its own success where now it now how to worry about its responsibility in 'deplatforming' someone.  -Daniel

[2021-01-09 02:34:01] - Paul: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html  In depth discussion from twitter on why Trump got perma banned now.  So you can at least get a better read on their justification (even if you don't agree / like it). -Daniel

[2021-01-08 18:01:01] - if you live in one of these districts, your representative objected to a legal, democratic election.  the objections were border-line sedition and i feel like i'd probably still feel this way if the roles were reversed.  looks like paul and mig and xpovos and pierce are "safe" (xpovos is near the edge).  daniel you're right on a congressional district boundary.  ~a

[2021-01-08 16:54:50] - paul:  "pretty much every day on Twitter I see threats of violence from blue checkmarks towards politicians so"  it's your favorite:  two wrongs don't make a right.  paul/daniel/pierce:  did trump break the law on twitter?  what's the test for the first amendment?  "intends to incite a violation of the law that is both imminent and likely".  he broke this one in his speech imo, but maybe not on twitter.  ~a

[2021-01-08 16:48:18] - Daniel: I guess I would have to see the tweet in question (and if it is illegal, then that obviously introduces another factor). It's not hyperbole to say that pretty much every day on Twitter I see threats of violence from blue checkmarks towards politicians so.... if we're banning Trump for that it's hard not to argue for banning a ton of celebrities and journalists and professors and other people on Twitter. -Paul

[2021-01-08 16:22:56] - And inciting violence as adrian pointed out?  Is that acceptable to take down?  Then its a question of whether or not you think Trump was but in the lens that Twitter thought he was does it make more sense why it was removed?  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 16:12:00] - Daniel: I don't want to see what Trump tweets, so I don't follow him. I think I may have also muted him so I don't see retweets or anything. As a result, I basically never see his tweets. That works for me. -Paul

[2021-01-08 16:11:04] - Daniel: It depends on the platform for me. On twitter, you choose who you want to follow. They provide tools to deal with direct messages and replies, so you can control what you see. Whenever possible, I prefer giving people tools to control what they want to see versus outright banning. -Paul

[2021-01-08 16:09:31] - Daniel: "I'm curious about where you draw the line" It's a hazy area, right? I got dozens of text messages about voting a few months ago that I considered spam, but which I am sure somebody would argue is political speech. PvtM is blocked on Facebook because it considers it spam, but I obviously disagree. -Paul

[2021-01-08 16:07:13] - Daniel: Again, if Twitter banned all Republican politicians or anybody who says "BLM" or... whatever, those people can still express themselves in other mediums, but I think it's hard to argue that Twitter permits free speech on its platform. -Paul

[2021-01-08 16:05:08] - Daniel: It's less about infringing on my free speech and more about a culture of free speech. Sure, no private company can completely take away my freedom of speech like the government can. Doesn't mean that they can't create a culture that is hostile to free speech, though. -Paul

[2021-01-08 16:03:38] - Paul: I guess then I'm curious about where you draw the line.  Do you desire a completely unfettered platform then?  I mean what about spam?  Adrian does moderate / delete that?  Is the board a worse place for that?  Assuming you are on board with that you do support some censorship at least.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 16:02:26] - Paul:  I don't think Adrian would be infringing your free speech.  I think thats the crux of the part I disagree with.  I think you can think worse of Twitter but I don't think anyone's free speech is affected by twitter.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:52:07] - Daniel: Like, do you think Twitter would be a better platform if it banned all conservatives? Would it benefit society? I think it just pushes those people to alternatives like Parler and we have more echo chambers and less tolerance by everybody for dissenting opinions. -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:51:05] - Daniel: It has nothing to do with the idea that I think Donald Trump is getting harmed because he can't get his message out. It's more about how I think, in general, our society and the private companies that operate in it, should be more accepting of speech and not trying to restrict it more. -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:50:07] - Daniel: I think censorship in general is bad. Doesn't matter if it's government or private. What if Twitter started banning accounts that said, "Black Lives Matter"? Would you just shrug your shoulders and say, "that's fine, because Twitter never guarantees free speech and it's not that important"? -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:30:27] - Paul: It seems like because you think Twitter is big enough that being blocked there is inflicting enough harm on the thing banned / censored as to present 'a real problem' where that is something I'm not sure the definition is.  I think in general I disagree because I don't think Twitter is that important?  But maybe that is me. -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:29:14] - Paul: But no company offers or guarantees free speech?  Only the gov?  I'm confused I guess.  Twitter offers the ability to everyone to share info but I'm assuming in their TOS it doesn't guarantee free speech no matter what.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:29:11] - Daniel: Free speech isn't just something that has to do with government arresting you. -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:28:36] - Daniel: "thats different than arguing the principle of free speech" Really? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech "a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal sanction" -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:27:33] - Daniel: "It means not arresting those people for those positions" Yes, when we are talking about government, when we are talking about private companies it has to do with the actions they can take (they can't arrest people). -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:26:42] - You can argue that they are contradicting their mission statement but thats different than arguing the principle of free speech.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:26:37] - Daniel: And it is less about any specific thing Trump tweeted (or even Trump himself) and more about the precedent it sets and the other actions taken. Twitter (and other social media) has been taking down lots of other content surrounding COVID and the election and lots of other topics. -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:25:32] - It means not arresting those people for those positions.  It doesn't obligate Twitter / NYT / Facebook / private owned land to give them a soapbox.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:25:06] - Daniel: " Is Twitter obligated to act as a public good that is 100% unrestricted?" No, it is not obligated. It is private and can do whatever the hell it wants. But I do think that when your mission statement is: "To give everyone the power to create and share ideas and information instantly, without barriers" (Twitter) then I would like it to be as least censorious as possible. -Paul

[2021-01-08 15:21:48] - I think I (we) can be fine with freedom of speech and not see banning on twitter as infringing on it.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:20:56] - I think moderation will always be needed on the internet and I think its fair to argue that people / companies should be careful with it but don't think that Twitter overstepped.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:20:42] - Paul: I get (I think) the free speech argument but I think part of the counter point is that while they can deny their own platforms that doesn't actually silence the voice.  They are free (and in the case of Trump did) to seek alternatives.  Is Twitter obligated to act as a public good that is 100% unrestricted?  Is Parler?  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 15:05:58] - a: I know a lot of the pictures didn't show ton's of guns but https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-supporter-arrested-at-capitol-had-11-molotov-cocktails-feds-2021-1 does show that at least some of them were armed.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 14:48:59] - Vs Tuesday being seen as done by one of the internal parties at the behest of the outgoing Pres I think could damage the legitimacy of the gov in a way that 9/11 couldn't.  Also I think the line between Congress people getting taken by rioters is thinner than you seem to represent Adrian.  50 guys with pistols isn't enough bullets for the number of people that where there if the rioters just decided to throw their bodies into it.  -Daniel

[2021-01-08 14:46:11] - -Daniel

[2021-01-08 04:47:55] - Daniel: No, but editorial pages have limited space and there's no sense of anybody (or most people) being able to print whatever they want in a newspaper whenever they want. Pretty much the whole point of things like Twitter and Facebook is that anybody can create an account and share whatever inane stuff they want. -Paul

[2021-01-07 22:28:20] - paul: similarly - is a newspaper obligated to publish a letter from a politician no matter what?  I get you are pro free speech but Trump could also walk into the press room and get on tv at almost any moment of the day so its hard for me to feel like he is being infringed.  -Daniel

[2021-01-07 19:44:38] - a: That is a big minimum.  Maybe if we all pool together.  I'm still working on .01% of that though.  So I'm going to need yall to pitch in a lot.  -Daniel

[2021-01-07 19:41:34] - daniel:  gotcha, yah.  in raytheon i have access to vitpx, which i obviously wouldn't have access to in an ira  (minimum investment $100,000,000.00.  that's a lot of zeros.)  ~a

[2021-01-07 19:37:58] - unless you really like what you have in your 401k then IRA means you have more control over things.  401k might have better options if they have some deal worked out to give lower fees on something for example. -Daniel

[2021-01-07 19:36:15] - daniel:  "I've generally been happy (enough)"  yeah me too, generally.  but the raytheon 401k (i left there 11 years ago!) don't have many good low-fee bond options.  which is why i'm asking these questions!  ~a

[2021-01-07 19:34:51] - daniel/paul:  thanks for answering my questions.  in my case it's a previous company, i'll check to see if they have fees, and if they do, i'll use a rollover instead.  any thoughts on which would be better?  an 401k->ira rollover or a 401k->401k rollover?  (is the second one even allowed?)  i know the near-retirement age rules for 401k vs ira ARE different.  ~a

[2021-01-07 18:28:42] - a: I've  never used a self directed but my experience is that there are additional fees associated with them.  I've generally been happy (enough) with the 401k options I've had to not want to do self directed.  -Daniel

[2021-01-07 05:54:37] - I saw some stuff say that McConnell's speech should have been a high point of sorts since it was a pretty strong refuation of Trump and the Hawley/Cruz strategy but it got totally overshadowed since it happened like 3 minutes before shit hit the fan.  -Daniel

[2021-01-07 00:32:22] - daniel:  i tried to start, but there are too many examples of this to list.  it's a complete night and day type situation.  ~a

[2021-01-06 23:55:00] - daniel:  "ahead" no.  they definitely give you a tiny grace period.  you have like 60 seconds after curfew starts to clear the area, and they probably give another ~10ish minutes to get out of the district?  but yes, you're right:  this time was chill relative to blm and it's not just the curfew.  these white guys were allowed to do so much compared to black protesters at EVERY point.  ~a

[2021-01-06 23:43:26] - Didn't police shoot out tear gas ahead of the curfew during DC BLM stuff?  Police seem more chill this time around.  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 20:44:52] - Watching Fox & CNN.  This is definitely crazy train.  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 16:37:47] - Like I can't type "James Harden wearing a scottish kilt".  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 16:37:02] - a: Yes but that is still just an example.  Can you personally edit the underlined stuff?  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 16:36:02] - daniel:  i replied below about that.  ~a

[2021-01-06 16:35:51] - daniel:  did you click on the underlined stuff?  ~a

[2021-01-06 16:21:50] - Paul: I didn't see a way to enter your own either.  Just see examples of what they did.  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 16:01:40] - yes!  daniel already asked that and i responded.  all of the underlined stuff (in the black examples) can be clicked on and you get a dropdown.  ~a

[2021-01-06 15:53:00] - Daniel: One of her picks was "sushi restaurants", so we had to find a replacement for that. Otherwise, she did pretty well. -Paul

[2021-01-06 15:52:28] - Daniel: Yes, Talia is actual Talia (ie, my daughter, the one true Talia). I didn't have to ask her to join, she wanted to! Very proud. -Paul

[2021-01-06 15:51:44] - Daniel: https://paulvsthemarket.com/fantasy-investing-2021-kickoff/ Thanks! I got a ton of participants from a new site I joined called CommonStock which is kinda like verified investing social media. -Paul

[2021-01-06 15:41:50] - daniel:  130% increase in one year?    ~a

[2021-01-06 15:37:30] - I can just tell the number of people in stock challenge seems to have grown.  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 15:37:13] - a: It does - which is why I asked?  Paul has 3500 followers?  I do squat on Twitter so grats there too Paul    -Daniel

[2021-01-06 15:34:44] - daniel:  it's not a super common name.  look at her picks.  seems on-brand.  ~a

[2021-01-06 15:34:21] - daniel:  the dude has 3500 followers on twitter.  ~a

[2021-01-06 15:33:47] - Is Talia actual Talia?  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 15:33:13] - -Daniel

[2021-01-06 15:03:39] - a: I think they have a luxury brand.  Acura maybe?  But yeah not as big as lexus for sure.-Daniel

[2021-01-06 15:03:01] - a: Yeah thats fair - I guess Toyota has offerings in more categories.  Makes sense now that I think about it more but it was still a surprise.  -Daniel

[2021-01-06 15:01:34] - daniel:  does honda have an equivalant to lexus or scion?  (scion brand discontinued in 2016)  ~a

[2021-01-06 15:00:51] - daniel:  i'm not surprised.  sure, the corolla and civic are comparable in sales (300k/year each in the united states), but the rest of the toyota line beats out the rest of the honda line:  rav4, tacoma, highlander, prius.  the prius has no competitor in sales until very recently.  i didn't realize that there are twice as many camerys sold than corollas.  also international sales show a very different picture.  ~a

[2021-01-06 14:50:35] - a: I'm surprised at how much more Toyota has than Honda.  In my head those were more comparable.  -Daniel

[2021-01-05 22:10:06] - daniel:  (to find the underlined text, you have to click on one of the examples in black)  ~a

[2021-01-05 22:09:32] - daniel:  you click on the underlined text and there's a drop-down on each one.  ~a

[2021-01-05 22:00:57] - is there a place to enter your own text input or just see their examples?  -Daniel

[2021-01-05 15:59:36] - a: Wed work for sc2?  -Daniel

[2021-01-04 20:35:00] - a: My vote would be it is illegal and he should face consequences but I'm skeptical of that happening.  -Daniel

[2021-01-02 03:51:57] - Daniel: Got it, thanks! -Paul

[2021-01-01 21:51:28] - paul: put a comment but i think you have to approve it?  -Daniel

