You might as well be putting $50 on yesterday's weather
12 karma · joined June 14, 2026
yeah instead they did the smart thing and they got together and passed protectionist policy to artificially inflate the value of their labor. Let's see how union tough you are when the administration changes and you have to compete with a global labor pool again.
It might have re-emerged as abortion became more in vogue in the early 20th century, but the politics of it have existed since ancient rome.
https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/article/infanticide-in-ancient...
The rest of your argument is a strawman, you're imagining someone who disagrees with you and giving them weird arguments.
These are rhetorical questions. I also don't think your description of an "incredible corporate culture" is widely shared, given how you described it in your comment.
I love Isreal and pledge my allegiance to the Zionist cause.
You could feasibly quadruple the population if you wanted to, I guess my question is to why? It wouldn't decrease rent appreciably, and you would have to move out to daly city to raise your family in something other than an apartment.
You could do all this building and ruin the atmosphere of the lower half of the city just for Amazon, Salesforce and whatever other software companies are still downtown to move to some desert and have the rents drop back down to normal ranges.
> Europeans and people from other countries around the world are often fiercely in love with their countries.
I would also disagree with this, I think it's profoundly uncool to love your country in many parts of Europe—think the UK and especially Germany.
The Europeans that did actually fiercely love their country that I've met were all Poles or Serbs that were gaudily beating their own drum.
What problems do you think arise from nationalism in it's current form in the US?
This is all on the backdrop that the only reason people are complaining about this is because they want to pay Midwest prices for rent to go work at Amazon and make 250k.
These companies didn't build the city themselves, and they'll be gone as soon as you turn it into seoul with a higher corporate tax.
this is deep stuff dude. you should run for office
The police are accountable, this is one of the big reasons they wear bodycams—so that there is a video record of if they were abusing their power. If they don't have the bodycam on, this would look very bad in front of a jury. If they're actually stalking you that's an abuse of power and you can sue the city/state.
The key difference is that they aren't accountable to you on the street because they need the special privilege to do their job.
Given the option (shown time and time again) police will sit on their ass and rack up overtime for their ridiculous pension. They aren't paid by crimes avoided so I don't think they would care to proactively fix it.
> The police do, literally, have special drone privileges. They get access to special, high-powered surveillance drones that the public does not get.
This is a real problem in America, where tools that could potentially be used for nefarious purposes become illegal for the general population "for their own good". If you're arguing we should have access to specialized surveillance drones and other police equipment on the market you have my complete support.
Also training for a drone, using a drone, recording video in public spaces, surveilling you in a public space are not privileges.
Surveilling you in your apartment needs a warrant, unless you have your window open, at which case it doesn't.
>Go fly a drone outside of a police officer's house and you'll end up dead or in jail.
Anyone can walk up to you and kill you, it doesn't mean there aren't legal consequences for it.
>people like some of the commenters in this thread will lay down their lives to defend them from public criticism.
This is because we've heard these arguments a million times and know it's a trojan for some harebrained ideology, which is unfortunate, because police oversight is an important topic—especially considering police unions wield a lot of political power.
Out of curiosity, where do you draw the line between what police can and can't do?
What about we keep the drones to reduce crime and just selectively never investigate black suspects?
>Second, if you're being followed by a police car, you know the police car is there. If you're being followed by a drone, you have no idea the drone is there.
There are such things as plain-clothed police officers. Not that police officers have to announce their presence to you when they are driving on a public road anyways.
> Third, I can pull over and ask the cop why they're following me, or (more likely) just let them pass. A drone is just going to loiter there, waiting for me to commit whatever crime they think I'm committing.
If they ask YOU what crime YOU'RE committing you don't have to answer. Why would they have to answer you or even admit to following you?
You say slippery slope when what I think you really mean is that it shifts the overton window of what is and isn't acceptable. That is a valid concern, but unless the police are allowed to fly drones in places where gen pop aren't allowed to, they aren't getting any special privileges from their position so I thin the point is moot. Slippery slope imo only starts when the police get NEW privileges.
- Massive money sink that shows no results: See SF during covid and a bit after - Dystopian policies that tank crime but flagrantly violate peoples rights: see stop and frisk, El Salvador, etc
Some people are going to be criminals no matter how much money you give them. I would argue that especially in functioning countries, the returns on carrot approaches to crime reduction are magnitudes weaker than stick ones.
I can imagine that some people would get away with it—but that's also kind of how the world works, some people will always game the system to their benefit like they do in every political system.
I think we're pretty far from devising a perfect system that is ungameable, so I don't see the point in devising scenarios where they are gamed.
A better metric imo for a tax system is seeing how much of the tax burden rests with people who work for wages vs people who own capital and comparing that to their proportion of the total wealth.
Looking into it, they are "folding" a logic chip to have shorter paths with their SRAMs, which is the main application of 3D integration these days, chucking memory (low-power) above high power logic die.
stacking logic chips is hard because they have to dissipate a lot of power, and stacking them multiplies your power density (which is already very high for the logic die, generally) by the number dies you stack~effectively. Most of the progress on these sorts of things have just been stacking layer on layer of memory on a single logic die.
It looks like they are folding other components other than memory onto the logic die which I haven't seen before, but this isn't cold fusion and even intel has thrusts doing this type of 3D integration.
Anecdotally, the tide on this is changing—all the low-hanging fruit has been picked and I see/hear many of my older colleagues regret not having gone the whole way with a PhD. This on top of AI being able to answer many of the engineering questions you might have learned the answers to in a masters/bachelors.
If being apathetic to a broken system makes you Nazi, what would be a better approach to the problem outlined by the person you were responding to? How would you keep political agents out of science institutions?
That and Taylor does get brought up the whole time for being rich and wasteful, I can't count how many times I've heard about her incredibly short private jet trips in the past few years.
Your criticism of Bezos are also a bit ridiculous. Nearly every company that isn't B2B SaaS junk uses roads in some degree. I fail to see how the warehouse workers being on public assistance have anything to do with Bezos—if you wanted them to be self sufficient a politician could increase the minimum wage.
Your criticisms of Musk dishonest, but I would also argue that he didn't "earn" a lot of the money for Tesla, as he's just a jackass with a bachelors in econ that did none of the work on it.
AOC/Bernie types have never been directionally correct, as allowing the government to rob you in America will usually not correlate with any increase in QoL for the general populace. Someone on here described taxes in America and Western countries as "tithes" like you would pay to the mafia as "protection" money, where every dollar you give them makes them more capable of extorting the next one out of you.