thrav

If there were a candidate who was going to demolish Trump, as you suggest, they should’ve easily demolished Biden for all the reasons others have mentioned about him being completely uninspiring.

For anyone interested, there’s a thorough politico interview with some California researchers pioneering exploration into this topic.

That’s an interesting point. You’re asserting that the fear of government funding falling through is what drives this behavior?

Any input on the impact of guarantees? Is this not something we do? Is it irrelevant because if funding isn’t there, they evaporate?

(I don’t know anything about how this actually works)

More people get well paying jobs, fewer people are overworked, and we pay less overtime? Sounds like killing three birds with one stone.

Inefficiencies like this should be the enemy of both political parties. They’re why Republicans complain about Government inefficiency and waste, and they’re holding progressives back from accomplishing everything they’d like the government to do.

This feels like it’s basically a matter of labor NIMBYs enriching themselves at the general public’s expense.

I couldn’t agree more. It managed to feel like good old fashioned low budget internet fun from YouTube yesteryear. Putting aside Matt and Trey, it’s one of the few things that’s made me genuinely burst out laughing in years, period.

It’s made me stop and think about why that is, and the best I can come up with is that very little is surprising anymore. When you get past 30, everything feels like something you’ve seen done before. Deep fake comedy is so cutting edge, that it couldn’t help but be fresh.

Or maybe I’m just a boring old man. The last thing that made me laugh this hard was this Reddit submission, and again, it succeeds because I didn’t see it coming: https://i.reddit.com/r/ContagiousLaughter/comments/gzdja1/on...

You could just as easily be writing about BART. The United States fails hard at public transit, even where we’re richest and it makes the most sense. I use it all the time, but I can’t really blame the people who refuse.

Tokyo was in a league of its own (2 weeks experience). London Tube was mostly great, with some minor flaws here and there (9 months experience).

This is without even beginning to compare the reach and convenience of stations in each system.

This feels like looking at our ability to Lockdown for COVID. Even when we attempted to fully close, we sucked at it, and got the worst of both worlds (economic crush + virus still spread). At some point, you have to look in the mirror and stop trying to be something you’re not willing and/or able to be and find a new approach.

Obviously that example can be replicated in a Google search, but that doesn’t invalidate the value of the same concept applied to protected information.

As an example, I just needed the routing number for my account to make a payment. I was like, “shit, where is that in the app again”, but had just made this comment, so I hit help, and typed “routing number”, and it immediately responded with the routing number in big bold letters. (https://imgur.com/a/raXEyO3)

The point is to eliminate the need to work to find stuff.

Because the ChatBot squashes all those different pages and forms into one location. It takes the time and mental load of trying to locate features on the site or app off of me.

Instead of navigating through 3 links to reach the form, having to search the newly loaded page each time, I answer 3 questions.

In truth, I just type “ATM withdrawal limit” and the form begins, because it’s so obvious what I’m trying to do.

This is not true of all ChatBots. In fact, some companies outright discourage using theirs as such.

USAA, for example, makes it abundantly clear that you’re talking to a robot, before beginning the conversation and provides multiple choice options for common support flows. I’m actually a big fan of theirs for things like travel notifications or ATM withdrawal limit increases.

Anything that’s under $20 is probably going to be disposable and not structurally sound. I completely agree, and think that’s by design. At that price point they know y’all are both considering the piece disposable.

If you buy one of their $50-$200 coffee tables though, they’ll be just as solid as most other furniture — assuming proper assembly — and are still a fraction of the price.

I finally got to the bottom of this, after moving in with my wife. I never owned IKEA furniture, but inherited some of hers. Her big chest of drawers wobbled, and some of the drawers were blowing out the bottom.

To her, and to anyone else, this is a shit piece of furniture. The truth is that it’s largely operator error. “High quality” furniture is almost impossible to fuck up. It’s preassembled and built like a tank.

IKEA furniture is what the owner makes it. If the owner builds it well, and keeps the screws tight, and doesn’t overstuff it — it’s brilliant stuff, and will last a long time.

If the owner does a half ass job putting it together, and lazily tightens the screws, and expects it to stay good forever with zero maintenance, it will devolve into crap.

You could find an analogy between Mac vs. Linux here somewhere — though, it’s not perfect.

Anyone who thinks IKEA is anything less than an industrial design marvel should go buy a few things there. Having done so recently, my perspective has completely shifted, and I actually love IKEA.

This is more or less what Texas has decided to do. I’m in California, but my entire family is there, and many of my younger family members are going about their lives relatively normally.

At least one of my cousins caught it and their whole young family (parents 30’s, kids <10) were fine. My 90+ year old grandparents are obviously being kept very isolated. Their kids (my parents’ generation - 60’s) are being careful, but not cancelling their entire 2020.