[2020-12-26 02:32:54] - Merry Christmas =)  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:49:42] - a: But also thats why I think I might be cheating in terms of how I'm defining the problem.  If we assume the object is taking all the energy regardless of speed then yeah its the same number cause then its just math.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:47:30] - Cause I don't have to stop the cruise ship, I can just move so I don't take all the energy.  The coffee cup I'm going to stop so I am going to take all the energy.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:46:57] - So its not about the energy its about how much energy I aborb and if I have a chance to mitigate that.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:46:35] - I think anything once you cross a certain threshold is worse than anything slow.  Like I'd rather get hit by a cruise ship at 1mph cause I can just sway / move out of the way after initial impact.  A coffee cup at 10 mph would hurt more I think.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:39:37] - daniel:  ok, now how about a 2lb sledge hammer at 50mph?  i looked it up, and even the 2lb sledge hammers are still pretty dangerous looking.    i don't disagree that the 35 mph sledge hammer would probably do way more damage to a person:  but remember i wasn't suggesting that it be used on a person.  i was suggesting we use them on a car.  ~a

[2020-12-23 22:35:11] - The reason I worry about cheating is because I don't think the human has to absorb all the energy from the car because they can move even after initial impact is made.  Its to late to move if something hits you at 35mph.  The initial impact is the impact and now you have absorbed all the energy.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:33:48] - I'm not sure if its cheating but in the scenario where I'm walking / biking across a sidewalk I 100% of the time choose the car cause while it will bump me I can react and move / sway / whatever and maybe it knocks me off course but I don't think it does anything major.  A 4lb weight at 35mph seems like it might could kill me if it hit me in the head.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:26:41] - daniel:  "move / sway with a 1mph impact" you usually don't have control over how this happens though.  you could get lucky.  i don't think i'm looking at the worst-case scenario though.  ~a

[2020-12-23 22:22:29] - daniel:  i understand your point, but at the end of the day, the energy has to go somewhere, and usually most of it goes into the human (what isn't accepted by the break pads).  ~a

[2020-12-23 22:20:52] - Also if the object (human) is free standing they can move / sway with a 1mph impact easier than 35 mph impact.  If we trap your shin in a metal vice and hit it wtih a car at 1mph then maybe it starts to get more equal?  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:20:04] - a: I think partly its the time over which the impact takes place? Maybe some assumptions about the thing being hit.  Like the 1mph car takes longer so you can squish more / easily / deform around impact vs the 35mph impact which is faster thus injures more because there is less time for the object (human) to squish / deform around impact.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:18:28] - a: I get the as a measure of energy they can be equal but I think there are other physics involved than just measure of energy in terms of injury suffered by thing hit.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 22:14:14] - daniel:  you're discounting that the car at 1mph has almost 2 metric tons behind it.  the 4lb hammer might be able to do some damage in certain contexts, but the car has the same energy:  it's super counter-intuitive.  the car can break bones in ways that are non-obvious and yeah, it's not easy at 1mph, but it's possible.  it's just like an optical illusion of sorts.  we're just so used to living with cars, that we take it for granted?  ~a

[2020-12-23 21:13:46] - a: I think there is probably some physics of momentum and point of impact and focus of the enery.  I would also think that a car a 1mph would do less than 4lb's at 35 mph.  -Daniel

[2020-12-23 16:10:22] - "a very, very, very small step in a long overdue journey to battle systemic racism" - seems an appropriate description.  -Daniel

[2020-12-22 17:13:01] - "a car nudging a jaywalker at 1 mph"  - Does this happen?  oO  -Daniel

[2020-12-22 17:00:54] - Paul: I've started to mix in some zergling rushes!  -Daniel

[2020-12-22 17:00:34] - a: I think at large anything where you don't plan to macro - have the game last past like 5/6 minutes is probably "cheese" in some manner.  But its probably an eye of the beholder type thing as well.  -Daniel

[2020-12-22 16:55:03] - paul: You don't have to know ahead of time - I was just checking / curious.  I'm fine trying off race wacky games.  More chance to work on my cheese  -Daniel

[2020-12-22 16:46:45] - Daniel: Just checked, should be good for tonight. -Paul

[2020-12-22 16:44:46] - Daniel: Also, I had an idea of a tweak we could try tonight: For some games, Adrian and Daniel can play as non-Protoss and non-Zerg respectively, and everybody else takes on a handicap of some type (10%?) -Paul

[2020-12-22 16:43:57] - Daniel: I think game time decision, but I am hoping to make it. Would it help to know in advance? I can probably get clarification by this afternoon. -Paul

[2020-12-22 16:40:25] - Paul: Any update on sc2 tonight or is it more of a game time decision type thing?  -Daniel

[2020-12-22 15:52:01] - title: That is so gross.  -Daniel

[2020-12-21 16:06:47] - daniel:  i know you'll be looking at me to be a tie-breaker, but i can do either day (today and tomorrow, i'm also free wednesday).  i'm free every day always!  . . . this week we need to start on-time so i can also do adventofcode  ~a

[2020-12-21 15:50:53] - Paul: ~just emailed~    -Daniel

[2020-12-21 15:47:59] - Daniel: For SC2 this week, earlier in the week is better for me. As it gets later in the week, I am less and less likely to be able to participate (but it's totally fine if later works better for others). -Paul

[2020-12-21 15:36:03] - a: That is a cool graph.  -Daniel

[2020-12-18 16:45:44] - I think Pauls position re criminal reform is some fair.  I think there is some nuance there but I don't it changes his overall point at the federal level much.  I think the difference in the parties shows up more in DA / AG type positions.  Also recently weed laws.  Does police reform fall under the criminal justice umbrella or that a separate thing?  -Daniel

[2020-12-18 16:43:14] - I'm pretty solid D yeah but I don't know all the bills that are proposed either.  -Daniel

[2020-12-18 15:57:16] - paul:  yep, daniel, pierce, and aaron are the token democrats here.  i'm maybe the one one here that votes for democrats and non-democrats on occasion?  ~a

[2020-12-16 18:44:38] - daniel:  "bias towards high level management", yeah this might be the true sticking point.  i wonder if we can do an experiment that proves if top-down management is good or bad.  ~a

[2020-12-16 18:44:15] - Again I'm not opposed to more experience I would just put myself in the not so big a deal camp.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 18:43:35] - /shrug  CEO's jump industries, buy sports teams, Carson leads HUD, random people get given ambassordships.  People lead things all the time that they aren't experts of and make it work.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 18:41:08] - a: Sure - I did use the word 'the' but yeah I would say thats the only reason for or against.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 18:40:20] - But maybe thats some level of internal bias towards high level management.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 18:40:02] - daniel:  agreed, but that's not the only drawback.  ~a

[2020-12-16 18:40:01] - As for Mayor Pete in particular - will he be a good Sec DoT?  I don't know but I don't a reason he would be bad at it.  Does he need industry experience in order to lead the Dept?  /shrug.  I guess partly I don't think a lot of special knowledge is needed for any CEO position or one thats high enough up to be removed from specifics.  Its all just budgets / priorities / strategic stuff.  Seems all interchangeable to me.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 18:38:01] - So I'm not 100% either what the DoT does but making sure that rail lines / roads / airlines work in some consistent fashion across the US seems like it would have benefits.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 18:37:21] - I wouldn't advocate against a cabinet person having industry experience but I'm still not sure its a hard requirement in my head.  The benefit (and drawback) of any federal regulation is the uniformity within the country.  You can trust that bank accounts are insured all across the country no matter which state because of federal regulations.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 17:34:44] - paul:  "At some point, don't we want somebody with some actual expertise making decisions?"  yes of course, but if you remember i was on your side on this one.  so maybe you're talking to daniel here.  i merely think reducing "levels of bureaucracy" is the right answer for a large system of moving parts.  ~a

[2020-12-16 16:01:58] - a: I think I partially agree with you?  I would agree that its probably at best near the minimum qualifications one should expect.  I'm also not that worried about it either so clearly accept it to some degree?  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 15:59:49] - Paul: CEO of a subsidiary?  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 15:49:38] - Daniel: If each separate department in the president's cabinet (which is just one branch of the federal government) is analogous to a whole company... that seems like maybe too many levels of bureaucracy to me. -Paul

[2020-12-16 15:48:38] - daniel:  "How many CEO's jump companies to one that has nothing to do with their previous industry?"  that's not the problem here.  he doesn't just have no experience in the industry, it's that he just doesn't have any experience of this magnitude.  mayor of a small town and ensign in the navy isn't enough (imo).  ~a

[2020-12-16 15:48:01] - Daniel: I guess a lot depends on exactly what the responsibilities of the secretary of transportation is. I guess I think of the President as CEO and therefore the secretary of transportation might be the Chief Marketing Officer or Chief Technology Officer, and in those cases, I would want them to have SOME experience with marketing/technology. -Paul

[2020-12-16 15:43:44] - I wouldn't argue that industry knowledge is bad just that for some of these other positions I don't think its critical either.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 15:43:18] - I have trouble envisioning what a CEO of a major company does all day anyway but I think its lots of meetings and listening to proposals and strategic thinking type stuff.  So if you listen to your peeps and then make a decision seems like it can still be a good outcome.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 15:42:08] - a/Paul: I don't think its ceremonial just that you can have vision / leadership without industry experience.  How many CEO's jump companies to one that has nothing to do with their previous industry?  I don't think Trump not being a statesmen is the entirety of the issue with him.  Its a lot.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 15:00:39] - Daniel: I guess it feels like if it's not a critical position, then why have it? It feels like one of two things has to be true: (1) The secretary of transportation is in charge of setting national transportation policy and thus should be somebody who kinda knows what they are doing or (2) It's not important and thus what's the point? -Paul

[2020-12-16 14:52:49] - If you are from the industry seems like there would be some inherent bias / conflicts that would arise?  Though I imagine those have come up before and been dealt with so maybe not that big a deal.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 14:51:59] - I'm also trying to think which part of the transportation industry we should draw from for the Sec position.  I'm not entirely sure I'd want someone from the airline industry in charge.  I mean maybe but after the whole Boeing debacle I'd be leery though that might be painting with to broad a brush.  Railway?  Musk would be interesting but he seems busy.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 14:42:38] - Like was Carson a bad HUD leader?  Honestly I have no idea.  So I guess to some degree he wasn't at least so bad that I know about it.  -Daniel

[2020-12-16 14:41:51] - I feel like cabinet positions are not always as critical like mig pointed out.  I think a lot of them are just admin / decision making which being a mayor (or honestly running a quality campaign) can show competence in.  There are career people in the dept's who can bring sec up to speed.  I think there can be people from the industry but I think that can be good or bad not just inherently better.  -Daniel

[2020-12-15 22:08:55] - daniel:  pierce was complaining about this.  i told him that the message board was written in 2004 and predated the 4-byte utf-8.  i think i figured it out, though.  mysql, by default, doesn't support the 4 character utf-8.  i did this and it seemed to work:  "alter table msg modify msg_str text character set utf8mb4;"  👍  ~a

[2020-12-15 21:57:56] - I'm not sure its worth supporting.  Just letting you know in case something weird shows up in logs or something.  -Daniel

[2020-12-15 21:57:27] - I tried to paste a thumbs up emoji and got "Incorrect string value: '\xF0\x9F\x91\x8D (...' for column `msgboard`.`msg`.`msg_str` at row 1"  -Daniel

[2020-12-15 21:55:46] - a: Good for sc2 tonight?  -Daniel

[2020-12-15 15:09:11] - -Daniel

[2020-12-15 15:08:29] - daniel:  both work for me.  dewey never replies to emails either, does he?    ~a

[2020-12-15 15:00:47] - a: preference on day for s2?  Current candidates are today or Friday?  -Daniel

[2020-12-14 15:19:01] - i guess its not a part of pfizer, that part of what i said was wrong.  partner like daniel said.  it's a little weird they even call it the pfizer vaccine?  ~a

[2020-12-14 15:18:44] - a: Is BioTech a part of Pfizer?  Its entirely possible I just thought they were corporate partners.  -Daniel

[2020-12-14 15:17:43] - Paul: Pfizer didn't make 'their' vaccine but they are the distro partner for the German company who did here in US (is the way I understand it).  -Daniel

[2020-12-11 00:09:23] - daniel:  yeah, i don't think i'm being overconservative on that though.  inflation over the last 21 years has been 56% for all things, but 134% for healthcare.  that's where i got the 2%/year over inflation from ((2.34/1.5556)^(1/21)).  ~a

[2020-12-11 00:06:49] - a: oO that is a lot over time.  -Daniel

[2020-12-11 00:04:56] - paul:  "real estate equity that we might end up tapping when we downsize" where are you moving?!  daniel:  "blow up any planning", yeah i've been accounting that healthcare will outpace inflation by 2%/year.  which, is crazy, but its what i've been accounting for.  ~a

[2020-12-10 22:13:36] - a: I have some healthcare spending accounted for but I definitely recognize that its one of those weird area's that could blow up any planning.  Hopefully ACA stays around to some degree till we get old enough for medicare.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 21:37:57] - daniel:  yeah, no kidding!  i thought *maybe* he meant kids in tae kwon do???  ~a

[2020-12-10 21:37:33] - Paul: You need exercise in retirement!  Gotta keep that Tae Kwon Do going!  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 21:21:30] - a: TX is a bit cheaper with some things for sure though.  I think you could get by on 8k a month if you had too.  Life style inflation is most definitely a thing.  Tons of people get by on like 1500?  2000? a month.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 21:19:57] - a: Current monthly spending is ~~10k a month though it varies greatly with some less and some more *cough christmas cough*  Currently that includes daycare and activities for the kids that will go away.  It is somewhat of a moving target cause the number I put in for estimated retirement spending changes over time some.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 20:59:10] - paul:  maybe it was just an example, but 60k/year (or daniel's 8k/month) is something i would have a hard time living on (as a family, even after my mortgage is gone).  i assume you guys are assuming your kid-spending will go down before retirement, but even then, i'm still surprised.  "I tried and our expenses are too volatile to track IMHO", you could instead track your income, taxes, and saving.  but, it'll be equally volatile.  ~a

