exclusiv

Agreed. My brother in law's dad got COVID. He had heart surgery before. They had him on blood thinners for some time and his doctor said that it was a very real possibility that it saved his life as he was already on something they would have probably prescribed to him.

He's in his 60s. Will he experience long term effects? Who knows.

I'm starting to get invited to meet in person for business and some are like "I get tested every week". And I just say sorry I don't make exceptions. I live with someone with a rare respiratory condition. A weekly test - what does that even tell me anyway? I know you're running your business and have employees coming in.

Everything is much easier with data. But when there is still so much to learn everyone weighs their risks differently.

Many of us here are extremely fortunate and can afford to pay for delivery and stay home.

So we need to understand that some people's perspective IS a real calculated risk tolerance.

If we can get data to understand long term effects, that will help with educating those that are really only weighing the risk of them dying.

> None of us is smart enough to sanitize correctly

It's just something that isn't and shouldn't be a concern of most engineers. I don't care about these things in terms of solving them.

You entrust the collective wisdom in each area like security for these types of things.

Which is exactly why it's hard to believe a former Facebook, veteran CTO would commit some code like this.

No legitimate electrical engineer would do the equivalent.

True. I worked at a company that once hired this former Yahoo engineer when they were hot and he sang the Smurf song often and wrote shit code. All the engineers were happy he was the only dev in his section because he also smelled.

Even with all that, I would still expect him to not make any commit similar to this CTO.

This mistake looks like he just started coding.

Can you negotiate 5%+ more salary if you know what you're doing? Yes. Yes you can. That's easy.

Half goes to buy side though normally. Although some firms try to "double pop" it and represent both sides. That should definitely be illegal everywhere.

There are a lot of terrible agents though that aren't worth it. It's a low barrier to entry with a very high upside. Not many career opportunities like it.

Buy side can be a ton of work though for the same payday as sell side. Agents and owners offer commission to the agents to make it worth their while.

If there weren't any buy side commissions, you'd get less interest, because no buyers agent would ever refer you to a house they can't make money on. Unless they had a conscious AND they hadn't already spent a bunch of time on you.

But at some point if you want a house that had no buy side commission and you locate it (Zillow or a sold by owner site), you're going to buy it without your buyer's agent.

So it could easily head the way of the hotel industry where the buy side is virtually non-existent.

The Dreamcast was an incredible platform. I've owned most console systems and nothing compares in terms of innovation during its time.

I remember the VMU memory cards that allowed you to call your plays on NFL 2k to remove the issue of your opponent screen-camping and guessing your play. Or to care for your Tamagotchi.

They created a second-screen experience so early. Did anyone else do that before?

Games like Soulcalibur remained very relevant into the next-gen. People still, in 2021, yearn for football like we saw with the 2k series. And while I still have nightmares of how far some my buddy's LE could dive-sack my QB, those were some great memories and great gameplay.

Also loved the portable Sega Nomad during road trips but especially the CDX which was a portable CD, Sega CD and Sega Genesis player. Would you take a look at that thing? [1] A 2lb portable CD / game system. It's beautiful.

I mowed my parents yard listening to tunes on that thing and later played Lunar. An incredible story and game where you couldn't just level up and beat it easily. They programmed the bosses to level up in relation to your level. Seems so simple in retrospect but it made for a rewarding finish and perfect game.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Genesis#/media/File:Sega-...

Censoring opposing, and even ridiculous views, is the dumbest idea ever.

#1) You might be wrong or #2) don't you want to know who those ridiculous people/views are? They readily identify if you let them.

> that's not what it means at all

That's exactly what it used to mean. But then it wasn't warming and they had to revisit.

Wow that's terrible how they handle that. What a bad process. That can't happen with your bank accounts for anything in the US unless you had a special judgment against you in court, which is difficult to get, it would take a long time but you'd have the option to contest it or get some leniency.

Typically auto related things are tied to just that - your car could get a boot put on it, could be towed, you could get your license suspended. You accrue fines. But they aren't garnishing any funds from any bank account. And you have recourse in court and other programs if you can't afford it.

You're talking about exchange. But even in that example, it's not anywhere near the equivalent of going from ~17k to 3.5k, then up to 45k+ as bitcoin.

Did you go to court? Or just not pay for a long time? You said "take all your money". Was that indirect due to the fine amount or are you saying they actively took it (like a garnishment)?

