selfportrait

The whole lesson of gangster films is centered around regret and the tragedy that befalls the family. It's actually a good test on people and their views of status. If someone emulates gangster bravado, it reveals a lot about them and how they've missed the entire point of the genre.

“In Sweden, researchers found an average 6.7 percent greater risk of heart attack in the three days after the spring change. Inspired by that finding, a group of U.S. researchers conducted their own study and determined that heart attack risk jumped 24 percent the Monday after switching over to daylight saving time. That risk then tapered off over the remainder of the week.

By contrast, risk for heart attack dropped 21 percent on the Tuesday after the fall time change.”

https://www.heart.org/en/news/2018/10/26/can-daylight-saving...

“A study of 732,000 accidents over two decades has found that the annual switch to daylight saving time is associated with a 6% increase in fatal car crashes that week.”

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200130144410.h...

I agree with this comment, and it reminded me of this Twitter thread of Seny Kamara’s (https://twitter.com/senykam) talk which in part addresses CS education and its narrow quantitative focuses: https://twitter.com/leakissner/status/1488959978530504706

What is missing in Sheets that would save you 20 hours a week vs. Excel? Genuinely curious to hear real world examples from a power user, because in the worst case scenario I use JS/G Apps Script to automate analysis/organization, which is actually a preference for me if I can't do it easily enough with a formula. I also can't stand Excel UI

> Despite previously claiming that Tether was backed 100% by cash, the company’s breakdown of reserves at the time showed that less than 3% of Tether reserves were actually held in cash.

If this does not eventually implode cryptocurrency valuations, I don't know what will.

1. Are Israeli figures to be trusted? There are countless - literally countless - of examples of abuses and arbitrary detention from the state. Including detention for “terrorism”.

2. What qualifies as “terrorism” in their book? Does throwing a rock at the IDF qualify as terrorism?

3. Why is Israel providing citizenship in the first place? What brought them to such an authoritative position? Who are the people they are giving citizenship to, where are they coming from, what were they subjugated to, why are they seeking citizenship in this place? The answers to these questions lie somewhere between Israeli far-right governance, oppression, human rights abuse and land imprisonment of a population who were kicked out of their homes and left stateless, passportless, and immobile, unable to cross their borders and travel, left to take long treks through abusive barriers and routes just to make it 5 miles from one place to another. Whose water is shut off, food supplies are limited, and have no economic prosperity. So why are these people the way they are, and seeking citizenship in such a place?

No, they are awful. Does this exempt Israeli’s own actions?

“The Zionist Jews who founded Israel had three basic objectives in mind when they thought about the kind of state they wanted to build, Israeli political scientist Areyh Naor liked to tell me: They wanted to create a Jewish state, a democratic state, and a state that would be located in the historical homeland of the Jewish people—the land of Israel—which technically included all of Palestine from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River, and even some areas beyond, in what is today Jordan.”

“Ben-Gurion essentially said in effect to his nation: ‘In this world we can only have two out of three of our objectives. We are being offered a chance for a Jewish state and a democratic state, but in only part of the land of Israel. We could hold out for all the land of Israel, but if we did that we might lose everything. If we have to compromise on our objectives, let it be on obtaining all the land of Israel. We will settle now for half a loaf, and dream about the rest later.’”

“Then came June 1967. Israel, in the course of the Six-Day War, occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip, extending, in the process, Jewish control over virtually all the historical land of Israel originally sought by Zionism. From that moment on, Israelis again faced the monumental question: What kind of nation do we want to be? Once again, it could only have two out of three of its objectives. One choice was to keep all the land of Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and to remain a Jewish state, but this could be done only by curtailing Israeli democracy. The only way Israel could permanently control the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be by physically suppressing them and ensuring that they were never given political rights.”

From Beirut to Jerusalem, Thomas L. Friedman

A slave escaping their master was once illegal.