[2020-12-10 20:05:17] - daniel:  the issue is your income will be significantly smaller (especially if you ladder things into roth).  and when your income is significantly smaller, the lower tax brackets (and the standard deduction or itemized deductions) eat up much more of your income.  ~a

[2020-12-10 20:04:25] - a: But yeah taxes is accounted for as part of the spending that is covered by the X dollars a month goal.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 20:03:45] - daniel:  ".15" sig fig.  ~a

[2020-12-10 20:03:33] - a: Cause also they could just change tax laws in the future so its all somewhat of a guess.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 20:03:15] - a: Agreed taxes are hard.  I mostly just make a number informed by our current effective tax rate.  So I think our effective rate was like 19%? or something last year (I'd have to check to be sure) so I might be like 16% in retirement!  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 20:02:03] - So if I think I need 8k a month at a 3.25% SWR I need 2,953,846.15 dollars to retire.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 20:01:51] - daniel:  do you account for taxes?  if so, how?  calculating taxes in retirement might be hard.  i think they'll be very low, but not zero, and using different values for this gives me very different results  ~a

[2020-12-10 20:00:50] - I use 3.25% which gives me a magic number of 369.2307692 to multiply my monthly spending by.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 20:00:08] - Paul: My way is to estimate spending in retirement (I currently do monthly but thats how most of my current expenses are laid out so it flows) then multiply that by a number that is derived from my safe withdrawal rate.  There are different rates you can pick. 4% is the standard for a 30 year retirement so you can go higher or lower depending on your risk / how long you think you will live.  -Daniel

[2020-12-10 19:28:48] - daniel:  you are right of course.  i was simplifying.  using your primary residence as part of your liquid portfolio still wouldn't make sense, but accounting for changes in the future is fine.  ~a

[2020-12-10 19:27:34] - a: What if I'm going to downsize my home in retirement?!  I get your point and its a useful distinction but there are times where you can get $ out of your primary residence in retirement although much more of a process than withdrawing dollars from an account somewhere.  -Daniel

[2020-12-08 14:48:21] - Daniel: I should be good. -Paul

[2020-12-08 13:59:00] - a: good for sc2 tonight? -Daniel

[2020-12-07 17:34:17] - a: To your first question then answer (to me) is yes it matters.  Intentions aren't the only thing and maybe aren't even the main thing but if motiviations are bad then the odds of a good thing happening again in the future are worse.  Ideally motivations and actions are both aligned to be "good" (though good is subjective often and especially in politics).  -Daniel

[2020-12-07 16:58:10] - Daniel: Like, Democrats were against legalization for 30 years and Republicans are against it for 32 years and we're asking why Republicans were against it for those 2 extra years? Maybe for the same reason both parties were against it for 30. Gateway drugs and making people lazy and yada yada yada. -Paul

[2020-12-07 16:56:09] - Daniel: Sure! I am 100% not excusing Republicans. They should support marijuana legalization. They should've done it years ago. Decades ago. My point was that I don't understand why it's puzzling to wonder why Republicans are against it now when pretty much all politicians were against it  just years ago. -Paul

[2020-12-07 16:54:28] - Paul: I partially understand where you are coming from in the both parties were wrong for decades so its understandable for one party to still be wrong for a few more years but also I think its fair to immediately hold it against one party once the other one switches.  For any issue as soon as one party aligns and one doesn't I think its fair to question the reasoning.  -Daniel

[2020-12-07 16:47:20] - Daniel: Do you mind handling it still? Not sure I can consistently come back just yet. -Paul

[2020-12-07 16:13:48] - Paul: Do you want me to keep sending sc2 emails since you were able to return or do you want to take them back over?  I'm fine either way - just checking.  -Daniel

[2020-12-04 21:41:28] - daniel:  that's the . . . straw man, i agree.  is there a more nuanced explanation?  is there an explanation that takes into account that a "drug war" has been historically unwinnable?  or one that takes into account that treating drug abuse and drug addiction as a healthcare issue has relatively positive results?  ~a

[2020-12-04 21:37:48] - a: DRUGS BAD.  Is why I think R's are against it.  Degrades the moral fabric of America.  -Daniel

[2020-12-04 03:18:06] - Daniel: Still in better shape than the Wizards. -Paul

[2020-12-03 18:00:32] - I'm not encouraged by any of the moves since the end of the 2018 season.  I would have tried to keep that team together.  Oh well.  -Daniel

[2020-12-03 17:54:51] - mig: WB decided to move on from Houston.  In theory if Wall is the 2016 version thats an upgrade on 3 pt shooting and D at the PG spot.  Both are on bad contracts so the trade market for WB is tiny and Wall is part of that market. -Daniel

[2020-12-03 17:51:09] - Daniel: Like, at some point I think you have to realize the problem isn't with your other guard and maybe you need to get a center or 3 and D wing or something. -Paul

[2020-12-03 17:50:38] - Daniel: Yeah, it seems a little... odd that Houston has gone through like 3 all-star (and in some cases, probably future hall of famer?) point guards in 3 years. -Paul

[2020-12-03 16:43:17] - a: Normally picks are like top 14 protected or only convey if its 20+ or things like that.  -Daniel

[2020-12-03 16:42:49] - a: You can put conditions on draft pick trades so it only actually moves (conveys) to the other team if certain conditions are met.  So for example (cause I don't remember exactly) we only get their first round pick if its the 28th pick exactly.  So in that example if they don't end up getting the 28th pick we don't get it.  -Daniel

[2020-12-03 16:39:23] - a: I don't remember the details but its a protected 1st that people thought wasn't that likely to convey.  -Daniel

[2020-12-03 16:36:35] - I didn't like the Westbrook trade.  Harden is still our guy but I don't know that these two trades (cp3 for WB and then WB for Wall) reflect well on Harden.  Like you gotta make it work and not just have these type of players not work out.  -Daniel

[2020-12-03 16:35:38] - Paul: Though I still just want CP3....      -Daniel

[2020-12-03 16:35:28] - Paul: TBD - if we get 2016 Wall then maybe us?  If we don't you.  I don't think we get 2016 Wall.  -Daniel

[2020-12-03 16:11:35] - Daniel: Wall for Westbrook. Who got the better deal? -Paul

[2020-12-02 17:43:14] - daniel:  my takeaway here is kernel development is hard:  even large companies (literally the largest in the world!) should consider it a problematic undertaking.  my second takeaway:  nothing connected to the internet is safe.  don't assume anything on your non-air-gapped computer or phone will stay there.  ~a

[2020-12-02 16:25:07] - This was on reddit but if you guys didn't see it - its pretty crazy.  https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/12/iphone-zero-click-wi-fi-exploit-is-one-of-the-most-breathtaking-hacks-ever/  -Daniel

[2020-12-01 17:10:39] - Daniel: Sorry, didn't see this until now. Tonight probably works a tiny bit better anyway. Thanks! -Paul

[2020-12-01 16:08:58] - a: Andrea voted tonight.  -Daniel

[2020-12-01 16:02:45] - a: Yeah I was hoping you would be a tie breaker.  Paul any insight on which might be better even if you aren't 100% committed?  -Daniel

[2020-12-01 15:50:03] - a: Tonight or tomorrow for SC2? -Daniel

[2020-11-25 15:06:25] - Yeah saying the voters voting doesn't matter is a weird take to me if you agree that they determine how the electors will vote.  -Daniel

[2020-11-24 14:12:04] - daniel:  sure.  ~a

[2020-11-23 21:59:06] - a: Wed night good for SC2?  -Daniel

[2020-11-23 19:12:16] - paul:  so as long as we don't call both packing, you still think its a false equivalence?  like daniel, i kinda don't care what we call it, but it does seem to be breaking a 123 year precedent vs breaking a 151 year precedent.  you say "democrats are proposing worse things" without saying why you think its worse.  is it literally the difference between 123 and 151?  or is it something else?  ~a

[2020-11-23 19:09:24] - Maybe its all just side effects / unanticipated outcomes of gerrymandering where they made themselves safe R districts but that just means you get primary'ed by people further and further to the extremes and now its hard to get back to a middle ground. -Daniel

[2020-11-23 19:08:33] - I think R's see themselves as a minority who is trying to save? protect? return to? some idea of America that is in their head that they will do almost anything to pursue that goal.  Trump, Roy Moore, Fox News, Gingrich, etc are all points on this scale where they just keep going further and further.  -Daniel

[2020-11-23 19:06:30] - Biden 'blorstchy-boo'-ing isn't good but it gets hard to advocate for a high road when one side seems to so easily and quickly choose the low.  I don't think D's are saints that are pure innocent or anything but I definitely think over my lifespan that R's have been fundamentally worse imo on concepts like ethics / fair/ norms.  -Daniel

[2020-11-23 19:04:09] - I think I agree with paul that the generally accepted definition of court packing is adding seats.  I think I also agree with Pierce that the intent behind it is really the thing that people care about.  So if we create a new word "blorstchy-boo" that means breaking norms in order to change the ideological make up of the courts I would say that in my head R's are full speed ahead on that and that people want Biden to catch up. -Daniel

[2020-11-23 17:25:51] - Daniel: Because when Obama was trying to nominate Garland for SCOTUS, their position was the Republicans were evil bastards for opposing it, and then when Trump tried to do the same thing they were the ones opposing it for pretty identical reasons. -Paul

[2020-11-23 02:55:28] - Bush Sr years.  -Daniel

[2020-11-23 02:55:12] - I think Mig referenced some SC nominee from like the Bush years but I don't remember who and when I read about them it didn't seem the same to me but I don't remember the specifics at this point.  -Daniel

[2020-11-23 02:54:38] - Paul: I think this came up before but I don't remember but when you say "often forgotten is that Democrats have pretty much equally been hypocrites" is there something specific you are referring to?  -Daniel

[2020-11-17 22:54:14] - daniel:  I wouldn't call it cancel culture, more of freedom to dissaociate.  If there was an active effort to push the owner out like what happened to Don Sterling, that maybe would apply. - mig

[2020-11-17 21:26:12] - pierce:  that's fair, but i still think in daniel's case, that counts as cancel culture.  i think i'd like to point out that "cancel culture" is already a war of words in an of itself.  as wikipedia mentions, recently, cancel culture, the term, "has mostly negative connotations".  "cancel culture" as a wording needs to get canceled.  ~a

[2020-11-17 19:37:00] - Daniel: Interesting that Harden would want to go to the Nets, then, considering their owner made some news with his own political viewpoints. -Paul

[2020-11-17 19:14:29] - daniel:  yes, it counts.  mostly using the various definitions here.  the definitions are all pretty general.  ~a

[2020-11-17 19:13:40] - I think it generally speaks more to the distaste that so many have for Trump vs other R's but I wonder how it plays out if owner politics starts to weigh on players (employees in general?) decision on where to play (work).  Reportedly Harden turned down a 50m a year extension so if thats true thats definitely putting your money where your mouth is. -Daniel

[2020-11-17 19:12:02] - This is still specifically Rockets related but an interesting case for 'cancel culture'.  Does it count as cancel culture if employees don't want to work for someone if they strongly disagree on politics?  https://foxsportsradio.iheart.com/content/2020-11-17-tilman-ferttita-supporting-trump-leading-to-revolt-among-rockets-players/  -Daniel

[2020-11-17 15:38:18] - a: Thats who most fan's are currently blaming.  -Daniel

[2020-11-17 15:36:48] - So its hard to pin it down on one thing. -Daniel

[2020-11-17 15:36:34] - a: We got a new owner who is cheap, a trump supporter, not nice, and might be part of the mob.  -Daniel

[2020-11-17 15:25:08] - Paul: It looks like yes.  MDA left, Morey left, Westbrook and Harden both asked for trades.  There were articles about how Rivers, Gordon, and Tucker were unhappy with the org.  So pretty much the whole team wants out.  Sad story.  -Daniel

[2020-11-17 14:14:07] - Daniel: They're trying to trade Harden? Did he request a trade? -Paul

[2020-11-17 07:34:36] - Rockets make me very sad right now.      -Daniel

[2020-11-16 20:50:48] - a: Thursday good for sc2?  -Daniel

[2020-11-16 19:59:05] - daniel: we lost critical mass -- we're down to about 5-6 people which isn't really enough for a game - aaron

[2020-11-16 19:53:07] - aaron: Are you still organzing people to play Among Us?  I know I missed the one week in October but wasn't sure if that was still happening.  -Daniel

[2020-11-16 17:08:27] - aaron: Also crazy that you remember the names of kids you went to camp with when you were ten! -Daniel

[2020-11-12 01:05:44] - though then in my defense I didn't actually change my mind a ton after then doing those.  -Daniel

[2020-11-12 01:05:25] - in my not defense I think these "don't be an asshole, think about what you say, do reasonable due diligence on a topic, and make it clear that you're listening to others" are probably mostly what got me in trouble in my original conversation.  -Daniel

[2020-11-12 00:38:23] - daniel: yeah, there's no oracle that will give us the proper terminology for every audience. if you're discussing a tough topic in a public forum you might have to jump through extra hoops to avoid offending people, and you might end up offending them anyway. in that case it usually comes down to whether it's part of a pattern of being offensive/insensitive, and whether the quality of your point mitigates the problematic language. - pierce

[2020-11-11 23:29:39] - So I think I'm willing to listen to "the community" and not a person but that also does feel like cheating because again who determines who "the community" is?  Like someone could just continually pick some community such that it always gave the answer they want.  Which maybe to some extent is what I'm already doing?  But the flip side seems subject to the whims of the last invdividual that you talked to.  -Daniel

[2020-11-11 23:26:31] - "people and groups" - of note in my head those are both plural terms and not referring to an individual.  I mostly get your point (I think ) Pierce and don't largely disagree but if one person says something is racist and therefore anyone who isn't racist should avoid that phrase that seems to be a lot of power for any one person.  -Daniel

