sandoooo

"Top 20 politicians from <party you don't like> looking stupid in long-haul flights".

How do they know which party that would be? Facial recognition, obviously.

On the other hand, if a technology requires higher levels of organizational competence than is available from the government of a major first-world country, maybe it isn't ready for primetime.

1. somehow the hate against the 0.01% always turns into policies that tax the upper 20%, or 10%, or 5%. why is that? Is there a way to formulate the arguments / policies so that it doesn't do this?

2. the wealth of the 0.01% are numbers stored in computers. They are claims on future production, yes, but the whole system only works because 99.99% of these claims never gets cashed out, because there are physical limits to what a handful of billionaires can consume, no matter how opulent their lifestyles. If you try to distribute this virtual wealth, people will try to turn it into physical consumables, only to find there really isn't enough for everybody, and the whole system will go to shit.

3. at some point, a guy I know made the observation that revolutions don't really redistribute much, mostly they just take the wealth from the wealthy and burn it. Well maybe how it works is the most important and expensive physical good - land - gets redistributed, most other physical goods are destroyed, and the virtual wealth is zeroed in a very expensive accounting exercise.

Implement this as an android app instead of email. Have a system where I can open a random page of a book in a genre as many times as I want for free, and I can continue reading from that page, but if I read through x continuous pages I have automatically bought the book (or a chapter of it) and it goes in my library.

You're casting a pretty wide net there. I've always felt news organizations should be legally required to recruit from my exact microdemographic and only from registered members of the party I most recently voted for, with wages indexed to between 99% to 101% of my current income.

great, expect the same socjus drivel that's right now killing hollywood's legacy IP, dressed up for a new medium with prettier art but the exact same sorry excuses for storytellers. It'll last just long enough to suck in the industry's best and brightest and push the current crop of cash-strapped studios off a fiscal cliff, only to leave everybody high and dry when the number-crunchers finally realize that the core audience - nerdy young men - would rather gouge their eyes out with a spoon than watch this shit, while the diversity pushers clamoring for it never planned to watch it in the first place.

There is a nonzero chance that various political figures will have their handles 'accidentally' deactivated and inserted into the available pool. An enterprising body should set some bots up right now just in case there's lulz to be had.

Should also have a tweet lined up, in case they catch their mistake fast. Something like 'we're nuking wales tmr'.

The next question would be: is it possible to compare across multiple lottery ticket networks, and look for commonality? Maybe the lottery ticket params all give rise to some small set of particularly efficient configurations that we can add directly to other networks?

A million pairs of economists walked down a million streets in a million possible worlds, but no jokes were made there because they didn't find squat.

well, so long as they don't mistakenly break into Jeff's actually-occupied house and accidentally traumatize his wife and kids, I suppose he'd be pretty chill about it.

>I think there's a potential irony here in that the author would probably be fine with stoner teens wandering in, in that they'd more likely be kindred spirits in their railing against the evils of The System.

I doubt it - some unknown dudebro passed out on your carpet in a pool of their bodily fluids seems like too much to deal with at 3am for a poor reporter with writer's block.

As one of the posters of a TLC, I can tell you that the scores of all my posts are going up and down like a yoyo.

Or it might be spiking up at irregular intervals then steadily decreasing over time. I haven't instrumented.

Well I do have an office of the sort that you're presuming that I'm presuming that he does, and so does most of the people in this thread, even the ones railing against the evils of The System. Unless he's doing this thing out of his mom's basement, I'm sticking with my wish for stoner teens.

I think he means it's ok so long as the building project is falling massively behind schedule. Crappy builders need to be punished somehow, and the easiest way is to strike terror into the hearts of their clients.

The author also singles out a corporation for owning a large number of prestigious offices (quote below). Why do you think that is?

The author specifically differentiates between personal (neighbour-owned and not ok to trespass) and private (corporate-owned and fair game) property. Presumably his office is in the latter category.

"According to Forbes, not only is Brookfield the biggest office landlord in London and Los Angeles, it “quietly owns entire city skylines in places like Toronto and Sydney.” In New York, it owns the massive World Financial Center complex (whose real name is Brookfield Place) in Manhattan, along with the enormous skyscraper at One Liberty Plaza (which was built atop the bones of the Singer Building, the tallest building ever torn down)."

are you assuming that the author is suggesting the former while I am suggesting the latter? I even explicitly used the word trespassing!

I hope a bunch of stoned teenagers show up in the author's office to explore the pleasures of trespassing.

(Owned by evil corporations! Private not personal property! Fair game!)

spectrophotometer.

so which of the following things are the author claiming with the ==?

- all respectful reviews are useful - all useful reviews are respectful - all disrespectful reviews are useless - all useless reviews are disrespectful

Which of these things would the author defend when challenged, and which are they gesturing vaguely at and hope to slip under the radar?