collegeburner

yea i completely agree. "he's a asshole" is a perfectly good reason to not make somebody the public face of something. as i said i feel like he's one of a fairly small number of people i'd genuinely dislike spending time with

1. we don't know how a piece of research will be used because we don't even know what the outcome will be.

2. rarely is a piece of research only used for 1 thing, and even if someone uses it wrongly, maybe someone else uses it for good purpose or builds on it for an important discovery.

3. the correct answer is to address the person attempting to abuse the data when that person does it not to attempt to suppress that information by preventing the research or limiting how it's done.

4. are you saying we shouldn't do research on e.g. whether certain groups are better at lifting because it could be abused?

i mean, i agree they're imperfect but there's also not "0 basis". if nothing else they may continue to associate with stuff because society often sees them as coherent groupings.

but cool, now suppose some study has a result i can't spin as "anti-racist". what do?

also you seem well-intentioned but your definition seems wildly different from kendi's defining anti-racism to include support for present discrimination to "remedy" past.

how is publicly acquiring a company, then entering a competitive bid priced against competition, "sneaking in"? nobody's sneaking here.

1. "anti-racism" is a specific ideological doctrine with nefarious branding because it falsely implies anyone who does not support present and future discrimination (c.f. kendi's def) is a racist. i am "anti racist" but not "Anti-Racist (TM)".

2. haidt is clearly protesting the requirement to describe how any research further's the associations "anti-racism goals". there's plenty of knowledge to be uncovered that has nothing to do with it and targeting all your work to uphold a specific viewpoint offends the general idea of "academia" as a tool for broadly and impartially adcancing knowledge.

autonomy of "private" institutions partially died with the mechanism of tying title ix compliance to any federal dollars. i think there are 2 colleges in America that take 0 federal aid (pell grants etc.) so don't have to comply.

tbh i always found it contradictory we don't use those federal $ to require compliance with all constitutional rights, e.g. 1 and 2a.

does it rly change anything? like, take sports. asians have some structural advantages (endomorphism and limb to body ratio) for lifting, west africans at mnay explosive/power sports (fast twitch muscle concentration, arms/legs to body), east africans at long-distance running etc. (lighter structure, efficient muscles over long term), whites at swimming (shoulder structure & torso length).

should we stop large swathes of research into athletic performance? bc i guess it doesn't provide sufficiently "antiracist" outcomes?

oh no, strategic m&a to enter a new market, getting a customer base and acquihiring a team with local experience? that's evil!

i have lots of issues with palantir's applications spying on law abiding citizens and expanding government power but, uhh, this aint it chief.

i don't know if the allegations are true and if he sexually harassed people then sure, cancel him. but none of the "hacker humor" shit people reference seems that serious.

* stuff like "knight for hot ladies" is just corny not bad.

* the abort() joke was as follows: "Proposed Federal censorship regulations may prohibit us from giving you information about the possibility of calling this function. We would be required to say that this is not an acceptable way of terminating a program." that's not that bad honestly. it's more pro-abortion than anti-abortion so i'm not sure why progressives got mad.

* the "emacs virgin" shit is cringe but not rly sexist? anyway i think he switched it to be either men or women later so it was still cringe but not gendered.

idk if there's other stuff i missed but that covers what your article and the twitter thread you mentioned point out. like, yeah, it's cringe asf. but is it rly "cancellable? nah.

btw i still think his presence in the open source community is a negative in part because of goofy ahh shit like emacs virgins or knight for hot ladies, mostly because the amount of cringe it produces attracts more asocial weirdos like rms and puts normal people off open source stuff. like, i'm a outgoing person and can sit and enjoy a coffee with almost anyone. but i feel like spending 5 minutes face to face with rms would make me lowkey want to unalive. i also really don't like a lot of his politics. so i'm in no way an apologist, just don't think a lot of what you referenced is problematic.

ofc, i think there's enough evidence of creepy behavior, especially now, to kick him out and don't really have a problem with it. just the goofy ahh jokes isn't the right reason to do it.

nope, a shitton of amphetamines and fentanyl that end up here poisoning our population start there. we should be at war with china the way she is doing this. over 100,000 a year from opioids alone. Australia getting hit with meth explosions in a similar manner. exporting drugs is china's sneaky way of weakening her competition.

