exclusiv

There's some of that for sure, but real estate is a good inflation hedge. So if you print like we have been and new supply doesn't jack up, then here we are.

That's just a natural economic thing; not a political system at play, other than a byproduct of massive printing which has been out of control for some time.

I mean, we had interest rates jack up (for the US in modern times at least lol) and prices didn't drop as much as they should (and many that lost in bidding wars in the frothy market went to the sidelines)

When the Fed goes the other way because they have no real choice, prices are going even higher.

Silly that the author is solely equating contrarian with bears and shorts.

You can be big long and be a contrarian lol.

Best value plays of all time are going long on companies that the masses wrote off or were near bankruptcies.

This article is fake news. Has no data and just gloats that the invisible hands basically saved poor theses to come up with another poor thesis.

The only people that believe the market isn't bullshit as a whole are the ones who's livelihoods depend on it.

Certainly seems that way. They had been giving access. Then made pricing outrageous and 30 days to comply. A way to kill them off without straight up removing their access or shutting down the API to third parties in full.

That study doesn't make "cats rarely attack rats" accurate.

More accurately from that study - a transient group of feral cats rarely attack huge rats that are in a 150 rat colony at a waste management facility.

- They watched huge urban rats that had engorged themselves at a waste management facility

- A large rat colony can communicate and they had safe routes established by the time the researchers and cats visited

- The feral cats had better options in and around that facility for food or fun

- They observed many cats in the environment which changed the rat behavior. "a one percent increase in the number of cats on a given day made it 100 times less likely that a rat would trigger the team’s motion-sensitive cameras". So throw a ton of cats at the problem and they become less effective.

“You can watch a lot of cats and rats accommodating one another, easing by one another, eating out of the same trash bag.”

Many predator/prey animals will ignore each other if there is an ample food supply to share. Hyenas and lions do this. Lions don't stop eating a kill to go kill hyenas. They'll chase them off or choose to share a meal.

Long time ago I used to have a huge cat that was indoor/outdoor. It went outside and killed anything that moved. It once drug home a large rabbit and put it on the doorstep.

This study shows, contrary to what many would think, that you can't toss feral cats at a huge rat colony and expect them to eradicate them. True. Especially good to know if you run a waste management facility in New York.

You'd probably get more kills if you used a single well-fed housecat than letting a lot of feral cats come and go into the rat colony which drastically changed their behavior and made them stay in hiding.

Put a rat and cat in your house and the cat WILL attack it. Send a cat into a rat's environment, same thing. Watch a bunch of feral cats come and go into a rat colony with huge rats - yeah, probably not many attacks as they load up on the easy food from the trash bags and the rats stay hidden. Fat rats can do that. Especially at a waste management facility.

The general claim that cats rarely attack rats due to that study is silly.

I agree. Spoofing your capabilities and getting a higher title doesn't make one an architect or near architect lol.

Seriously, that jumped out at me. You do not know anything after a year and a half. You are a junior developer. Nobody is that special.

Also, there is a real risk to learning if you "stop being a junior". Namely, the posers don't raise their hand and ask for help when they hit a wall, waste a ton of time drowning with things that senior engineers can figure out in 10 minutes, and are scared of learning from senior teammates as it requires them to be vulnerable in front of them. The ones faking it tend to be insecure and not fully dedicated to their craft, but their title first.

I don't think that's fair. For example - we have a 2 party system that is designed so only one of them will win. And most people want to vote for someone that has a shot at winning. That doesn't make them morons. They're just picking the least dirty shirt in their minds.

Yes, you could say - well they don't vote in the primaries so it's their fault. But the same systems at play in the general elections are the same ones that drive the primaries. If primary voting was 1:1 with general election voting, the system would just adjust to influence accordingly.

Who exactly was going to do anything meaningful to save the finances of the US? The best options we've seen have been Ron Paul and Bernie and we saw what happened there. Funding and media are able to influence who wins. If someone says logical things and is anti Fed or even a little anti Wall Street establishment, they are painted out as nut jobs. And it's effective to the public who generally, has no savings and has little time to research like those that live more comfortably.

All candidates are all co-opted by special interests. And almost all by the financial system which is the biggest risk. It's not an accident that both red and blue appoint the same people to the Fed, despite fighting aggressive over almost every other nomination and appointment.