[2020-11-11 21:33:31] - a: I don't think its entered terrible / disaster territory yet.  I think his lawsuits are dumb but also he has a right to try.  However once the lawsuits are all promptly tossed out if he still refuses then I think it starts to get bad.  -Daniel

[2020-11-11 19:17:35] - a: Maybe?  Would require more thought / exploration. I agree with Pierce that the goal is to "delegitimize people who voted against him." but I don't think that is specifically POC so I think thats where the racist part comes into question for me.  I'm on board with the bs narrative about voter fraud part of why its dumb though.  -Daniel

[2020-11-11 19:08:22] - true.  daniel would you feel differently if we somehow differentiate "functionally racist" from "racist"?  i feel like its the difference between a microaggression and, like, a normal aggression?  ~a

[2020-11-11 18:38:02] - pierce:  ahh, ok.  so, then maybe more to daniel's point, who gets to decide what is racist?  ~a

[2020-11-11 16:41:12] - larger community opinion / understanding that is formed.  I have also previously conceded in other conversations that as a white guy I'm probably not the best judge but I do think I would be able to find others making the same claim if it was a more widely agreed upon position.  Specifically Abrams in this context since she is so plugged in for the GA vote though again I don't think its up to one person.  -Daniel

[2020-11-11 16:22:23] - ah yes i had forgotten about that.  mmmm, daniel, does that change your mind any?  ~a

[2020-11-11 01:17:38] - which is to say, we could load a lot of debate into the word "as" in the tweet you linked to, Daniel. Are all of those turns of phrase with various political or racial undertones equally "as" problematic? No. But that's not because there's a real measurable gradient among them... it's because you can't compare them. I think the point is that refusing to recognize the rhetorical power of those phrases is itself a privilege. - pierce

[2020-11-10 16:45:35] - a: LIAR - yeah Fridays has generally not been the go to choice.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 16:44:54] - daniel:  i lied, i can't do friday, but we rarely do fridays, right?  ~a

[2020-11-10 16:42:08] - a: I sent an sc2 email.  You see it / have preference on day?  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 16:25:26] - a: Hard to tell without tone.  Just checking.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 16:25:12] - a: Partly the conversation pivots on things we've talked about before I think about how / what determines if something is racist.  Like what determines that.  So partly I think if it was definitely racist wouldn't people like Kamala / Obama / Abrams (especially since she is all about the GA vote)  being calling it out as such?  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 16:23:12] - a: Not sure if that is serious or joking.  If serious I don't think its racist because I'm not sure the entire issue of voter fraud is a racist issue?  I don't think Trump meant that POC's shouldn't get to have their votes counted.  I think he meant just stop counting votes in places he was ahead and only count votes for him in places he was behind.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 16:19:07] - "I don't think of it as a racist term (yet?" its because you're white, daniel.  ~a

[2020-11-10 16:16:46] - a: yeah I think I agree with that.  I don't think I would use the term legal vote as it seems like a generally unneccesary descriptor like if I was going to say I'm going to drive to the store in my functional car.  But if someone does say legal vote I don't think of it as a racist term (yet?  I guess things could change).  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 15:52:23] - a: Maybe?  I'm not sure.  I think the most prominent users yes but I don't know about everyone.  There were journalists / D's / election officials were starting to use it some last week during all the count stories / news conferences.  I think that was part of the point of the tweet in my head, was that the term was "gaining acceptance" to some degree and it was pushing back on that.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 15:44:39] - daniel:  no, i probably wouldn't use the word "racist" (lots of reasons).  instead i'd say that most people talking about "legal votes" also just so happen to be the same people trying to disenfranchise minority voters.  ~a

[2020-11-10 15:41:38] - But does that all carry over so that any discussion of voter fraud is then inherently racist?  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 15:41:04] - a: I can agree with subtext and agree they are trying to imply lots of illegal votes (which I would also agree I'm not aware of evidence showing this) but does implying illegal votes make it racist?  Or just R framing / rhetoric to push the voter fraud issue?  Is the voter fraud issue as a whole racist?  Like I think there are systemtic issues with voter registration / obstacles / id laws and all that.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 15:09:39] - daniel:  hmmm.  i could see that argument getting unproductive quickly (either side of the argument).  at its heart, though, i think i disagree with you:  when trump/mcconnell/etc say "legal votes" they have a huge heap of subtext.  "legal votes" are supposed to conjure up something specific (about how there's obviously lots of illegal votes, which there are not).  or otherwise they'd just call them "votes".  ~a

[2020-11-10 15:05:36] - a: Which having gone around with it a fair amount in the last day and half I mostly still disagree with though do think it could be used as such and should probably be paid attention to / kept an eye on.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 15:04:05] - a: Nah its fine.  https://twitter.com/DrIbram/status/1325078740746035202  That tweet was brought up in a group chat and I disagreed with it.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 14:50:20] - daniel:  what was the non-meta-argument?  are there details on the argument you can reveal?  or no?  ~a

[2020-11-10 14:50:10] - daniel:  i understand the meta-argument.  and its definitely where many leftists don't "get it".  you can decide your opponent is racist or privileged too quickly.  and calling out privilige is usually counterproductive, but people love to do it anyways.  otoh, i feel some arguments/discussions are unpalatable to some people.  i'll bite my tongue if i foresee an argument not going well.  ~a

[2020-11-10 14:22:24] - It did make me a little sad on a meta level cause its my faith overall in the left's ability to make arguments to the right if I'm too 'white guy' to get it then like how in the world is a less predisposed to the left "white guy"  going to ever get it.  That said one example doesn't speak for an entire political side of a spectrum but was still hard not to be a little disheartened.  -Daniel

[2020-11-10 14:19:15] - On a different note I had a argument where my white guy ness and privilege was called out as being reasons I wasn't getting something.  It was different.  Interesting in some capacity to see very stereotypical scenario play out where I disagreed with something and it was pretty quickly blamed on me being a white guy.    -Daniel

[2020-11-09 18:43:32] - yikes, that's terrible.  i'm very sorry to hear that, daniel.  i dearly hope things go well.  ~a

[2020-11-09 18:42:33] - My sister & brother in law tested positive for covid.  Mild so far and hopefully stays that way.  -Daniel

[2020-11-06 14:36:33] - I agree that on one hand its impossible to know how Sanders would have done I think in my head I'd lean towards Miguel - maybe not crushed but my guess is lose to Trump.  I think given the turnout I wouldn't expect a ton more people to have been energized by candidate Sanders.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 20:31:04] - mig: Good article.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 16:05:45] - I'm curious about post Trump politics for R's.  (Whether that is soon or post 2024).  They didn't seem to want to be on board but so many did get on board with Trump.  Do they stay on board or start to bail.  And if they do bail does the base get unhappy?  Who knows!  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 16:01:45] - mig: Currently it looks like just ~3 or 4% of voters would need to switch.  Which isn't a small number but could happen.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:59:37] - mig: I haven't looked at depth at anything so can't offer much in terms of specifics but I think its still somewhat possible given that its been shifting slowly that direction over time.  But not a certainty or anything.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:58:06] - daniel:  as an aside, looking at the Latino #s for Trump in Texas, I have serious doubts the "Texas gonna be blue eventually" is ever going to come to pass. - mig

[2020-11-05 15:54:09] - mig: That was an interesting article.  That author seems hostile towards pretty much everyone which is kind of interesting to read.  But yeah I think Latino voters fall under the same umbrella.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:42:03] - daniel:  Does "at a minimum, being ok with racism" apply to the Latinos and blacks who voted for Trump. - mig

[2020-11-05 15:39:00] - daniel: yes please.  ~a

[2020-11-05 15:38:50] - a: 9pm tonight for sc2?  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:35:51] - a: Thats why I said I agree with you about the burden of proof in general.  For Trump specifically I'm starting from a different place and was curious if there was a case to move me from it.  But maybe the only way would be to dispute every instance.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:34:16] - "the only way to assert someone isn't racist is to dispute every alleged instance?"  well i guess i'll ask you your larger point?  how do we determine if someone is or isn't racist?  how do we argue that daniel isn't racist?  ~a

[2020-11-05 15:33:18] - a: Maybe your larger point is that the only way to assert someone isn't racist is to dispute every alleged instance?  In my head I was thinking of something else but I'm not entirely sure what and maybe you are right that that doesn't exist?  Hmm -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:30:13] - You could look at the stuff he did?  Again I'm confused - I, you, and the article would agree that he didn't say it so why are you referring to it as evidence?  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:29:04] - daniel:  so, i shouldn't try to refute the totality of evidence?    ~a

[2020-11-05 15:28:28] - Yeah I said the USA today one had stuff he didn't do.  It was just an easy list that showed up that had stuff he did say later on.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:27:29] - pierce/daniel:  "looking at the totality of evidence" ughhhh, fine.  i'll start at the top, but i doubt you'll like it.  from the usatoday story.  "white power", clearly this was a mistake.  (i honestly believe this, in this *one* case, i'm definitely saying what i actually believe).  the right move here would have been to correct the record, and he didn't do that, but that DOESN'T make him racist.  you guys agree here right?!  ~a

[2020-11-05 15:24:40] - daniel:  still you're trying to reverse the burden of proof.  "If that case sole depends on disputing all the 'alleged' instances of racism"  yes, that's my plan.  that's how it should be.  lets take you as an example.  i'd say you're not racist, for sure.  but the burden of proof is on the person saying that daniel is racist, not the other way around.  ~a

[2020-11-05 15:22:53] - a: I 100% get what you are saying and no one has to play my thought game but the thought game I was curious about was if there was a case for Trump not being racist.  If that case sole depends on disputing all the 'alleged' instances of racism then thats probably enough for me to know no one here actually wants to make the case.  (Which is fine) -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:16:16] - daniel:  i'll offer the case that trump isn't racist, sure.  but you're trying to reverse the burden of proof and i don't think that's fair.  ~a

[2020-11-05 15:14:44] - a: I get the burden of proof concept but I was really hoping the other way.  If no one is interested in offering a case that Trump isn't racist that fine ( I wouldn't want to do that either) but I was just curious.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:02:41] - a: that's a circular argument. daniel is saying that those voters are okay with some amount of racism (one metric trumpload, to be precise) if it gets them some amount of other policies they want. - pierce

[2020-11-05 15:02:13] - I guess my point is that in my head by definition those voters are ok with racism because its obvious that Trump promotes racism.  So the way to show they aren't racist is to show that Trump isn't / doesn't promote it.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 15:01:10] - a: I'm confused.  You made a statement but I don't think its true.  I  think the way to show its true is to show that Trump isn't racist and doesn't promote racism which I'm not sure is possible.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:53:46] - daniel:  central park 5 was before inauguration, they're bringing drugs (true fact, before inauguration), they're bringing crime (true fact, before inauguration), they're rapists (kinda racist i guess, if he had said "some of them are rapists", it'd be a fact. before inauguration).  ~a

[2020-11-05 14:53:30] - a: I'm saying I think I agree with the statement that if you voted for Trump you are at minimum ok with racism.  I was curious if anyone could argue that was false not just argue to make me prove Trump was racist.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:51:29] - https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/30/fact-check-12-28-trump-comments-deemed-racist-direct-speech/6062530002/  That has things he didn't say as well as some he did.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:51:17] - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-election/video-donald-trump-racist-barack-obama-central-park-five-us-election-2020-b1426977.html as a start.    They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/06/trump-racism-comments/588067/    -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:50:41] - paul, i also wanted to talk about cars hitting houses, since you brought that up during sc2 for some reason  which reminds me, daniel, is sc2 happening tonight?  ~a

[2020-11-05 14:48:13] - daniel:  "you're okay with racism as long as you get the policies you want out of it"  "That isn't really contending he isn't racist"    huh?  you're "okay with racism", implies something about the man or his policies that are racist.  if not, what does the statement contending exactly?  ~a

[2020-11-05 14:46:28] - a: Thats just asking for a burden of proof, lol  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:46:12] - a: That isn't really contending he isn't racist  I was curious if anyone could make the case he wasn't.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:41:56] - daniel:  ok i'll argue that trump isn't racist.  (just for the fun of it, though, not because i actually believe it!)  since his inauguration, what has trump done that is racist?  for the sake of my crazy arguments i don't actually believe, facts (like, true facts) can't be racist, and stating facts can't be racist, even if it may seem that way.  ~a

[2020-11-05 14:35:52] - It seems that the only way to do so would be to somehow contend that Trump isn't racist or doesn't actively promote racism which I think isn't possible.  -Daniel

[2020-11-05 14:35:14] - I know there is a lot of crap being spewed at Trump voters and I don't know that I agree with all of it but is it really possible to argue with this statement, "If you vote for him, maybe you don't see yourself as racist. But a vote for Trump is a statement that, at the bare minimum, you're okay with racism as long as you get the policies you want out of it."  I don't think I can disagree with that part.  Can anyone here?  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 18:51:43] - a: You're assuming stocks are rational in the short term  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 15:25:37] - daniel: yeah that's basically the boat i'm in as well. i'm not convinced the past year would have played out much differently with a democrat in the whitehouse, or that anti-maskers in Arkansas or whatever would think "oh we have a democratic president, let's take this virus seriously" - aaron

[2020-11-04 14:17:19] - daniel:  agreed.  my tune changed in the past 8 hours.  we counted a lot of votes, and things do still look much closer than i was expecting based on what i thought i knew about trump and the electorate.  fivethirtyeight said this could happen, and it's happening, so i'm not surprised, just disappointed, like you said.  ~a