It’s worth noting the value of reparations in this case - some people suffered the consequences of having a marijuana conviction on their record (oftentimes a certain type of people, disproportionately). Sometimes, the law is unjust, unnecessary, and a huge waste of time and money, and it’s ok for us to recognize that and repair it.

This isn’t a reward, this is compensation.

I think you overstate the overlap of Musk fans and crypto climate impact critics.

You would be mistaken to think that Musk fans are in large part anti-crypto. It’s a weird notion for you to even submit.

Literally not even comparable. One is about a child sex trafficker who has had deep connections with the state, academia, the sciences and technology. This isn’t petty pop culture drama. It is shameless just how uncaring some people are about the most serious topics.

Yes, go on and ignore all the points made - especially your incorrect point about the value of cryptocurrency pollution in providing double spend protections - a feature that can easily be abused by a handful of powerful miners. Sweep it under the rug as you go on justifying the rampant climate impact of cryptocurrencies.

How did you go from reading a story about one of the richest men kindling a connection with a prolific child trafficker to twisting this into a reactionary incel narrative about the “oppression of the white man” and the “injustice of divorce court” for the poor billionaire with the best lawyers?

> Agreed, they have essentially nothing in common apart from the name.

I don’t know if it’s your English, but you just said you agreed that crypto mining is an offender on the level of other forms of mining.

> Why? You can get pretty bad pictures of eg factory farming, too; still that doesn't mean people will stop eating factory farmed meat.

Except there are people who stop eating meat, reduce their intake, and there are advances in meat alternatives in the market. This is whataboutism 101. It’s quite frankly ignorant.

> The pdf you linked says nothing about double spending.

The PDF I linked is about bitcoin mining collusion, one of bitcoin’s flaws. If you knew anything about collusion and the consequences of a potential 51% attack, double spending is one of the central topics.

Your entire post sounds like paid misinformation.

This entire chain of replies is skewed. Yes, real world mining is a serious offender, but that doesn’t exempt crypto mining. Have one look at one photograph of a crypto mining farm for one second and this will be obvious to anyone.

On the point of double spend - collusion in bitcoin mining is very possible and decentralization is not as strong as claimed. There are tons of studies about this.

https://cowles.yale.edu/3a/parlour-miner-collusion-and-bitco...

> I would highly encourage you to find different sources for news.

I’d be curious to know the type of apolitical source of news you consume, considering the flat out incorrect claims in your post.

I really do appreciate this response but to discredit this story, all it really takes is one look at the URL.

To be fair there’s some truth in even the most outlandish conspiracies. That poster is undeniably an incel with distorted views on women and social justice causes. I think it would serve the boy well if you could pitch in and save him from the conservative propaganda he’s been fed, not to mention his views on women and that common whining that echoes in the halls of the Joe Rogan sphere about divorce. Divorce court is a common trope amongst reactionaries. He has clearly never talked to a woman let alone heard of the concept of a prenup? Should we get the ball rolling on the wildly delusional nurses comment or the random Patriot Act comment or oddly enough the Epstein comment that he stitched in there for good measure? I’m sure they would make for good discussion, just not in the rambling context.

I think I did decently on the front of taking his post in good faith, that’s why I didn’t ask him if he listens to Jordan Peterson (hint: he probably does).

The guy is in pain, that much is clear.

This comment really takes you on a roller coaster. To mirror the title here, this comment is clear: this boy is not all right.

Domestic terrorists? Social justice warrior nursing home staff? Patriot Act? Incel-oriented divorce court angst? Epstein?

> And yet what is the national conversation about? It’s only about how all straight men of a particular “ethnic category” are racist and evil and they all need to focus on giving more to people in other “ethnic categories”.

I just am never convinced by this reactionary argument when I hear it.

The internet skews people’s perceptions of the world, and this comment is exemplary of it. These Twitter-fueled “culture war” distortions have not done us any favors. In the most polite way possible, I recommend you go outside once in a while.