We also have a huge wealth gap and media divisiveness giving rise to populist candidates.

They make it one side versus the other meanwhile they both fleece the financials and economic prosperity that could occur if managed well.

We've gone past the point of no return, led by both parties at different times and here we are. Overextended. Huge wealth gap. Ripping inflation. Interest rate hikes that, in my opinion, are just theater as we can't afford to keep hiking them. And as we hike them, the world gets pissed off and moves quicker to a new world currency reserve.

No idea when that will happen, could be 10/20/30/40 years. But trade has already started to shift to other currencies. CBDCs are also underway and for everyone's sake, hopefully they don't get adopted.

Very few countries want to trade in the currencies of Russia or China. But that's besides my point.

Getting resources and manufactured goods has nothing to do with my statement about sustainability.

Debt to GDP of 338% is not sustainable [1]. It doesn't matter if countries can get resources and manufactured goods. That's like saying - well I have 3X my salary in debt but it's ok... I can buy goods on Amazon.... on more credit, with a higher rate... and still be fine. No you can't.

There's about 20 trillion in US denominated debt / eurodollar debt [2] and 65 trillion in unrecorded debt overseas [2].

In order to service US denominated debt, you have to swap your currency to get USD. This is a major problem when you already need to keep printing to service your own unsustainable debt (> 300% debt to gdp), inflation rips on goods and materials you need and tax revenues drop in an economic downturn.

When interest rates go up, it squeezes you. Everyone kept rolling debt over in a debt drunk binge fest for decades as it kept getting cheaper and they have been feeling major pain from it going the other way.

[1] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/02/global-debt-2022-and-....

[2] https://www.bruegel.org/comment/euro-dollar-parity-beyond-sy...

[3] https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2023/01/65-trillion-debt-bank...

If you mean they have fallen from the peak of May 2022 you would be right. But that's not the story. And that has no bearing on fundamentals. Just because there has been a price movement doesn't mean it got disconnected from fundamentals. Price came off peak? Ok. Well cost of money also ramped up disproportionately to that. Prices have been resilient and when rates go the other way, they will go even higher IMO.

Prices are still, on median, 100k higher NOW over pre-pandemic. That's 33% more in just a few years. Sale to list prices is still at 98.9%. Off the peak of 103.1% but money was WAY cheaper then.

March 2020 median home price was $300k. March 2023.... $400k. [1]

March 2020 loans were about 3.5%. March 2023.... 6.5%.

It costs a shit ton more to service a loan now, inventory is down, yet prices are only 30k off the peak.

Is everyone buying a house with these interest rates a moron? No they aren't. Are banks approving risky loans now? No they aren't.

Volume is irrelevant when we are talking about fundamentals. Sellers are a key part of that. If they pull inventory due to the numerous factors in the housing market and the economy, then the prices are what they are. There is no shadowy hand now keeping home prices higher over their fundamentals, nor a shadowy hand telling the homeowners to not list their home. This is the market at work; and its been resilient with what is going on.

And to my point, if you couple supply and demand with the state of affairs and you look at build cost you'll see that current inventory is priced at or better than any fundamental analysis would suggest. And not overpriced.

I ONLY buy on build/replacement cost. Sure some areas went crazy, but if you are disconnected from build costs, you are rolling the dice and I highly recommend you don't do that unless you love the house so much you don't care what happens. But by and large, housing prices are NOT disconnected from replacement costs. They are still cheaper.

If you can buy a "used" house for 300k. Or build a new house for 350k (+6-12 months of your time and carrying costs on the housing you are currently at and potential unexpected costs), then where is the disconnect? I don't see it.

If housing WAS disconnected from the fundamentals, then you'd simply see a shit ton more building going on and with more inventory and less buyers and affordability due to interest rate hikes, price would drop a lot. That's not the case. There has not been a meaningful price drop with the interest rate hikes, we just have less buyers on average, and about 4% less on the sales price to list.

People waiting on the sidelines in most markets aren't going to be happy as inflation keeps on trucking, build costs are out of control, and inventory is low. Rent will go up.