[2020-11-04 14:13:55] - Even if Biden still wins.  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 14:13:26] - For me I think its one of those I'm not angry I'm disappointed things.  2016 after Obama I was willing to chalk up to some level of reaction some level of Trump being an unknown etc but at this point its hard to not accept to some degree that this is who America is and thats disappointing.  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 05:08:51] - https://www.270towin.com/map-images/br1DB seems a completly plausible path still so I don't think its decided at all but I was definitely pulling for a different outcome tonight.  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 04:51:16] - daniel:  "i was hoping for the biden landslide as a rejection of trump but nope"  mmmmm, nah.  we don't know that yet.  almost all of the states have counted about half of the votes.  and most of the counted votes are election-day in person votes.  we've been told that most of the mail-in ballots are democrats.  you could end up being right, in the end, but its too early to know either way.  ~a

[2020-11-04 04:46:15] - a: Just how many have already voted.  I was hoping for the Biden landslide as a rejection of trump but nope!  I mean yeah just like of them seems like to many.  I mean I knew he would still get vote obviously but so many.  Just oof.  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 04:40:59] - At this point even if Biden wins I'm kinda sad / baffled that so many choose another four years of Trump.  Big oof for our country.  -Daniel

[2020-11-04 01:48:00] - daniel:  biden leading in texas.  wow wow wow.  ~a

[2020-10-30 13:42:50] - Daniel: Yeah, what Adrian and Miguel said. He seemed to be more diplomatic about it than Weiss and Greenwald, but it seemed to be the same idea that there was some disagreement on the topics covered that played a role in him leaving. -Paul

[2020-10-30 13:40:48] - daniel:  probably this "On July 19, 2020, following the unexplained absence of his column for June 5, Andrew Sullivan announced that he would no longer write for New York. He announced he would be reviving The Dish as a newsletter The Weekly Dish hosted by Substack"  ~a

[2020-10-30 13:40:46] - daniel: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/07/andrew-sullivan-see-you-next-friday.html - mig

[2020-10-30 13:39:18] - Paul: I tried to look up Sullivan on wikipedia to see what y ou are referring to but I didn't see anything.  What happened with him?  -Daniel

[2020-10-29 17:33:02] - Paul: oO Good luck!  Enjoy being busy  -Daniel

[2020-10-29 16:27:37] - Daniel: Induction scheduled for next Monday, so might be busy with other stuff. -Paul

[2020-10-29 16:27:19] - paul: what happens after this week?  -Daniel

[2020-10-28 20:08:33] - a: I don't know a lot about TIPS so I would have to l look.  Are there tax implications if you sell?  If there interest rate is better than online savings I'd take a look at least.  -Daniel

[2020-10-28 20:07:56] - My emergency fund is in an online savings account.  Its probably more conservative than we "need"* but with two kids, a house, two cats, two cars, and a risk adverse Andrea its where we settled. -Daniel

[2020-10-28 18:04:35] - daniel/paul:  we talk about "emergency funds" here a lot.  any thoughts on TIPS?  "TIPS holding is a good investment for one who believes inflation will be higher than the market expectation ... but not if one thinks inflation to be lower than expected".  in other words, the dividends of tips float around based on future expectation of inflation and interest rates.  thoughts?  ~a

[2020-10-28 17:20:46] - a: I wondered that too.  Props to him though.  -Daniel

[2020-10-27 14:14:15] - Daniel: At least all my losses were against platinum... so I can't feel too bad. -Paul

[2020-10-27 14:13:57] - Daniel: I've been watching them and they have been helpful. A few losses were me panicking and being an idiot (stubbornly sticking to roaches and hydras against shield batteries set up outside my base with immortals instead of shifting to swarm hosts or brood lords). The others I think I just didn't handle harass properly and lost too many workers. -Paul

[2020-10-27 13:40:17] - paul: Oof sorry.  Vibe's b2gm is something to think about.  Its not be all end all but gives some good fundamentals to keep in mind.  Other than that sometimes the matching algorithm just decides it hates you.  -Daniel

[2020-10-16 00:52:04] - Daniel: I assumed 50/50 based on Adrian's response when I asked "So you think every index/sector/company, has exactly the same chance to outperform every other index/sector/company over the next few years?" -Paul

[2020-10-15 20:06:01] - Who said 50/50?  I don't know how I would quantify what a company's chances of beating the market were.  Again if I thought I could I would probably have a different strategy.  I don't know if over the next ten years Ford does better than Amazon.  Maybe Amazon goes the way on Enron because of some crazy scandal.  Who knows.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 18:48:55] - mig: /shrug.  Trying to work with Trump seems different than praising / defending Trump.  I mean Pelosi tries to work with Trump too.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 17:41:45] - aaron: nice!  good for you for waiting, hopefully its not that long all the way through early voting.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 16:04:32] - a: I think if I had the answers to those questions then I might have a different investment strategy  My guess would be that on a historical / macro level the IT industry has reshaped the economy of everything? in the last 30 years.  Will it continue to do so to the same degree over the next 30?  Maybe?  Maybe eventually everything is digitized and there isn't the same growth room for IT anymore at some point.  /shrug.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 15:54:00] - daniel:  to *keep* playing both sides of this argument . . . what about vgt?  why does vgt always beat vtsax?  shouldn't there be times where vgt does not beat out vtsax?  i guess its too bad vgt doesn't go back to 2000?  ~a

[2020-10-15 15:41:02] - a: Nice! -Daniel

[2020-10-15 15:32:52] - daniel:  yeah my individual portfolio is a retirement choice.  i know you can't see it, but it beats the market every year (sometimes by ridiculous margins).  in 2017 my individual portfolio beat the market by 33%, in 2020 so far its beaten the market by 45%!  ~a

[2020-10-15 15:27:32] - a: I think its some luck of the draw - some the inherent nature of risk.  Your 5 fund portfolios are riskier if one company tanks but if that doesn't happen then you're good.  The stock challenges are an interesting thing to watch / participate in but I don't think they are a great analogue for our retirement choices.  I think PVTM is a better comparison and has beaten the market so good for Paul on that front.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 15:23:42] - daniel:  to fight the other side of this argument . . . why does my individual portfolio *always* beat out my index portfolio?  shouldn't that not be the case?  why do you and matt herndon *always* lose the stock-picking challenges?  shouldn't that not be the case?  was it just luck of the draw?  ~a

[2020-10-15 15:12:22] - Pickup trucks aren't going anywhere and maybe Ford pivots / innovates / figures out something.    The point is that we don't know what the future holds.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:55:21] - Daniel: Sure, and that's fine, but I just think it's a little crazy to think that we can't make any predictions at all about what companies might do better than others going forward. Like, what is the bull case for Ford over the next 10 years? -Paul

[2020-10-15 14:52:00] - The whole point is that I can't / don't want to try and predict the future.  So just invest in it all and you won't miss out on the winners which is generally more important than avoiding the losers.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:51:28] - I mean what if airlines develop fancy solar planes (or some other crazy thing that I don't even know to throw out there) that lets them reduce fuel consumption in some crazy way in the next 10 years.  Suddenly they seem disruptive again?  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:48:16] - Daniel: "I don't think all airlines will go away, so then the question is which airline?" Sure, but do you really think the airlines as a group are going to perform just as well as other companies going forward? -Paul

[2020-10-15 14:46:35] - Paul: I don't think all railroads will go away, so then the question is which railroad?  Which we don't know the answer to hence index investing.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:46:08] - Paul: I don't think all airlines will go away, so then the question is which airline?  Which we don't know the answer to hence index investing.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:45:41] - Paul: I don't think all banks will go away, so then the question is which bank?  Which we don't know the answer to hence index investing.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:41:57] - Paul: The point of index investing is that you get all the benefits of disruptive innovation along with all the downsides of disruptive innovation because you believe on net that benefits outweigh the costs.  However you don't know if it will be Tesla or TelaDoc or Netflix or who so you invest in them all.  -Daniel

[2020-10-15 14:27:21] - Daniel: How so? -Paul

[2020-10-15 14:23:24] - Paul: I don't think that video understands index investing.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 20:12:02] - Daniel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Post Wikipedia calls it a "daily tabloid newspaper", so it agrees with you. Never heard the term before. -Paul

[2020-10-14 20:11:03] - Daniel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_States Finally found the relevant Wiki page. -Paul

[2020-10-14 20:10:33] - Daniel: Ah, okay, is the Post a tabloid? I've never really read it or anything, so I don't know. I thought it was relatively legit as newspapers go. -Paul

[2020-10-14 20:09:36] - Also I can't read stuff on that statista site  Its paywalled.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 20:06:29] - Paul: tabloid?  I didn't say it was wrong but perhaps might call it misleading.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 20:01:56] - Daniel: https://www.statista.com/statistics/184682/us-daily-newspapers-by-circulation/ Fourth in terms of total circulation? Seems major to me. -Paul

[2020-10-14 20:00:36] - But I do take that it is an interesting step for Facebook to take and being an arbiter of information.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 20:00:05] - Paul:  "fairly major newspaper" is an interesting characterization of the post.  If it was the WSJ that would be a different thing.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 17:22:26] - a: Sure - but on the point of Roe where Paul thinks it isn't going away that seems fanciful given the current state of the justices.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 17:20:59] - daniel:  i don't buy that acb needs to be a "fair" replacement for ginsburg.  she just needs to be a "good" justice, and i don't think acb is a good justice.  ~a

[2020-10-14 17:19:48] - Your link Paul had it at 5-4 with Roberts siding with the liberal side.  If we are replacing RGB with ACB on some similar decision then doesn't that mean it will swing the other way?  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 17:09:21] - Daniel: "Like can Paul actually say with a straight face that ACB doesn't want to over turn Roe?" Did I say that (legit question, I can't remember)? I believe she would probably like it overturned, but that's a far cry from actually being able to overturn it, which is at least partially my point. A court case would have to work its way up to them and be accepted. Roberts already seems pretty hell bent on not rocking the boat. -Paul

[2020-10-14 17:02:47] - Daniel: "One is limiting with the goal of practically extinct and the other isn't." I think a lot of people in a lot of states, prior to the Heller decision (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller), would disagree with that assessment. -Paul

[2020-10-14 16:59:52] - Daniel: Maybe this time will be different? Maybe there's finally the votes of people willing to overturn established precedent? It's possible. But I just don't think it's something that seems so inevitable that it should provoke a knee-jerk life or death reaction to every Republican nominee like it does. -Paul

[2020-10-14 16:58:32] - Daniel: So, no, I don't think Supreme Court Justices nominated by Republicans are all eager to roll back Roe v Wade and I don't think there is some imminent danger of it happening if ACB gets on the court, just like how I didn't think it was going to happen with Alito and Kavanaugh... -Paul

[2020-10-14 16:57:42] - Daniel: Yeah, I think Adrian got it. It feels like every time a Supreme Court Justice is nominated by a Republican, everybody on the left screams about how it means the end of Roe v Wade, and if anything hasn't the Supreme Court been pretty friendly towards abortion rights as of late? (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/29/us/supreme-court-abortion-louisiana.html) -Paul

[2020-10-14 16:47:48] - a: It had naive as a misspelling with the red squiggly and the autocorrect version has the fancy i.  naïve.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 16:47:19] - Paul:  "certain civil rights as well" - oh?  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 16:43:53] - a: As a logical position I can accept that R party != SC nominees but that also seems very naïve in a real world sense.  Like can Paul actually say with a straight face that ACB doesn't want to over turn Roe?  If so thats crazyland to me.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 16:42:37] - Also I get that its entering the grey area but the idea that states want to make it so there are like maybe two clinics that offer abortions if they are hospital grade and if the doctor has admitting privs at the nearby hospital and etc vs you can't own some types of guns isn't the same level / type of limiting.  One is limiting with the goal of practically extinct and the other isn't.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 16:42:00] - daniel:  not to speak for paul, but R's want to overturn roe vs wade.  however, their supreme court nominees won't necessarily want (or not want) that.  ~a

[2020-10-14 16:40:45] - Paul: I'm confused - do you actually thing they don't want to overturn Roe?  Thats like one of the central goals of R's as party isn't it?  Like I don't think its even a question?  But you think maybe they'll just be like nah?  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 16:34:53] - Daniel: And you said "I don't think its remove so much as allow states to limit", but that's often the case with the rights that other side wants to remove too, right? The court isn't talking about blanketly outlawing abortion, it is taking on cases about states trying to restrict abortion. -Paul

[2020-10-14 16:34:01] - Daniel: Property rights, gun rights, depending on the justice, it can be certain civil rights as well. -Paul

[2020-10-14 15:26:39] - a: I'm unaware of a right to do business unimpeded and am also unaware of anyone losing their right to donate.  There might be limits and there is the whole corporations are people thing but again I don't think anyone is going to lose their right to donate to a campaign.  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 15:24:59] - daniel:  the rights to donate to political campaigns.  the rights to do business unimpeded (by regulation, by tax, etc).  ~a

[2020-10-14 15:23:46] - Paul: What rights are liberal justices trying to remove?  I can think of maybe guns but then I don't think its remove so much as allow states to limit. -Daniel

[2020-10-14 15:11:46] - Daniel: Ooooh, I would strenuously disagree with that idea. -Paul

[2020-10-14 15:05:29] - Also I'm not sure that liberal justices are trying to take people's rights away?  -Daniel

[2020-10-14 15:04:17] - mig: I mean "aside from Garland" is a pretty huge qualifier.  -Daniel

[2020-10-13 14:36:41] - a: I'm not sure how else we ended up there.  We definitely aren't that good  -Daniel

[2020-10-13 14:26:33] - daniel:  i agree with your logic but it only takes you so far . . .    i imagine they fill from top down in the diamond league too:  if you were bronze players they wouldn't put you in the masters league even if you showed up the first second and just lost to a platinum player  ~a