Everybody hated on Texas because of the Lt. Governor’s over the top declaration of sacrificing grandparents for the economy, but there are definitely aspects of their approach that I prefer to what’s happened in California.

I think the idea was that if they properly marketed their achievement, they could get Lambo level compensation at a big 3 cloud provider.

It absolutely does and is extremely challenging for a particular type of partner. There are many books on the subject.

Most ADHD people are also susceptible to RSD (Rejection Sensitive Dysphoria(?)) that can make us feel like the entire planet is crumbling when we experience even minor rejections. As in, suicidal ideation level pain that at some point we have to learn how to move through or just avoid relationships altogether.

Sure. But you won’t see anyone commenting about that. I’m only saying some people will in fact intuit a thing and be right, and we should hardly admonish them for doing so.

The higher rated their comment is, the more other people likely intuited the same.

It’s almost a decent measure of how obvious the thing being proven actually was — assuming you could baseline it and compare it to others in a meaningful way.

At the same time, in a big enough forum, there will always be many people who have already intuited what most psychological scientific studies are about, and had it confirmed by their own experience many times over.

I’m equally irritated when people label an idea invalid until it’s been scientifically confirmed and peer reviewed. Science is often about confirmation, not about creation. Many people are likely to have realized something long before a team of scientists got funded, figured out how to test the idea, analyzed results, wrote papers, published, and officially confirmed it.

If only setting aside brand was a legit thing car purchasers did. Cars are one of the prime places people assert their identity in a product. I feel like any car maker willing to make the most expensive SUV will immediately sell a ton, because there are so few options for doing so.

I have probably seen more Lambo SUVs in the last year than I had any other Lambo combined for my entire life.

The same was true for EV / Tesla early on, which helped establish their brand in a similar elite way. They’re still holding onto that for the moment, because cars don’t turn over as often and they have a production backlog — we’ll see if it lasts.

I think it’ll become more like Apple, where everyone of a certain class feels like they have to own the most expensive version, even if it only offers marginal benefits at double the cost.

It likely happened in Florida and Texas too. Their profile basically matches New York.

Wasn’t there a proof of concept for exactly this about how social media apps were probably already doing this? I believe I saw it on HackerNews. It was a site where you gave them camera access and then ran something like a 60 second experiment. Seemed academic.

This is so true that at other companies it often takes a lawyer (in-house counsel) reminding product that something is legally precarious to stop it, and they still push.

For something that has no real legal ramifications, there’s no way you’re stopping it.

Have you read about how your example, VW, saw a massive increase in market cap In a similar way in the past? It’s a way that was easily repeatable with enough capital and some ability to influence the public with things like memes, controversy, and celebrities.

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSTRE49R3I920081028

That tweet was likely intentional foreshadowing of the coming split. He posted it at 8:11 and they announced the split on 8/11.

I have no basis for this suggestion, but I’ve actually been thinking lately that SoftBank and Musk coordinated the TSLA infinity squeeze that we’ve all been watching.

It’s a great way to make a massive investment in TSLA, at the price you were willing to pay anyway, while sending the stock through the roof so the company can take the needed liquidity from the market.

TSLA added one of SoftBank’s largest financiers to the board in late April.

You reminded me of the close of one of my favorite Philosophize This episodes on Authenticity: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GfkJEWnsNy4

The end around this is convincing yourself that you’ll spend it better than the government would. There is a famous clip of Michael Dell saying as much at Davos.

Bezos and Musk think they’re saving the human race by deploying their capitol towards the pursuit of life in space.

Gates is attempting to make various diseases extinct.

Soros is attempting to bring about a world more closely aligned to the philosophical ideals that shaped his early education.

The richest of the rich usually have some pet project that they think is the most important thing in the world.

Inverse the gain porn —- Don’t buy TSLA on the day everyone is posting screenshots of their $4M accounts —- Ride the wave of the self-fulfilling DD.

Significant hurricanes are not rare. Significant hurricanes landing in places that expose massive vulnerabilities in American infrastructure (the levees: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_levee_failures_in_Great...) are more rare and lead to catastrophes like Katrina.

Almost by definition, they must be adding something to the world to acquire that capital —- so they’re definitely adding something to the world.

I didn’t mean to suggest it’s a social negative. I only meant to suggest they’re defining their meaning by an odd side of the equation.

Just wait for the pendulum swing. Modernity has a real under appreciation for the value of the institutions that naturally arose within almost all human societies.

Sometimes the time for a thing has passed. Sometimes the genius of a thing is only appreciated in its absence.

Maybe modern marriage is mostly useless because people are quick to head for the exit, instead of feeling a sense of loyalty and responsibility to their partner. Without that, I agree, it’s not much of a partnership.

Consumption.

If your life is defined by consumption, you’re not adding anything to the world, which is where most people experience meaning.

Maybe you’re planning to consume now and create later. Marriage is all about creation.