Apart from the hack I mentioned, there are also options if you cannot afford.

Example: in LA they have community service or payment plan options. [1]

[1] https://ladot.lacity.org/projects/parking-in-la/pay-your-par...

> I guess the downvoters never had a government take all their money because of unpaid parking tickets

That's kind of how it works when you don't pay your tickets.

However, I once had to go to court to show proof of insurance that I didn't have when I was pulled over.

I watched as all these people showed up, pleaded no contest and the judge gave them like 50% off what they owed. You would think you would get a discount if you paid out of court, but no, you can force extra/busy work on the courts and you get to pay less. Being a pain in the ass can save you money.

Speeding tickets, red light tickets - sure there can be innocents. But parking tickets - the ticketed are almost always guilty.

Of all the things to complain about regarding the government, you probably picked the most legitimate of all in parking enforcement.

I mean, I don't like all the rules and fines, but it's a pretty clear thing and a pretty clear fine & collection process.

Everyone knows you can get your car booted too.

Just because someone doesn't like Bitcoin doesn't mean it's a misunderstanding because they're privileged.

Bitcoin IS a terrible currency because it's volatile. Really the worst aspect to have in a currency.

Also, your statement alludes to Bitcoin being the one true way, as if there are no other options for third world countries.

Volatility in a currency is a terrible idea and it gets even more terrible of an idea when utilized by people with little money.

Can you explain how a volatile thing like Bitcoin is a reasonable currency for third world countries?

So this seems like a pretty easy way to stop a stock - change the collateral requirements.

From what I heard from the WeBull CEO, what you described sounds right. And he said the whole market could not function.

So in order for other stocks to trade (which have much lower requirements) they had to shut down several stocks.

So I'm sure the big shorts would know that if they get super screwed (price going higher and higher) this collateral requirement would cause this (and the stock to drop big like it did to $112 the other day)?

And this is basically all because of the risk that some hedge fund may not be able to pay (which causes collateral requirements to change)? Seems like the rules should change for these big shorts.

They blocked regular buys though. If you have money in your RH account, this is a big problem.

Which "spokesman" made that statement? Pretty easy to deny no?

"Melvin Capital has repositioned our portfolio over the past few days. We have closed out our position in GME (GameStop)," the spokesman said in a statement. [1]

[1] https://www.usnews.com/news/top-news/articles/2021-01-27/hed...

Well they sure made selling really easy during the architected dip.

Why allow so many new users to buy those positions before they blocked buys if this was coming? I mean, the prices were elevated before it got to this. Seems like a situation of let's ride the free customer acquisition and figure it out later.

They happily took the huge influx of new users that had no knowledge of this. And many got screwed. They couldn't average down on their position. And a ton of buyers were removed. So the price got out of control. Many panicked because of it.

I'm not on RH but added more at 170 and it came with several partial fills of 1 and 2 stocks. That was RH users getting screwed as a ton of buyers were removed. Trading was not halted on the downward spiral.

They could have said - hey guess what - 750k RH users (whatever it is) that own GME cannot buy this stock, so consider this before you sell. Some kind of warning that passed the attorneys. How could they not see this coming?

Any way it went down - RH is done. I hope they "pivot" into a worse situation.

Exactly. Trading halted when it was going up. But no problem letting it plummet down to 112 earlier when most could only sell.

And what if their decisions cause it to crash?

> Not being able to get alignment is a valid reason to question "could".

I agree. That's precisely what I mentioned was the only barrier in achieving it. The answer to getting it done is getting alignment from various stakeholders.

Many of the people that think it's a hoax or the ones that don't believe it's doomsday support nuclear plants. That's always been the case in the US.

You can get alignment without even agreeing on why to go nuclear. This escapes the doomsdayers and the climate crusaders. And based on your comment... you.

I mean - you provided a perfect example. You mentioned our outgoing President thinking climate change is a hoax while we are talking about nuclear plants. And he supported nuclear plants.

People with different concerns and end goals can't talk and agree on things that would help both of their agendas.

You want nuclear plants? Pitch national security to one group. Pitch saving the world to the other. Pitch cleaner air to another.

You aren't going to get anything done if you try to convince them that they need to believe your reason.

As Neil deGrasse Tyson's dad told him - it's not enough to be right. You must be effective.

Also - "I refuse to use most languages that have been used to solve a shit ton of problems".