yet again unjustifiably both-sidesing the actions of America and china. i don't like when America does it but it isn't relevant and i'm a lot less worried about her expanding power than china.

spoiler: most of us actually don't like the bullshit war on terror/war on drugs tactics.

and is there evidence we've threatened American citizens at home to get to expats?

no, all football fields are 100 yards long. i think that comes in around 90 meters for y'all euros.

no. you cant seize land without compensation, see the constitution. literally just don't insure it any more, or require much stronger buildings (like concrete). oh and quit bailing out insurers.

100 yards which is probably like 90 meters in euro?

yeah true and i'm not asking for anyone to remove stuff, nothing wrong with being wrong (though i wish this person did it less confidently). when i commented though this was the top comment on the thread (still #2) and i was more hoping dang could pin a better explanation to the top. reading something egregiously wrong that's written very confidently first thing can screw up a thread imo.

do we know they are net receivers rather than net contributors? i would expect 30-something percent of the lifetime earnings of a very rich person to be more than the cost of putting that person through oxford? and do they really use more services around things like healthcare or less because they might lean on private insurance? seems like pensions are probably concentrated in lower classes as well. i'm not british though so you probably know of better data on this.

yeah buddy i'm totally aware of the 86 ban but if your family has stuff before then and moved it to a nfa trust then you're cool. cause it wasn't all that expensive before supply was capped. and the cool part is if you got a bunch of full auto AR lowers you can make a shitton of different configurations and they're all still the same thing legally.

literally all you have to do is get a el cheapo thing to screw on the barrel and it cycles fine, sometimes have to tune the gas system but if it's built for the exact model then not much. one guy sometimes brings a m10 and has a closed barrel he fabbed himself for shits and giggles.

and no, we all reload so blanks are actually less expensive than a full round.

we do a shoot too but sometimes it's fun to shoot off in the air? like usually at the end after we finish up fireworks.

why tf are you so pressed about it anyway?

p.s. would have commented separately earlier but i keep getting ratelimited

this is just... dead wrong. like factually, you are wrong. FY 2021:

entitlements were $1.18T (social security) + $697B (medicare) + $537B (welfare) + $396B (unemployment) = $3.329T

military was $1.035T.

if it helps, 3.329 / 1.035 = 3.22. that number means we spent over 3 times as much on handouts.

so no, military spending is nowhere close to our handout spending. yeah it's inefficient and wasteful and i favor cutting it at least somewhat combined with efficiency improvements and focusing on spreading defense $ to make the market more competitive. but i get really fed up with people trying to "both sides" our handout and military spending every time someone brings up the cost of the former because they just aren't close.

...borrowing more money and minting new bonds, and committing to do that indefinitely in the future, while your central bank is literally trying to QT at the same time, is not "financial tightening". they've had to go back to QE temporarily to stop a liquidity crunch because the midwit running fiscal policy decided to run literally the opposite direction. and worse, he didn't just do it for a year, he committed indefinitely into the future to keep doing it and keep printing more bonds. so yeah the gilt got hella whipsawed but there's a reason it happened in england when all the other countries are tightening as well.

because people have different risk tolerances? derivatives let you pick a "middle way" instead of having to pick the best of a few options. you can customize your risk/reward tradeoff to whatever you want and that's generally a good thing.

rich people are still very much net contributors. cutting the top tax rate will still leave them paying a high tax rate on a large income. if the choice is some super-rich people money and no super-rich people money it seems smart to choose "some".

uhhhh no? i don't think most countries levy extra random taxes on the super-rich until their military budgets are met. also i get really fed up with people pretending that military spending is anywhere close to entitlement spending these days. yeah it's too high but please don't both-sides it.

it's unfortunate but usually when there's a downturn, revenues drop. yes including from the super-rich, whose net worths are usually more not less volatile. so now what?

i said football field, not pitch. they're measured in yards and all come to 100 of them. glad to know soccer fields vary in length since that means they're obviously not a good unit of measure and there won't be any confusion :)

so you are saying we should sit through 15, 20% inflation for the sake of other countries? that's not the fed's mandate and you will never, ever get domestic support for that. nor should you tbh, we should not suffer for the sake of everyone else. we don't want the dollar quite this strong but it's better than the alterantive.