[2020-10-13 14:24:35] - a: Our theory was we got in early and they fill in from the top down?  There were no teams below us in rank when we got placed.  -Daniel

[2020-10-13 14:06:42] - paul/daniel:  congrats!  you seemed to have skipped over diamond entirely?  honestly, if you're losing to rushes from gold and winning on everything else, i think that's still a strategy in and of itself, right?  prepare to lose to a rush, and always go for the late-game plan?  (i think those have always been your strong/weak spots)  as long as you aren't playing people who know that is your strategy, it seems like a good system.  ~a

[2020-10-13 13:58:49] - Daniel: We're Masters players who routinely can't fed off simple rushes from gold players (speaking solely for myself). -Paul

[2020-10-13 13:53:05] - Paul: We're officially masters even if we aren't legit masters?  -Daniel

[2020-10-13 13:50:03] - a: We've missed you in SC2. Daniel and I are legit Masters in 2v2! (We're totally not legit Masters). -Paul

[2020-10-13 12:36:13] - no, daniel.  do not engage  there is no favreau.  ~a

[2020-10-12 20:41:44] - Favreau: I'm very excited about the American Cent Assocation.  Can you tell me more!  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 18:39:55] - I side more with Daniel about Lebron not solo-ing it, but to Miguel's point, the Bulls were still decent after Jordan retired the first time, whereas when Lebron leaves his former team tends to fall apart. -Paul

[2020-10-12 16:17:14] - Oh yeah overall for Lebron, just saying that for his championships though that he didn't do it solo still.  Kyrie was there for that.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 15:41:37] - daniel:  that's a point for LeBron?  Made the finals again even with Kyrie gone. - mig

[2020-10-12 15:22:13] - Kyrie left first though right?  I think?  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 15:18:26] - daniel:  I would say more than a focal point?  Cleveland went from title contender to absolute trash after LeBron left. The Heat did fare a little better after LeBron left but it was still a major drop off. - mig

[2020-10-12 14:38:41] - Kyrie?  Love?  LBJ the focal point for sure but not solo.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 14:38:07] - daniel:  I would say LeBron's Cavs championship was him taking the team solo. - mig

[2020-10-12 14:31:57] - I don't think anyone really goes solo on their way to a championship.  Hakeem in 94?  Maybe someone else somewhere but I think its generally the exception.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 14:30:43] - Duncan / Parker / Manu.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 14:29:15] - MJ games played: 1,072.  LBJ games played: 1,265.  So assuming that number continues to grow and considering that MJ's Wiz years were not his greatest thats a lot of games for LBJ in his corner.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 14:20:10] - Daniel: Re: Longevity. I have a hard time balancing that, too, because MJ still had the longer career in terms of years from start to finish, but he took two breaks. What could his numbers look like if he hadn't taken those breaks? Does that count for or against him? -Paul

[2020-10-12 14:00:59] - I agree that MJ's undefeated-ness in the finals are the major feather in his cap.  I think LeBron's making of the finals is the feather in his cap.  Its hard to balance those but LeBron's sustained peak would probably get the nod from me.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 13:58:59] - mig / Paul: I think I'm somewhere closer to Paul that I think its reasonably close but I'm leaning Lebron.  I think the longevity is really the kicker for me that LeBron is still rolling this many years later.    Going into the Rockets series I was hopeful because I wasn't sure LeBron could keep it up anymore and boy was I wrong.  -Daniel

[2020-10-12 04:12:01] - daniel/paul:  offering a probably shit take:  LeBron's career accomplishments are way more impressive than MJ. - mig

[2020-10-11 17:41:36] - aaron: its hard to know 100% but I imagine the anti mask crowd will be game on?  The pro mask crowd will sit it out?  Thats a guess though.  I think we are planning on skipping it for our family.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 23:54:26] - https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/editorials/article246347750.html#storylink=topdigest_latest  As an example of not being interested in good faith operations.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 20:11:34] - Daniel: "What if one side did start it?" Then great! You have the moral high ground. Don't ruin in by stooping to their level. But, as mentioned by others, I doubt you can get everybody to agree that one side started it. -Paul

[2020-10-09 19:25:05] - Bork: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork_Supreme_Court_nomination  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 19:12:30] - Bork?  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 19:06:13] - Daniel: I mean, clearly, one side started it.  But at this point, we're looking at at a pre-Bork era for when it started.  I don't think it's reasonable to look at a 30+ year process of escalation and complain, "but they started it," not anymore.  Because, honestly, it almost certainly did start before Bork.  That's just the first one I can think of. -- Xpovos

[2020-10-09 17:59:13] - I think its possible its a bluff for Biden.  I don't think its a bluff for D's at large.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 17:54:22] - mig/daniel/paul:  here's a theory.  the whole "court packing" threat is just a bluff.  they say this to push moderate republicans and moderate democrats to consider voting against barrett:  moderates who might consider the barrett situation *clear* and *blatant* hypocrisy.  ~a

[2020-10-09 17:50:57] - "it's an endless stream of escalating awfulness with both sides pointing to the other saying, "they started it"  -  What if one side did start it?  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 17:50:03] - mig: Were judges before Estrada/Bush as clearly ideological?  I don't know enough about judicial history but I generally think of R's as pushing the envelope and D's responding and not the other way around.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 17:48:00] - Paul: I don't think it ends well.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 14:57:41] - also as a random aside I'm super tired today so hopefully I don't make to many dumb points in talking through things.  lol.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 14:57:13] - I think the central tenet of the R party is to make the fed gov look bad then run on how bad the fed gov is which is at its core not a good faith argument.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 14:55:20] - mig: I would be interested in some more accurate accounting cause I could totally believe my biases factor in but I do think that R's in general are much more interested in pushing the envelope wherever possible and less interested in things like fairness and operating in good faith.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 14:11:25] - paul:  still, i agree with one thing daniel said.  if one side takes the low road *nonstop*, i have a hard time faulting the other side for taking the low road on occasion.  its kinda just where we are.  it'll take a while to dig out of this shit.  ~a

[2020-10-09 14:10:28] - "cheat" in terms of the prisoners game.  I don't think either side would have acted illegally under the hypothetical outcome.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 14:09:47] - paul:  for what it's worth, i disagree with daniel.  i doubt the court packing thing will happen.  the fact that he's not promising not to do a thing that probably won't happen is just a play (imo).  ~a

[2020-10-09 14:09:30] - IMO court packing will happen / be attempted if Amy is confirmed.  I think at some point D's decide that R's aren't interested in fairness / operating in good faith and so why should they?  Its a prisoner's dilemma type thing.  If one side just "cheats" all the time then there is no incentive for the other side to not "cheat" as well.    -Daniel

[2020-10-09 02:58:51] - mig: I think there is a difference in how it would be treated between some rando D talking about court packing and Biden talking about it.  Same as the diff between Steve King being racist is a smaller deal than Trump.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 01:50:36] - daniel:  I don't agree.  Court packing has been talked about among democrats since the Kavanaugh confirmation. - mig

[2020-10-09 01:21:31] - mig: It wouldn't be an issue if they weren't doing that in the first place.  -Daniel

[2020-10-09 01:21:16] - mig: I don't think its great but I do understand his position that as soon as he answers the story shifts to that rather than on Trump / McConnell trying to shove Amy through.  -Daniel

[2020-10-08 18:00:37] - rookie numbers.  don't tell daniel, though.  he thinks it should be 0%.  ~a

[2020-10-08 16:37:52] - paul/daniel:  i don't like a virtual debate because in person comms are quicker and higher fidelity.  until we get <10ms latency and microphone/camera technology goes through a couple more generations, you won't have the same fidelity as an in person debate.  i don't HATE the idea though:  it honestly can't go any worse than the september debate, so why not give it a shot?!  ~a

[2020-10-08 16:15:22] - in free play I can sabotage all the stuff as the imposter.  Can you do that in the real game?  Like why wouldn't you just constantly sabotage o2 and reactor?  What does sabotaging comms do?  Thanks for the tips  -Daniel

[2020-10-08 16:01:16] - daniel:  anyways, none of this matters.  you'll learn it all on the job.  ~a

[2020-10-08 15:54:10] - daniel:  everyone has their own task list (if you're an imposter, your task list is unimportant).  ~a

[2020-10-08 15:46:58] - aaron:  For Among Us - does everyone share the task list or is it per person?  Can crew hear imposters in the vents?  Are there any other obvious give aways I should be aware of?  -Daniel

[2020-10-08 15:45:49] - -Daniel

[2020-10-07 18:34:32] - Daniel: That's interesting! I know for a generation, the Xbox was actually closer to a PC and the Playstation tended to be more proprietary. I guess that trend has reversed. -Paul

[2020-10-07 18:33:51] - Daniel: Doesn't seem like it anymore. I'm not sure. I don't really follow what PS has. Apparently Ori was only on Xbox and was an arcade style of game? -Paul

[2020-10-07 18:33:23] - PS5 uses M2 expansion slot for hard drive expansion.  XBox uses proprietary storage expansion.  Thats a reason!  -Daniel

[2020-10-07 18:23:39] - Paul: Does xbox have games that PlayStation doesn't in terms of arcade?  That you also can't get on PC?  -Daniel

[2020-10-07 17:30:34] - I will get a PS5 within the next year though not 100% on when.  When the next Horizon Zero Dawn or God of War comes out would make me get one.  -Daniel

[2020-10-07 17:30:04] - a: Similar to Miguel.  I've owned every playstation so far.  I generally like their games / design decisions better.  MS exclusives were generally Halo and random and were more likely to port to PC as well.  -Daniel

[2020-10-04 00:54:20] - daniel:  haven't been able to get too much time into it, but it definitely has the feel of the old LucasArt flight sims. - mig

[2020-10-03 04:02:33] - mig: If you are trying out squadrons let me know how it goes.  I don't think I have the gaming bandwidth for it currently but I'm definitely curious.  I remember being a fan of XWing vs Tie Fighter back in the day.  -Daniel

[2020-10-02 22:04:38] - daniel: okay, added! our next game is october 10th. people filter in and out so if you can only come for like 20 minutes or if you're late that's OK -- whenever you have time - aaron

[2020-10-02 21:19:25] - aaron: You can add me to your email list for the game.  I interested in checking it out though I don't know if I'd be able to play everytime.  -Daniel

[2020-10-02 18:32:14] - a: Like doctors are faking positives for R's folks as a way to harm them?  -Daniel

[2020-10-02 18:02:26] - Challenging people on their beliefs is always tricky.  Hard to do it in a way that actually leads to them changing their mind.  They have to be open to it and you can't really force it.  -Daniel

[2020-10-02 18:01:54] - a: suicide by words material there.  -Daniel

[2020-10-02 09:50:12] - daniel:  male.  74 years old.  obesity.  his personal ifr is really bad.  on the other hand, he'll definitely get top-notch care.  ~a

[2020-10-02 09:36:28] - daniel:  File:Concept of incubation period.svg:  infection period (period of communicability) for covid starts at 2-days in.  decidedly before symptoms.  it is very likely he was hurting biden with the virus in two ways simultaneously.  using the rant coming out of his mouth and the air.  i'm very happy their campaigns agreed ahead of time to not shake hands before the debate.  ~a

[2020-10-02 09:21:48] - daniel:  it was a throwaway line from the debate, so i had completely forgotten about it, but now it should be the line of the night:  "i don't have -- i don't wear masks like him. every time you see him, he's got a mask. he could be speaking 200 feet away from them and he shows up with the biggest mask i've ever seen."  what does biggest mask even mean?!  ~a

[2020-10-02 05:11:32] - Trump has covid.  https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1311892190680014849?s=20  I honestly don't know what to do with that.  I hope it gets better and he learns from it?  Or something?  What a crazy ass year.  -Daniel

[2020-10-01 17:29:23] - Daniel: Nope. Not really trying to make any point other than (assuming this is true, which I fully admit might not be), "sometimes it's funny the unintended consequences of certain rules". -Paul

[2020-10-01 17:00:41] - Paul: I'm confused by if you are making a point (and then what that point would be) or if you are just pointing out an interesting oddity that car seats have a potential impact on peoples decisions to have a third kid.  Which could make a small intuitive amount of sense but like adrian said lots of factors go into that decision.  -Daniel

[2020-10-01 01:10:56] - Wallace makes the point there that muting the mics might not be enough.  As practical as sound proof booths would be it seems unlikely.  I don't really know what kind of consequences they could introduce that both sides would actually agree on to actually curb Trump.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 20:25:54] - sound proof booths?  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 19:58:38] - daniel/paul: hmm, interesting counterpoint. muting the mics actually might make the problem worse. it won't stop trump from talking out of turn. "trying to talk clearly and confidently is harder when you’re listening to someone else talking to you, but if the audience can’t hear it, then it might just seem like [biden] is stumbling on his own, rather than being tripped up by the incessant whining of his opponent"  ~a

[2020-09-30 18:54:47] - daniel:  there normally wouldn't be excitement for Harris but I think the identity politics cult is going to demand she be the nominee. - mig

[2020-09-30 18:27:28] - She's probably a lock to run.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 18:27:13] - I don't think Harris is a lock for 2024 if Biden doesn't run.  I think she potentially starts with a leg up assuming the 4 years prior went well but I could still see a primary run.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 16:28:12] - Daniel: I guess it depends on your opinion of Biden (and who replaces him). Didn't mean to imply any good or bad to it, just something a little odd. -Paul

[2020-09-30 16:18:18] - Paul: Is it bad if Biden only goes one term?  Somehow seems like an implication in your statement.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 13:39:03] - daniel:  agreed.  i'm def not watching any more.  i'll watch at least some of the VP debate because i don't know much about harris.  ~a