Or, "I will not use any language which made software eat the world"

Ted Turner has like 2M acres[1]. I can't find it, but I had read a story awhile back where he was trying to acquire enough land where he could ride a horse from like the southern border to the northern on only his land.

John Malone is #1 I guess, but I thought that Ted Turner approach was pretty badass. Ted Turner also has a herd of 50k bison.

"With approximately two million acres of personal and ranch land, Ted Turner is the second largest individual landholder in North America. Turner lands are innovatively managed to unite economic viability with ecological sustainability. Turner ranches operate as working businesses, relying on bison, hunting and fishing, and ecotourism as principal enterprises. In addition, Turner ranches support many progressive environmental projects including water resource and timber management, and the reintroduction of native species to the land." [2]

I like that.

[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/who-are-the-top-10-land-owne...

[2] https://www.tedturner.com/turner-ranches/

> "we haven't built a nuclear power plant in 40 years" to "we could build 10 at a time continuously for the next half-century" in a convincing way?

The same way we were like let's go to the moon, build the transcontinental railroad or some nuclear bombs. Everything is a hell of a lot easier and possible if you have alignment.

As with most technical projects, the technical problem is usually not the barrier to achievement.

> So people in committed relationships, homosexuals and people above the age where pregnancy is possible?

I wasn't speaking in an absolute, because almost nothing is absolute.

I probably should have said "I also have a theory that those that don't wear condoms or use protection are significantly less likely to wear masks over the general public. And that a large percentage of the more religious are less likely to wear masks."

Since you went there, I'll try to be more concrete.

Committed relationships across any sub-group you'd like to slice = no. Homosexuals that aren't in committed relationships = yes as they would be in the general non-committed bucket. No risk of pregnancy of course but obviously STD. Above the age of pregnancy? If not committed relationship = yes. Again, still risk of STDs, in fact quite high for the age group most younger people don't want to think of as having sex.

Above the age of pregnancy would have the kicker bonus of less likely to care due to being older and cynical. Once you've seen a lot of crazy things maybe this doesn't phase you? Can't tell you how many that have been fortunate to escape cancers or other more challenging problems only to go carefree on coronavirus which they have more control over. It's an odd thing. Especially because those are higher risk and the ones that still have parents alive are in the highest risk category.

> at least one of them is certainly not letting religion inform their sexual habits.

The condoms and religion in my theory need not crossover. Although I would guess the center of that Venn diagram would skew even less likely to wear a mask.

> Because all of these statements of ethnicity have to be contextualized.

I don't see how it wasn't contexualized? They were responding to the Fourteen Words racist trash.

The USA is 330M people. What the journalists and politicians report has nothing to do with whether it is a real concern or not.

There have always been anarchists and these types of people that don't like the current administration. We've had Presidents shot. We have crazy cults. We have unstable people with agendas. Hell, we had a nasty civil war before.

It's not a real concern to the nation's republic despite what some wish.

It seems you aren't a fan of the US. What's your stance on Nazi Germany? Imperial Japanese puppet regimes? And even if a dictator only screws over their own citizens - should they get to do as they please because it's their country?

I don't agree with every regime change. And personally I'd rather let most countries deal with their own affairs. But sometimes it's necessary.

The recent events are a non-issue to our republic. I know that will displease some that would love the US to completely unravel. But it's not going to happen.

That's an estimate by someone with insight, but not like they were the bookkeeper for Putin. And if true, that's still inline with the top western capitalists (which we have real data for). Not multiples of their wealth. That's ridiculous to assume and present as fact.

That's precisely my point. We only have some very limited data available. And none of that says anywhere near 200B or multiples of that as you present as a fact.

No the article is odd/fascinating because most people's "rent-a-person" would be a friend or family member. And there would be no exchange of money.

It's kind of sad people have to hire people to do friendly things, but this is a pandemic. And you would "rent-a-person" to move probably in most places (unless you had great friends haha).

Also this makes sense "I'm not a friend or an acquaintance. I'm free of the bothersome things that accompany relationships, but can ease people's sense of loneliness"

So you want a throwaway friend. Or a casual therapist that does things with you. Rent them. Ok I guess not as weird as first glance. We have something similar in the US - life coaches which seemingly everyone on LinkedIn is nowadays.

Separately, I've heard personal reports and seen a documentary about young Japanese men in general.

It was said that their mothers do everything for them and for a much longer time than other countries. Is this true?