regardless it's not all our choice. people will keep fleeing to the dollar for stability and that will strengthen it relative to other currencies. believe me this is not all fed policy or even mostly fed policy, we still have a lot of inflation so domestic winds aren't making it that strong. this is a "relative basis" thing. besides, what do you think the RoW impact would be if there was no safe currency to flee to?

and lastly petrodollar go brrrrr, energy crunch means we will have a strong dollar like it or not.

this isn't a "counter narrative" any more than "bill gates put microchips in my vaccine" is a "counter narrative". and i'm not being an asshole here, this is just a factual misstatement of LDI and what transactions are taking place. maybe the peak of the dunning-kruger curve shouldn't be sitting at the top of the thread for the first thing people read? i think asking @dang to at least pin a better explanation is fair.

this tbh. me and some buddies will sometimes shoot blanks on auto, like if we're out at a ranch doing a barbecue for the 4th or something. away from people, zero risk, people who are drunk don't get handed the guns. still had a neighbor who was driving by so she could hear it and pitched a fit like, ok karen.

edit: hn is ratelimiting me again so here's my response to @chroma comment

yeah buddy i'm totally aware of the 86 ban but if your family has stuff before then and moved it to a nfa trust then you're cool. cause it wasn't all that expensive before supply was capped. and the cool part is if you got a bunch of full auto AR lowers you can make a shitton of different configurations and they're all still the same thing legally.

literally all you have to do is get a el cheapo thing to screw on the barrel and it cycles fine, sometimes have to tune the gas system but if it's built for the exact model then not much. one guy sometimes brings a m10 and has a closed barrel he fabbed himself for shits and giggles.

and no, we all reload so blanks are actually less expensive than a full round.

we do a shoot too but sometimes it's fun to shoot off in the air? like usually at the end after we finish up fireworks.

why tf are you so pressed about it anyway?

most ppl can visualize a football field as a unit of large distance because it's a large thing we've all stood on and regularly see. so it kinda makes sense and is easier to visualize than a mile. good "for scale".

what's with the hate on measuring things in football fields, aside from some hand-waving about it being "unscientific"? like yeah don't use it in a research paper but i don't see a problem with it.

why th should i be paying for illinois underfunding its pension obligations. this is not some natural disaster where the government couldn't predict it, so screw that. i hope all the other 49 states vote against any of that nonsense.

uhhhhhhh what? it says pretty clearly this is interest rate derivatives (makes sense). i think what you're trying to talk about is repo leverage: buy a bond, repo it out, use cash to buy another bond and repo it ad infinitum until counterparty risk measures start blinking.

remember a repo is me selling you my bond at a haircut and buying it back later for a little more, so basically a secured loan. the repo margin (the amount more than the loan value i have to give you as a premium) depends on creditworthiness and bond prices blah blah blah but the gist is there's some margin where, if the value of the collateral i gave you (the bonds) falls too much (like now) you margin call me and say "give me more stuff because your collateral lost too much value". this is what happened to the pension funds: they buy bonds (safe asset), sell via repo (cheap loan to invest in interest rate swaps for hedging) and now they get margin called because the "safe" gilt just shit the bed. some are using gilts as collateral for swaps, so their collateral fell so much that their hedges are getting called.

now think about if you've leveraged the repo market to double or triple up on bonds, whatever your counterparties will put up with... you don't have to cover the fall in the gilt, you have to cover 2-3x (or more) the fall. so it's not really "borrowing to buy more" because that wouldn't make sense it's diluting your collateral in a way that tbh counterparties should account for better. same thing happens in real estate if you do it right.

the big concern here is a death spiral: funds have to sell gilts, value of gilt drops more, more funds have to sell gilts. BOE doesn't want this so it's now back to QE because the exchequer is a bozo.

KYC for a gd phone number... honestly the whole attacks on E2EE make a lot more sense now with the background of that kinda shady stuff going on beforehand. praying for y'all, hope the digital rights situation gets better there.