"Year-over-year rental price growth will rise from 5.8%, as of June 2022, to 8.4% as of May 2023, according to a Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas forecast that uses data from the federal government’s consumer price index"

You used to be able to just stash cash and then when interest rates jack up you could get a real deal. No more. Housing is an inflation hedge and the market has been pumped up.

When the pivot occurs and cheaper money returns because the asset owners would rather have inflation than deflation, the housing market will go even higher IMO. 30T debt and 180+T in unfunded liabilities along with a pissed off world that has gotten drunk off cheap USD leaves no choice but to print in overdrive. I won't be holding USD or more than retirement money in the stock market. I'll be primarily in RE and private companies. If you are big on stocks, you may still do ok - we've seen that we can print and not cause extreme inflation, by pushing dollars into equities. But I think that game will end as it's further exposed and money rotates out.

[1] https://www.redfin.com/us-housing-market

Exactly. Not enough supply. Build costs exorbitant. There will not be some magical supply out of nowhere nor a big drop in build costs. So thus prices, IMO, in most major metros are connected to fundamentals.

If housing was not connected to fundamentals, home sale prices would have been exposed and taken a nose dive with the movement in interest rates. People aren't getting any easy money. They are still buying.

> housing costs completely decoupling from fundamentals,

Not true in most markets. Compare to build/replacement costs.

In a high inflation environment with 30+ trillion in national debt and 186 trillion in unfunded liabilities, I'll take my chances with hard assets that are connected to fundamentals like housing.

They WILL pivot and print in overdrive. There is no way out at this point. And not just the US, the world cannot handle higher interest rates which causes more demand for the dollar. The entire world is jacked up on eurodollar debt that is not sustainable. And those with the assets will gladly choose inflation over deflation.

"Inflation is transitory". "Banks are fine"

We're led by morons, shills and thieves.

Well I'm trying to think about it like this - hypothetically... if there were NO innocent people convicted, the process itself of the death penalty may not even provide more closure than just life without parole.

I agree and it's also cheaper to house them in prison for life without parole than to do a murder trial, get them convicted and executed.

So the system might be wrong about the conviction which is just an absolutely terrible thought and it's cheaper to skip the death penalty.

So the only real possible benefit is that it could be 1) a deterrent and 2) closure for the family.

But it seems life without parole is a pretty strong deterrent in itself. And part of the closure that the family perceives in an execution is, just a guess on my part, the fact that it takes so long and is emotionally draining that the family is also going through the long laborious process of a capital punishment conviction and execution.

If you don't have a death penalty, what's the sense of closure a family gets knowing they got life without parole?

I don't like death penalty because humans err and innocent people get killed, but I'm curious if the closure aspect of the death penalty is actually related to that process and not the closure they might get if they know they got the best possible conviction in a life without parole situation.

In other words - if the death penalty is removed, it seems plausible that a family could get the same or more closure with a life without parole sentencing as they avoid the emotional and mentally draining death penalty case and process.

Always a bit of a struggle as an engineer who is always searching for the solution and has a trained approach to debugging. Some just don't want to try something new for fear it won't work or that it isn't the preferred approach. This is most people I feel.

Thanks for sharing. I'm going to try this book. My 5 yr old likes to be read to, but sternly refuses to attempt to read words. Also montessori. He likes some mobile games which have menus so I'm going to explain why we are doing it but also position this book as a way so he can read menus in games so he knows how to play. And then I'll reinforce that when he asks me to read any menus/storylines in the games by going through the phonetic process and challenging him.

> Frankly I don't think she's still completely convinced, but I refuse to sit on the sidelines and watch my kids not be able to read.

I had a similar situation where I had a thesis on my child's behavioral health concern. Saw a neurologist and she confirmed exactly what I said. Wife was STILL not convinced and even criticized the neurologist's evaluation. But our kid improved after I disclosed the neurologist's evaluation to my sis in law and told them we need them to move out. They had been staying with her family in my house for a year and my wife had been watching their kid. Problem solved. Case closed. My wife wanted to help her sis so much that she was refusing to see the damage the situation was causing.

I also had to take matters in my own hand with getting kids to be sleep trained. Wife refused to do cry it out and we just kept struggling and getting no sleep over and over and kids weren't getting quality sleep. I'll get onboard a plan but if it doesn't work, I'm not going to continue to stay on that path.

