clipsy

The party is named the "Democratic Party," not the "Democrat Party."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_State...

"I can only explain my beliefs to people who promise they'll agree" is certainly a unique take.

For the viewers, or the performers?

> A better comparison would be ~550000 average US houses... or a single medium-sized aluminum smelter factory.

Want to provide a citation for either of these? This would have the average US household dissipating the equivalent of ~30kW, which does not pass the smell test for me.

Have these dramatically higher tech requirements and expectations improved the quality of education whatsoever?

That sounds simplistic and worthy of criticism in some ways, but how is it "textbook racial discrimination"? You're jumping from "they were required to interview a person of color" to "they discriminated against white people" without demonstrating the latter, and judging by the statistical overrepresentation of white people in powerful roles it doesn't hold water. All this does is force the hiring manager to interview a more diverse set of candidates; the expectation is still that the most qualified will ultimately be hired.

Edit: Actually, it does deserve criticism for assuming that there are white people and men in the interview pool, regardless of the fact that this is almost certainly true; a better approach (similar to what my own employer does) would be to require that the interview pool included candidates of at least two races and of both genders (or "at least two gender identities," if you prefer). Statistically, though, I'm not sure it makes a significant difference. Nevertheless, fair point.

Since the 1970’s, actually.

> Oh ffs. I belong to the one true faith (big fat /s so you comprehend). I do not agree with people of inferior beliefs but I _understand_ why and how their beliefs drive their actions. So I’m not alarmed by Vance because he is a Christian and that’s what Christians do. I would have advised Usha not to get involved in that but 1. It’s too late and 2. She didn’t ask me.

Why do you single out Christians by saying "that's what Christians do" when you already stated "A Hindu in the equivalent situation would want his Christian spouse to share his"?

The disagreement we're having here fundamentally is that you want to portray this as an argument about how liberals "don't even understand" faith, but the content of your argument treats faith as nothing more than an excuse for the husband to dominate the wife. When a Christian husband disrespects his wife's Hindu faith, you support the husband. When a hypothetical Hindu husband disrespects his hypothetical Christian wife's faith, you support the husband. What's the determining factor? Spoiler alert: It's not faith.

So please, just be honest about the reason you really support JD, about the real thing liberals "don't even understand": that women should be subservient to their husbands.

> potholes

If you think the president fixes potholes, please do the country a favor and stop voting.

> We believe faith matters.

No, that's the problem: you don't. If you did, you'd be appalled that JD was so callous in wanting Usha to abandon her faith. What you really mean is that you believe faith matters when it's the right sort of faith held by the right sort of person, and when that's the case you use it as justification for ignoring basic human decency.

One might argue the social media companies already did that research before adopting infinite scroll.

Should, but won't.

> U.S. Says

Let me know when someone halfway trustworthy says it.

If you can't explain your idea, I doubt it possesses any merit. A commoditization of AI as you're describing does not in any way rule out mass unemployment.

I've reread your post a few times and I can't make heads or tails of it. I don't even disagree with anything you've said, it just seems like a total non-sequitur; nothing you've said gives any reason to disbelieve that AI will put (many) people out of work.

Perhaps there are no such movements because all the men who could start them choose to sit around waiting for women to do it instead?

This checks out: all the confederate flag wavers view conscription just like they view slavery: it's great when it happens to someone else.

Perhaps you missed the memo, but affording basic dignity/respect to those you disagree with is "woke" and therefore bad.

> high context fox-like (a la terrence tao's foxes and hedgehogs)

Pedantically, I think you mean Isaiah Berlin's foxes and hedgehogs[0].

> assuming we dont have some incredibly unlikely massive mobilization towards post-work post-scarcity thinking with active social safety nets

The problem being that we're not actually heading toward post-work or post-scarcity. We're heading towards post-knowledge-work. Any chance of UBI or similar will be summarily shot down by the Epstein class, most likely by using their ownership of 90+% of the media to drive a class war between the ascendant blue collar workers and the collapsing white collar workers.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog_and_the_Fox

I'm sure they'll welcome us as liberators and we can declare "Mission Accomplished!" any day now.

Sometimes you just need to reheat mutton in a hurry.

Funny, I certainly think Americans have bad morals and ethics, and your comment is an example of why.

> They do data integration the way IBM does under contract for the governments

Good thing IBM's data integration was never used for ill!

Oh, wait https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_World_War_II

> Yes, who is taking bets?

Polymarket: https://polymarket.com/event/will-the-us-invade-cuba-in-2026

Sure enough, the odds are surging!

Were the peace talks run by Task Force Frog?

> Inequality will always be a thing.

If you want to engage honestly, you can start by acknowledging that there is an enormous gap between believing that "record breaking wealth inequality is bad and causing societal problems" vs "no inequality should exist in any capacity."

If you aren't going to tell us what the elephant in the room is, aren't you part of the problem?

> Again, folks, the argument here is from existence. If the browser stack is insufficient for developing UIs in the modern world, then why is it winning so terrifyingly?

If McDonald’s hamburgers taste like warmed-over shit, why are they the most popular in the world?

You might try giving an example of a complex UI that isn't a frustratingly slow resource hog next time you're posting this rant.

Documenting the disabilities seems ethically dubious (and perhaps legally dicey -- not sure if HIPAA applies here); wouldn't it be sufficient to document just the accomodations? Those are what should be relevant to employers and grad schools, after all.