This isn’t guilt by association. That website is purely a grift, starting from its appeal to authority, leading into the Fox News nonsense and pseudoscientific slant, all the way to its Rush Limbaugh, early 2000s aesthetics. It doesn’t take a scientist to know that this isn’t how credible scientists operate, especially with the partisan hackery on display.

I don’t refute anything you say, but linking to a page that features Glenn Beck, Mark Levin and Tucker Carlson doesn’t help your case. Not to mention the clear partisanship and call for donation to the “American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology” - a rabbit hole I’m happy to avoid.

The most American response ever. “I know it’s insane and stupid but at least freedom.” I would sit here and explain how what you’re describing is only an illusion of freedom but I feel I’ll continue this cascade of ignorance.

> why not count the $40 out of it to be sure your returns were done right?

Do you realize how absurd it is to justify having to pay a fee… just to give the government our money? It’s a weird argument to make especially when normalizing the whole TurboTax angle, a company that is not only the result of but a perpetuator of our broken system. Lobby to keep our system broken and inefficient to rake in money from taxpayers.

Not only should the process be free — no exceptions — but it should be painless too. And we have not checked either one of those boxes. And people will continue supporting TurboTax to inject their $40 right into the company’s lobbying budget.

It shocks me sometimes how little imagination for innovation some people have, especially as it relates to the government and the ways our institutions are ran. This is not the norm in many other countries around the world and neither should it be.

Joe Rogan has transformed slowly but surely from a liberal who smoked weed to a somebody who appeals to conservative fervor. For example, he will rail against the vaccine because “big pharma.” Then he “throws the kitchen sink” at COVID when he gets it, including flaunting the ridiculous ivermectin BS that us chimps will be laughing at ourselves over in 50 years, ironically a product of big pharma. So what is it, does he support or not support big pharma when he leverages ivermectin and monoclonal antibody treatment.

Now, you list off a few names like Elon Musk, Tim Ferris, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Sam Harris, all of whom have companies to market, images to sell, podcasts to peddle, speaking tours and appearance fees to offer, and ideologies to impart. Yes, they’re all selling something to you, and Rogan fans delude themselves if they think they’re simply consuming pure intellectual discourse. This isn’t Dialectic, and nobody is Plato here.

Do you think it’s any coincidence that after Jordan Peterson - a guy who sells himself as a clinically-minded intellectual and liberty defender with liberal aesthetics - went on Rogan the other day, conveniently after stepping away from his teaching post at the U of Toronto. He’s got a speaking tour lined up. Do you think it’s a coincidence that Jordan Peterson, after resigning immediately released an article in the National Post about how “appalling” diversity, inclusion and equity is?

I’ve got a bridge to sell all the Rogan fans. It was fun to listen to him back in 2016 when he smoked weed and talked to writers and doctors. But it’s no longer 2016. And this isn’t an approval to shut him down or even shut him up. It’s simply criticism of misbehavior.

Your statement about not listening much to Rogan shows with this comparison. I don’t think the two are alike at all. Channel 5 lets the crazies talk while he stays silent for the most part, which says everything about his subjects. Rogan on the other hand lets his grifter repeat characters talk and then he himself talks and parrots all sorts of insane disinformation and obviously reactionary nonsense and neatly justifies it all away by saying “but don’t listen to me, I’m an idiot” all under the guise of rational dialogue and all the while elevating his guests who all conveniently have something to sell you.

When I think of Manchin and Sinema, I definitely think “backbone”.

I have experience in recruiting and onboarding at a big company you’ve heard of, and you would be surprised (or maybe not) that their practices come down to lack of internal tools, and sometimes competency of the staff. I would email onboarding to hide attendees/recipients in the Zoom call or to transition to work emails moving forward. I would also suggest that they establish compliance practices with your personal data.

The story of receiving your equipment early is probably made to be a favor to you more than anything. The team that likely initiated the send out did it at their earliest discretion, not because they wanted to hold up your holiday plans. They get a request and fulfill it. The timing was just inconvenient, call it unlucky.

I would share this feedback with the relevant people. If those teams were managed competently, they would use your experience to improve practices.