I told her I'd handle it and then boom, got them trained in a few days. Not fun at ALL, but all these industries and philosophies take over and push it out there as the new one true way when we have hundreds or sometimes thousands of years of success in various things that work lol.

This is not unique of course. We see this in engineering all the time. Until the tried and true disciplines prevail. And the ones that care about what works best for the context, rather than what is popular at the time are the ones with less stress/anxiety.

I've seen family members say - oh cry it out is stressful for the child and creates distrust. Meanwhile, both partners get no sleep, project their stress and frustration and even end up yelling at their child because of it! Their spousal relationship suffers big time too. Makes no sense to me. Also the same ones who try to optimize everything for their child according to modern parenting philosophies are the ones who have completely unhealthy marriages in my experience. In my opinion, the best thing you can do for your kids is to just show them how to treat and love your spouse and do things that take care of yourself and your spouse so you can be great parents. If you try to do everything according to what is popular at the time, you're going to have a bad time. You need the oxygen mask so you can help your dependents.

Or you have parents who refuse to do cry it out and say - oh I couldn't get baby down last night, had to hold them on my chest and sleep in a chair. Utter madness. Don't do that. They will now be used to your warm embrace and heartbeat and they will never be able to sleep normally in their bed. Well... until you do some form of cry it out lol.

Most things really aren't that hard or frustrating unless you create and foster an environment that makes them so.

end rant

Making fraudulent claims for your medical device may not be traditionally violent. But it is.

Kind of like framework laptop though. So while I agree search wouldn't be great to start, This isn't a TV for the masses if we're being honest. It will be high word of mouth and on niche tech sites.

Top 2 results: standardtvandapplicance.com and https://talent.nebula.tv/

not impossible

Also, marketing isn't only about search results. Another example: Standard Hotels

Suggestion: STANDARD

Pretty sure this guy can catch your dog even if your dog was on cocaine, remained focus, and had someone feeding it water periodically:

[1] https://www.irunfar.com/aleksandr-sorokin-smashes-24-hour-wo...

True but I watched some documentary where some westerner went to spend time with a tribe.

The tribe thought it was absolutely hilarious that he would get up early and just go run for fun.

Social media. Overly medicated. Sold a raw deal with college tuition costs. Social justice and their desire, and ultimately heavy mental weight of trying to change people and systems. Intolerance of those that think differently or disagree. The Media divisiveness machine. Their own families dividing themselves over political differences. All these things are incredibly sad.

I think social media is the main culprit, but there's a lot behind that.

I think PG's identity essay comes into play.

"Most people reading this will already be fairly tolerant. But there is a step beyond thinking of yourself as x but tolerating y: not even to consider yourself an x. The more labels you have for yourself, the dumber they make you." [1]

As teenagers pick up all these various identities and labels, it makes them dumber. And it's also exhausting for them mentally to defend them or champion them.

A teen may have as part of their identity: atheist, climate change activist, transgender rights activist, feminist, liberal Democrat, goth, aspiring influencer, etc.

Back when I went to school, you might just be a jock or a nerd but it wasn't anything you felt compelled to defend. There weren't that many identities or groups organizing to recruit you to their cause. You didn't have the weight of putting all your time in so many things AND maintain some bullshit presence on social media.

So how do you address this? Only thing I can think is to help our young people develop a mindset or philosophy for dealing with bullshit. How to be resilient in a dynamic world that really gives zero fucks about you. Once you accept that as a fact, I think it is infinitely easier to be happy.

I had a professor say once something like "nobody gives a shit about you except maybe your family and a few close friends" and that you need to be compelling and memorable. The class was about helping students reflect on that and how they wanted to tackle the world.

I already had that kind of outlook at the time, but you'd be surprised at how many students had a completely stunned look on their face because they were raised in an environment where they were the center of their parents' lives and were told that everyone loves them, that they are super special and that if they go to school, do this, do that, then they'll be good. So the professor shocked them with that statement.

In my opinion, that's part of the core issue. We aren't preparing our youth with this mindset. And they get frustrated when they take their identities and dreams and run into the world's brick wall. It overwhelms them. As Neil deGrasse Tyson was told by his father - it's not enough to be right, you must be effective.

If we teach them to accept that the world gives zero shits about them and that they need to develop skills to be compelling, then they can be more effective and get more reward.