[2020-09-30 13:38:29] - a: Yeah I don't know that I'm planning on watching all the debates but I wanted to power through at least one.  It wasn't super easy.  I do feel like Trump spent almost as much time arguing with Wallace as Biden.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 13:34:50] - daniel:  yeah, push to talk makes sense in THIS case.  normally at least being able to mute seems important.  ~a

[2020-09-30 13:34:08] - debates need to be push to talk where the moderator actively let someone talk.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 13:05:02] - Daniel: "That is so insane to me" It isn't to me, but only because it's not surprising anymore. This isn't the first time he's pulled this, although maybe it is the first time he has been so explicit on such a widely viewed forum. The crazy thing is, he probably thinks in his mind that he DID denounce white supremacists. -Paul

[2020-09-30 06:05:28] - It was a crazy moment where Trump was like yeah I totally could denounce white supremacy and Wallace was like ok do it!  Then he didnt and instead went with the stand by thing.  BLOWS MY MIND.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 06:03:53] - Its gotten a lot of play already but in real time I had a sit up and out loud WTF momemnt when Wallace pressed him to denouce white supremacy and the best he could do was "stand by".  That is so insane to me.  -Daniel

[2020-09-30 06:02:07] - I watched the debate.  Thought it went about how I imagined a debate between them going.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 19:59:44] - i've pushed daniel hard enough, now maybe we can convince him that UBI is a better idea.  what do you think paul, can we convince him?  ( )  ~a

[2020-09-28 19:38:54] - a: I thought it was 300m of personal debt and ~100m of potential debt to US Gov if he loses his audit.  I didn't read about 1b in personal debt but I only read the one really long NYT original article on it.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 18:47:19] - daniel:  "Does a failed economic state need to exist in order to provide consequence?" define "failed economic state"?  (probably, regardless of your definition, though) no, not in my opinion.  i think ubi would be fine if you got rid of snap/ebt-card.  ~a

[2020-09-28 18:25:47] - Mainly just thinking about coming around to wondering about UBI as it relates to the wealth gap and if that helps to make things sufficient.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 18:25:14] - oof double post.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 18:25:02] - So if poverty is simply defined as the percent of median spending perhaps its not the word I'm looking for.  Does a failed economic state need to exist in order to provide consequence?  So like would a UBI cause all the problems that people fear or would providing a base line existence be better in terms of net happiness by avoiding things like hunger / not being able to go to doctor / etc.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 18:24:59] - So if poverty is simply defined as the percent of median spending perhaps its not the word I'm looking for.  Does a failed economic state need to exist in order to provide consequence?  So like would a UBI cause all the problems that people fear or would providing a base line existence be better in terms of net happiness by avoiding things like hunger / not being able to go to doctor / etc.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 18:06:22] - daniel:  "is the presence of poverty / homelessness / hunger a required state in the world in order to provide consequence for failure / laziness?"  i deny the assumption in the question, that poverty has a purpose.  also deny the assumption in the question, that poverty can be defined inherently.  don't we currently define poverty as a percentage of the median spending, i mean like what?  yes . . . it's like required by definition?  ~a

[2020-09-28 18:02:21] - daniel:  basically, the idea of a luxury tax.  anything that costs over $X million has another tax on it.  "A luxury tax is a sales tax or surcharge levied only on certain products or services that are deemed non-essential or accessible only to the super-wealthy. The luxury tax may be charged ... as a percentage of the amount above a specified level"  ~a

[2020-09-28 18:00:43] - As another facet of this perhaps is the presence of poverty / homelessness / hunger a required state in the world in order to provide consequence for failure / laziness?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:59:49] - daniel:  well, no, i think 100b is bad.  you've already sold me on that.  its how we "solve" that problem where we strongly disagree.  i can propose more though!  progressive sales-tax, progressive property-tax.  sales tax (including closing costs on houses and when buying/selling cars), and property taxes, can be progressive.  we mostly never make them progressive and i'm not sure why.  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:59:39] - a: I imagine it would have to be something that was debated and figured out over time.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:57:16] - a: I don't know.  Thats why I was throwing out numbers earlier in the wealth tax portion of the discussion.  I thought something absurdly high like 100b would be an easier sell but NOPE.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:55:55] - daniel:  "Some level of wealth gap is acceptable"  how much wealth gap is acceptable?  (this question is to myself as well.  i agree with your statement, but i'm not sure where to draw the line)  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:52:27] - Well I would have to think more about any wealth gap is bad statement.  Some level of wealth gap is acceptable is probably better.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:51:54] - I don't think ANY wealth gap is bad.  I think our level of wealth gap is bad and that it is increasing.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:51:23] - a: Yes.  I've agreed to that and said its a spectrum several times.  I don't think we are near the absurd end at all though.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:50:39] - a: At a certain point sure, cause eventually it would just become communism which I've already agreed is bad.  So I think that extreme is bad, but I think we are super far from that extreme and much closer to Miguels version where its maximized capitalism which I think also has its issues.  So I don't think taking all of Bezo's checking account is good.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:47:54] - daniel:  reductio ad absurdum:  everybody should get the same pay.  you need to stop somewhere, right?  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:46:46] - daniel:  i don't think it's mean spirited or uncaring.  it's a different perspective.  i think taking money directly out of bezos's checking account and paying extra snap-card benefits has a detrimental effect at a certain point don't you?  you agree that taking money out of bezos's checking statement and handing it to panhandlers in the street or building libraries would eventually stop being a good idea?  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:42:32] - a: The point being that focusing on Bezos' opportunity while ignoring those that are failing to make ends meet seems like a position that is mean spirited? uncaring? to those that need help.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:38:56] - a: It would depend on why / how he doubled / halved his wealth to determine the impact on the those at the bottom of the wealth gap.  There are certainly ways it can change without impacting them true.  There are ways it could change that certainly would impact them.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:34:20] - daniel:  "And those people on the bottom of the wealth gap?  They are just left there and we can look at them and say well they had a chance but now because they missed / messed up / failed their chance they're screwed?"  if bezos doubles or halves his wealth that doesn't change the happiness of the people in poverty.  "the belief that someone having lots of money somehow makes everyone else's lives worse":  i also reject this argument.  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:32:59] - a: Which first message?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:30:29] - Maximized is a strong word.  An individuals maximized opportunity seems to inherently conflict with the notion of public good.  Like 0 taxes would be the maximum opportunity.  I care about whether people's economic opportunities are sufficient and would balance it against the public good.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:29:29] - daniel:  i don't agree with your first message.  miguel is right, bezos's changes in wealth don't make the life of a person in poverty any better or worse.  but, i agree with your second message.  if wealth gap gets above a certain threshold, governments destabilize.  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:27:56] - mig: Doesn't that just lead to the French Revolution eventually?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:27:33] - mig: And those people on the bottom of the wealth gap?  They are just left there and we can look at them and say well they had a chance but now because they missed / messed up / failed their chance they're screwed?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:05:48] - daniel:  I don't believe the wealth gap is bad. - mig

[2020-09-28 17:05:31] - daniel:  you can't get wealth without income.  unless i have some major logical flaw here.  changing the laws can even "fix" most grandfathered-wealth, i.e. capital gains taxes.  bezos holds 80% of his wealth in one single stock and his cost-basis is basically zero.  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:03:36] - daniel:  they are separate things of course!  if bezos actually paid taxes on his income (because the laws were different), i.e. the laws on deductions/etc were curbed, he wouldn't have $200b.  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:02:18] - daniel:  income tax, capital gains, estate tax, property tax, increase them all at the highest brackets, make them all progressive as fuck.  you can get me behind all of these ideas.  ~a

[2020-09-28 17:02:01] - Why do you think income tax addresses wealth?  Isn't the whole point of this that they are separate things?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:01:09] - So other than a tax what means does a gov have to deal with unlimited wealth?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 17:00:44] - I think the wealth gap is a problem and thats its a problem that only gets worse as globalization continues and capitalisms grows.  I don't think an income tax addresses those issues.  So then the idea of a wealth tax springs from that point.  So if there are alternatives that work towards that goal that would be good.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 16:58:58] - a / (whoever): Do you think wealth concentration / wealth gap is bad?  Do you think an income tax is able to address that issue?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 16:57:56] - daniel:  "there are practicalities to be addressed"  moreso that many of the practicalities are unaddressable.  that you're setting yourself up for a low or negative ROI (enforcement could cost more than you'd get back in taxes?  maybe?).  ~a

[2020-09-28 16:56:33] - daniel:  "properties were accounted for?"  i'm not talking about real properties.  i'm talking about trade marks.  the "brand".  the "name".  not physical objects, but non-physical concepts.  ~a

[2020-09-28 16:53:53] - So finding a spot on the spectrum where creators still create but that public good is still accounted for and addressed seems like a good goal.    Unlimited wealth seems in contrast to the public good.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 16:53:19] - On a higher level I understand the point that there are practicalities to be addressed but I think the concept of there being a point past which I don't think people need money.  The far end of the spectrum is communism which I think has been shown to not wrok well but I think the other end of unfettered capitalisms has been shown to have its problems too.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 16:50:21] - a: Didn't you already say properties were accounted for?  How do you know that the trump brand is wroth 500m?  It seems like someone already figured it out?  If we limited it to only certain asset classes your concern would be that people would just hoard things in the non taxed classes?  Like Bezos could just buy a warehouse full of picaso's or w/e as a way of avoiding taxes?  Could he buy enough random stuff?  Maybe?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 16:02:36] - a: that seems to go both ways?  Art appreciation doesn't' count against you but you can't claim depreciation either?  Its just worth the last sale price?  Is that a terrible system?  You seem to say yes because while people could think its worth less you still have to pay tax on it as the og price but you think the "truth" is that its less?  So you are paying taxes on an 'untrue' value?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:58:22] - daniel:  income always has a dollar amount (yes i know you can hide it, but it has a dollar amount).  things often do not:  its really worth what someone will pay for it, so in many ways it doesn't have a worth until you sell it.  (one great reason why capital gains are only levied only when you sell) ~a

[2020-09-28 15:56:32] - daniel:  its not just that things can be hidden, its that things can (drastically) change in value.  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:56:16] - "have to go into your home" seems to be making assumptions that I'm not sure I agree with.  I get the point that if you want some version of the truth that it would be required but we already have fuzziness around income as well where its just on what has a paper trail why would it be different for wealth?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:55:07] - Also though if you buy a 100m dollar painting at auction doesn't that make a paper trail?  I get your point that things could be hidden but that also just seem analogous to under the table cash payments for things in order to hide income.  So you just pay taxes on whats declared / known without having to go assess things in your house or whatever.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:51:41] - daniel:  wealth tax, the assessors have to go into your home every year.  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:51:30] - a: It would be funny in a absurd way if art suddenly all jacked up in price as a means of 'storing wealth' to hide from the IRS.  That makes more sense than burying gold to me.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:51:06] - daniel:  property taxes you have to assess what something is worth, but houses you can often see the outside of without disrupting you too much.  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:50:17] - daniel:  luckily, with income tax and capital gains tax, you don't have to assess anything, because it's already assessed.  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:48:29] - daniel:  would IRS cops now be allowed to go everywhere always if they think you're hiding anything ever?  seems like we need to de-de-fund the police in a major way?  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:47:33] - daniel:  so, new additional problem!  how the heck do you agree on what something is worth?  with houses that is hard.  with art that is hard (and already has tons of corruption).  but, you're talking about an assessor assessing everything in your house every year.  everything on every part of land you own and everything on every part of land that you DON'T OWN but have access to, or know someone who has access to.  every year.  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:40:59] - a: I'm not convinced it would be a bad plan yet though I do get your point its a new class of enforcement.  I'm not sure how much the burying gold argument holds sway with me currently but I would definitely agree that there could be ramifications / implications that I haven't thought of yet.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:37:42] - daniel:  thinking about is fine with me, obviously.  it seems like a bad plan, and i'm not sure how to repair it:  unless someone comes up with a brand-new idea, i'll be for increasing the top-tax-bracket.  maybe even making some new ones?  . . . i'd definitely be for increasing the funding to the IRS, but not for something that will have a bad ROI.  and i think a wealth tax will have a bad ROI.  ~a

[2020-09-28 15:34:29] - Also even in conceding its not the most feasible I don't think its not worth thinking about.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:32:52] - I would be willing to concede that a wealth tax isn't the most feasible option of available options but would still be interested in something like it being pursued / thought through by people smarter than me.  Maybe wealth brackets for tax instead of income brackets for some taxes?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:30:36] - a: Bitcoin I'll give you wouldn't really work or would fall into that same category as like gambling income currently where you are supposed to just self report.  I'm still unclear on how you buy enough gold to hide a billion dollars without a paper trail.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 15:29:15] - a: " who will want to drastically increase funding to the IRS?"  me?  Voters would want better tax enforcement?  I guess its baked in that in theory an increase of IRS spending would net a gain for the gov.  If it didn't then over time that it could end up being a poor choice.  But if tougher enforcement over time led people to try and avoid / cheat as much that might be worth the investment.  Would be tricky to quantify though.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:58:25] - daniel:  who will want to drastically increase funding to the IRS?  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:57:59] - daniel:  i have bitcoins that i bought over 10 years ago.  i guarantee nobody knows about them.  i bought them on a website that no longer exists.  (obviously i don't hold 50b worth, but please just follow the example anyways)  nobody knows about them.  and as long as i don't blab to anybody (on a public message board) nobody will ever know about them.  could a police force find them?  sure.  but it would require a lot expensive work.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:53:34] - daniel:  i'm not saying it would be impossible to prosecute, but that it'd be significantly harder to prosecute.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:53:26] - daniel:  it depends on how you buy it, you can get gold without a paper trail.  regardless, gold is just one example:  you can hide ANYTHING that you have a lot of and nobody knows about.  anything easy to bury or hide.  my point is that hiding things would become illegal, and its not illegal today, and it'd be much easier to do than hiding a whole business (hiding income).  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:51:32] - Heres little Jimmy - he gets to eat bread and have milk today because you paid taxes.  Here's veteran Frank who gets to walk because taxes paid for his medical bills.  Here Gina who went to college.  I dunno.  Maybe everyone already knows that but getting more people to think about it.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:50:11] - Maybe we need a marketing campaign for taxes?  Everyone seems to just take it for granted that everyone hates taxes and that all these rich people will just try and cheat and avoid and everything.  Maybe we need superbowl ads (lol) on what taxes actually pay for so people won't hate them as much.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:46:41] - a: For the gold bars I still there would be a paper trail though.  I don't think you get to a wealth tax threshold an an unbanked.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:46:12] - a: Sure.  I don't want to argue against an income tax.  I support that.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:42:14] - a: I do agree.  I just think it could be more.  I do agree that tax cheating is an issue that I think the gov could be like 1000% percent more aggressive in dealing with.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:41:14] - daniel:  here is my least favorite part of a wealth tax.  it's much much much easier to hide wealth than it is to hide income.  tax cheats will be tax cheats, and they'll go to jail.  but if you create a brand-new tax law that's 100 times easier to cheat than any other tax law that has ever existed, you're taking an age old problem and making it much worse.  why can't we all agree that increasing the top-tax-bracket is a good thing?    ~a

[2020-09-28 14:40:47] - Even with F35's (or whatever) though an increase in the education budget seems more likely if there is increased revenue.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:40:19] - F35's are kind of a black whole into a whole other topic.  I don't know that they love F35's specifically but love directing funding towards their base and seeming patriotic.  Maybe those idea's could be funneled into a different venue?  Maybe not.  I'd like to think with voting it would be possible.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:35:50] - daniel:  agreed.  but, most of the people i vote for love f35s.  mainly because all politicians (almost all of them) love f35s.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:35:07] - a: So that again seems like a reason to vote for people who would spend it on the right things rather than just give up on having better schools and public institutions.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:34:59] - daniel:  "That money is better in corporations than being spent on the public?"  sometimes yes and sometimes no.  but, most importantly, a wealth tax won't fix that.  it might actually make it worse.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:34:12] - daniel:  you forgot f35s.  most of what the government spends its money on are things that we all wish they didn't spend money on.  and a big new tax is going to make that worse.  (less important, but you're assuming they'd decrease taxes on the middle class, but they probably won't.)  man, i sound like a republican talking to you.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:33:15] - a: I'm not sure what point you are driving at.  That money is better in corporations than being spent on the public?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:32:35] - a: Yes to pay tax to the gov so that they can spend it on roads / hospitals / schools etc.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:32:23] - daniel:  1.5b every year?  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:32:09] - And that him selling 1.5 billion in a 23 trillion dollar market is going to make it tank?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:32:00] - daniel:  yes and that he'd be selling from stocks held in american companies.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:31:20] - a: I have no idea how much cash or not he holds.  Is the idea that he would have to sell stocks in order to pay the bill?  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:28:45] - daniel:  if you levied the tax today.  bezos would owe 1%*(200-50) = $1.5b in 2021.  do you think bezos holds $1.5b in cash?  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:27:19] - daniel:  well, lets not go there for simplicity.    100% seems crazy to me, but if you want to make it more "real", lets say you pay 1%/year of all wealth you hold over 50b.  is that a fine (less simple) situation?  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:26:26] - brainlessness seems harsh.  I don't think it seems brainlessness.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:25:28] - a: Cap is  just extreme example of the tax taken to 100%.  I just went there for simplicity.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:24:51] - -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:23:33] - daniel:  your idea of a "cap" shows the brainlessness of your plan.  even if there was a wealth tax, it wouldn't include a cap!  you'd just pay a percentage of wealth you have over a certain amount.  and THAT is crazy, but less crazy.  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:21:56] - daniel:  i don't think its bad faith at all.  i think creators would stop creating if they hit 20b and you wouldn't "let" them hold larger balances, but the totally crazy thing to me is the mechanics of it.  how are you going to even take their wealth over 20b?  you are forcing them to sell from the US stock market and you're underplaying the realities of that:  not only amazon would be totally hurt: but so would the entire US market!  ~a

[2020-09-28 14:20:22] - When Bezos was just a young lad, he would have worked just as hard to start Amazon even if he knew that he would "only" be able to earn 100 billion.  Like this is crazy that he somehow would have been deterred.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:19:21] - The notion that somehow creators wouldn't create if they could earn only 20 billion or 100 billion or whatever is just completely ludicrous to me and seems like one of those bad faith arguments Pierce was talking about.  Like its so ridiculous to my head that I can't think you are serious.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 14:18:25] - Paul: The idea that Amazon would fail if Bezos had a cap to his wealth doesn't make sense to me.  I don't know what Blue Origin is but maybe he wouldn't have done it?  But do you really think Bezos is operating on a maximizing his profits still?  You think the WaPo part is profits oriented?  I think Amazon would be just fine if Bezos had a cap.  -Daniel

[2020-09-28 13:22:59] - a: "you're assuming he holds 100% of his wealth in amzn?" I am assuming something close to 99% of his wealth is in Amazon. What else would it be in? I guess maybe real estate or something? Sure. Maybe it is 40%. I also don't know what percentage Daniel is talking about taking. Could be 50%. Could be 80%. Could be 20%. -Paul

[2020-09-28 13:20:40] - Daniel: On the flip side, would Bezos take on projects like Blue Origin or buying the Washington Post if his wealth was cut in half? Maybe? Who knows? -Paul

[2020-09-28 13:19:56] - Daniel: So maybe he gets ousted by the Board at some point. Do we see stuff like AWS? Or Fire tablets? Is Amazon resilient enough with their own logistics network to weather Coronavirus and serve people? Who knows? -Paul

[2020-09-28 13:18:48] - Daniel: So let's say 10 years ago we decide that Bezos is too rich and take 50% of his wealth. Well, that basically means he has to liquidate half his Amazon shares. Besides the havoc that would wreck with the stock as so many shares are sold off, that would perhaps put him in a position where he no longer has strong control over Amazon. -Paul

[2020-09-28 13:17:09] - Daniel: Because Bezos' wealth and the creation of Amazon are too inexorably linked, in my mind. The vast majority of his wealth comes from Amazon and I believe an incredible amount of Amazon's success has been due to Bezos. -Paul

[2020-09-27 22:42:37] - daniel:  yep!  super fun.  my first time playing and i think i've finally learned the map . . . now aaron tells me we're going to play with a different map in two weeks.  make sure aaron gets you on the invite.  ~a

[2020-09-27 18:18:40] - aaron / a: Did you guys play?  I'd be interested to try it some night but not sure when I'd be able to.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 21:13:29] - I don't think I can claim authority on how all entrepreneurs think but I would bet most of them get into business for millions and not many start off thinking about billions.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 20:53:50] - Creating things and doing well isn't he immoral part.  Its the continual accumulation past a point where one can even conceptualize how much money he has and that there are many people who can't pay for doctor visits.  Or food.  Or education or whatever else we as a society that we deem important.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 20:52:31] - I think I don't understand the link between capping Bezos's income at some level and Amazon failing? not functioing? not being started?  If your contention is that somehow he wouldn't have started or run the company if he could only get to 100b then I would disagree with that position.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 20:23:15] - Daniel: So have many of Amazon's employees. I also think it's hard to argue that customers and the rest of the world isn't better off as well, especially in the wake of COVID. I won't go so far as to say Amazon was a life-saver, but I do think it made life a lot more convenient for people when we had to stay locked in our houses but still needed to get supplies. -Paul

[2020-09-25 20:20:58] - Daniel: And likewise it's hard to make the argument that by becoming wealthy, Bezos has somehow taken from others. Wealth and prosperity is not some fixed pie where if somebody gets more wealth then others have to be less well off. The investors who invested in Amazon (which indirectly have lead to much of his wealth) were happy to do so and have been richly rewarded. -paul

[2020-09-25 20:18:50] - Daniel: That's fair, but I also think "immoral" is the wrong word to use as well. I think it's hard to make the argument that Bezos has made any of his money by some immoral way. He didn't steal from anybody. Quite the contrary, Amazon is built off of consensual transactions and an obsessive focus on customer service. -Paul

[2020-09-25 19:31:47] - so many needs that it would be better / good to use that money in a better way than to make a select few individuals wealthy.  And a potentially good way to go about that could be to tax them so that the public could then vote / have input on how that $ was utilized.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 17:35:54] - daniel:  know your audience.  deamonizing elon musk to paul is a non-starter  ~a

[2020-09-25 17:35:15] - Daniel: "the idea that its immoral to have SO MUCH gains traction with me over time as the wage gap increases" Yeah, I think this is the root of our differences. I'm sorry, I just can't at all fathom how it makes sense to demonize Jeff Bezos (or Steve Jobs or whoever) for having made something which has made life better for so many people. -Paul

[2020-09-25 17:33:33] - a: "maybe you have a misunderstanding of how little the richest people actually pay?" I think it's more just we haven't really defined what "rich" is. I think the only number I saw thrown out was by Daniel ($100k) and I don't know if he intended it to be a definition of "rich" -Paul

[2020-09-25 17:30:12] - mig: I guess I'm not sure about the state of 'most' of the rhetoric but I think its pretty easy to make a case that isn't about jealousy and hatred but just about helping your fellow man and being responsible towards other humans.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 17:24:28] - Paul: You use the phrase "evil greedy wealthy people" sarcastically but I think that the idea that its immoral to have SO MUCH gains traction with me over time as the wage gap increases, as the CEO salary continues to rise while lower end wages don't.  At some point the state of living for the masses does matter in regards to how much to top x% have.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:49:50] - i'm against a wealth tax, sorry daniel.  ~a

[2020-09-25 16:48:20] - Daniel: "I don't understand why bezos's couldn't lose 75 billion to the gov and have amazon just keep trucking like normal?" Because Bezos is using his money to do other stuff? I mean, sure, Amazon would still function, but Blue Origin probably wouldn't exist or whatever else Bezos' next project wouldn't exist either. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:46:55] - a: Heh, sorry, I meant to direct it at daniel, you are right. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:46:38] - Daniel: "I proposed schools / hospitals / roads not F-35s." Sure, but you don't control the government. Regardless, sure, let's use Medicaid since it is a federal program that is related to hospitals. We can take all of Bezos' net worth and pay for like a quarter of a year of Medicaid spending. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:44:57] - paul:  that was daniel.  ~a

[2020-09-25 16:42:54] - I'm also not sure why Bezos having his wealth directly affects Amazon's ability to function.  I don't understand why bezos's couldn't lose 75 billion to the gov and have amazon just keep trucking like normal?  I'm not sure I understand the point or relationship you are trying to make there.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:41:43] - Paul: So that is moving to a different topic (though related) of implementation.  So if we magically got to a point of decidign that the gov should spend money then we would need to debate what we spent money on.  I proposed schools / hospitals / roads not F-35s.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:38:05] - Which would then leave a hole in the budget.  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:37:46] - Paul: So to rephrase that in my words it sounds like we shouldn't do things that benefit the masses because it might make the rich people move away?  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:32:46] - paul: I don't necessarily agree or disagree, but you told daniel "it's almost impossible NOT to lower them on the rich at this point" and that's clearly wrong.  the top tax bracket is lower than it's ever been.  https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-do-federal-income-tax-rates-work  ~a

[2020-09-25 16:32:28] - Daniel: The simple (and yes, admittedly extreme) example would be if we had 100% of taxes paid by Bezos, Gates, and Buffett. That might be great for the millions of Americans who aren't them, but the government might be in trouble if one decided to renounce citizenship and move to Canada. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:31:18] - Daniel: And if you keep shifting a higher and higher percentage of the tax burden on fewer people, then your tax base gets more fragile, and if a handful of them decide to up and move to another country you start to get in trouble. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:30:39] - Daniel: Once the majority of voters are at the point where they are paying no taxes, what is their motivation for voting against any increased spending? They are incentivized to vote for all sorts of free government programs. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:29:31] - Daniel: "And that without that sense of 'skin in the game' then you think people will vote for unsound financial policies?" That's one way to think about it. Basically I believe, in general, that the tax base is more robust when you have more people contributing vs less and you hopefully get more responsible governance when more people have skin in the game. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:23:44] - Daniel: Sure, Bezos is worth lots of billions, but I'm not sure how that is relevant? I'm guessing most of it is tied up in Amazon stock, which means he can't exactly just liquidate it all to give to the government. As for if it could help with school, sure, and he is doing that (https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/13/bezos-launches-day-one-fund-to-help-homeless-families-and-create-preschools.html) -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:21:32] - And that without that sense of 'skin in the game' then you think people will vote for unsound financial policies?  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:21:08] - paul: That same logic seems to imply why not just lower the taxes for the masses if it doesn't actually matter for the gov budget.  So it seems like a goal (the goal?) of taxes should be to give people a sense of a stake in the spending of the gov?  That because they are "the ones paying for it" they should want it to be good / efficient?  -Daniel

[2020-09-25 16:13:16] - Daniel: So if you lower taxes, it's kinda hard not to cut it for that guy who is paying the $5. -Paul

[2020-09-25 16:11:56] - Daniel: "I'm not sure what you mean here cause it seems obviously and easily demonstrably false" Okay, say you have a population of 10 people: The 4 with the least income pay no taxes. The next 4 pay $1 each. The last person pays $5. -Paul