I'm not advocating for that message to just be dropped on teens as is, although I think all universities should have that course along with personal finance. But when raising kids and in our elementary and high schools, we should be challenging them in a way that let's them know that if they want their way in anything, they should think of compelling reasons and they should be able to articulate those reasons without raging on others, to be effective.

Ultimately it's the fault of the parents and society. People are showing kids that it is ok to just rage on your friends and family when you find out they disagree with you. Defriend, talk shit behind their back. Constantly comparing themselves to others. We've been grooming citizens with strong identities with every form of media and built systems around divisiveness and social outrage. It's a nefarious engine that rips families, friends and communities apart. And this leads to mental illness with teenagers and their parents too.

The only solution is to try and disconnect from that engine. It's extremely powerful though. May take a generation unless someone or something with major influence is able to connect with the youth in a meaningful way.

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html

I like them too but they tend to promote shittier code. The codebases I inherit that use classes = clean, easy to follow. Ones all in with functions and React hooks = trash.

Obviously using hooks doesn't mean it has to be shitty, I think it just brought a lot more wannabe React devs that have no experience with architecture or maintainability.

Sure, but as an example, I paid a lawyer who presents that they are an expert in real estate. And I later find out they have zero understanding of legal non-conforming permits. It was a key factor I made clear upfront before I hired them.

I shouldn't have to pay for your time so you can educate yourself on the thing you purported to know before I hired you. Especially when the hourly rates are in the hundreds of dollars.

So there is some balance there. And doctors are using software that spits them out shit in real-time and then they send you on your way with some printed info you can readily find on the web.

I just had a knee issue and the doctor thought it may be a torn meniscus. Didn't have me do any range of motion movements. We just chatted and he said I think it is this. Take an xray. Bye.

I go get an xray and results come back the next day over the app. All he says in the app - "xray is normal".

So I'm thinking what the hell. That's where you leave it? So what. Should we do an MRI? What's next. You gave me an anti-inflammatory and your guess was apparently wrong. What a shitty engineer this person would be.

Tech can help in some cases. I like getting lab results back in the app. I like that I can follow up with chat later.

But I fear it's making doctors less effective. And the best ones will be the ones that maintain their traditional craft and nuance even with all the fancy new tools and tech that save them time.

Just like everyone is a React developer these days. Tech and advances can make many people sloppy. And dumber. It can push away great talent due to mandates of the tech or process. And attract new talent that is worse.

Why not just use Sendgrid or similar for SMTP emails to customers, get a dedicated IP with them and have way less concern.

I always prefer to isolate those things from the main corporate email and reputation anyway.

You don't want your main domain getting hacked and affecting customer emails or vice versa.

> Actually the expansion of the NBA ended that era, because the Pistons were not able to keep Mahorn. If they kept that team together, Bulls don't win in 1991.

Mahorn. An all defensive second team selection. One time. 6.9 ppg and 6 rebounds. I'm sure the best team ever would have been scared of him.

The Bulls SWEPT the Pistons in 90-91! Back to back champs just completely embarrassed. Laughable you think Mahorn would have changed anything!

> Jordan was not someone Isiah worried about, his competition was Magic and Bird.

Yes because until Scottie Pippen came along the Pistons, Celtics and Lakers had clearly better teams lol. You are trying to insinuate something that isn't there.

> Every team that won in the early 80's would have beat the 95-96 Bulls EASILY.

That's laughable and the pros that actually played would not back up your claim.

We're talking about THREE 7+ year first team all defensive players and the ability to lock down the paint and perimeter.

Pick any team. They are not better offensively and defensively complete as Jordan/Pippen/Rodman.

> Magic won it in his first year in the league. Bird won it in his second year. Andrew Toney is one of the most underrated players ever. Jordan didn't win until everybody else got old.

Again - look at what teams AND organizations they joined. Your statement has no merit. The Jordan led Bulls dominated the league in ways that none of the teams you mentioned did.

Both Bird and Magic have less championships. And also - almost NOBODY puts them ahead of Jordan as best player ever.

You can put several Lakers over Magic for best Laker. And Bill Russell over Bird. Your favorites aren't on the same level as Jordan.

> Jordan didn't win until everybody else got old.

More like the Bulls added a missing piece in Scottie Pippen. How many all stars did Bird and Magic have when they won?

In 1987 as one example, Celtics had 3. Lakers had 3. Bulls just 1.

They started winning because they had the best player ever and the organization added weapons. The Bulls were trash until after Jordan was drafted.

95-96 team is the best and most complete team ever assembled. You can disagree because it's your opinion. But collective opinion... it's widely known they are the best.

"Hersh uses the testimony of one person, mixed alongside that aforementioned historical or political commentary, as evidence for every significant aspect of the alleged conspiracy. Here is the first mention of that source:

Last June, the Navy divers...... according to a source with direct knowledge of the operational planning."

"Hersch was asked by the Russian news agency TASS about the identity of his source. He told them that, "It's a person, who, it seems, knows a lot about what's going on."

https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/02/10/hersh-nord-stream-sab...

> Physics never does an about face. Whatever new physics is out there must be compatible with the physics that we know and use today.

According to who? How is that compatible with the history of physics?

Yeah why would they? They had classified technology.

Probably because the idea of intelligent life forms outside our planet is fascinating? And the stories and culture through the radio and movies brought it to life.

But anyway, the Sasquatch and Yeti is pervasive across numerous countries and cultures. That's a similar path to becoming part of the culture (some random reportings, some weak evidence, then movies and tv shows and now it's part of the culture regardless of whether it exists or not and interesting to most people whether they believe in it or not). Like mermaids.

Aliens are not only an American thing. And American's are not obsessed. It just might seem that way with the media.

Of all countries, India believes the most that aliens will visit Earth in 2023. 43%. The US is 17% which is actually under the global average of 18%.

https://www.statista.com/chart/29296/public-opinion-on-alien...

> In the 80s, Jordan was out in the first round

He joined a horrendous team when he was drafted.

And your statement is just wrong:

89-90 - Lost E. Conf. Finals

88-89 - Lost E. Conf. Finals

87-88 - Lost E. Conf. Semis

Then we know what happened after that.

> 80s and prior it was a team game and you had to play great as a team to win

Have you watched the Spurs or Warriors win multiple championships in recent times? It's not like team ball (more like UCLA teams) vanished, it's just rarely the way to win in the NBA.

Also, Pistons played as a team, and then Jordan took over and ended that era.

Some teams win playing team ball. Some teams win with a few all time greats taking over. That's always been the case.

Just because you had more passing and slower scoring, doesn't mean those were "real competition" or better teams.

Jordan was the leader of the best team of all time. The 95-96 Bulls. Any talk about "team game" in 80s and before doesn't change that.

I also don't think many give the Bulls teams credit as playing as a team. Jordan was dominant but you won't find many teams EVER that played defense as a team any better than those Bulls teams. And even on offense, everyone clearly understood their role (Pippen, Kukoc, Paxson, Kerr, Kukoc). That's 100% team ball, it just doesn't look like a John Wooden UCLA team or Showtime Lakers.

You can play team ball without passing the ball around 20 times each play before shooting. And team ball doesn't mean every starter has to average 10-20 pts.

> He elevates his teammates more than Jordan ever could.

That makes zero sense. Jordan got everyone to buy into his obsessiveness and fully commit, getting TWO 3 peats. And it would have easily been 8 in a row if he didn't take time away after his dad was murdered.

I'm taking 3 Lakers over Lebron (Kareem, Magic, Kobe) if I'm building my team. And they are still after Jordan.

Lebron doesn't have that Jordan or Kobe mentality. He's also been in an era where he just bulldozes and travels on most plays. Exceptional athlete and player. But he's not the leader or competitor that Jordan was. Objectively based on his career - he just isn't.

Can you recall the Paxson, Kukoc and Kerr moments for Lebron? They don't exist.

The fact that you would hate playing with Jordan is what his teammates said too. Yet they wouldn't have traded it for anything and he lead them to 2 3 peats.

He made it hell for them and challenged them like they never would. And they stepped up when he called their number. There was no confusion on the role of every player.

Paxson, complete role player - “The stories are legendary about him on the practice floor,” Paxson said. “There was something unique about what was inside of him. The challenge was always there for him, and that’s a unique trait that you don’t see in athletes too often. The great ones seem to have it.”