addicted

> No money is exchanged when I promote my own product through my own channels

This is not really advertising, but it’s not really a problem either. People expect you to promote your own products and take it with the grain of salt they should. Besides, there are only so many channels you can possibly control.

> nor when I promote my friends products, whether I disclose it as promotion, or disguise it as my genuine unaffiliated opinion. Sometimes it really is a genuine opinion!

Sure. Maybe this is advertising that slips through. If all were down to is people advertising their friends’s products for no money then we would have eliminated 99.99% of the problem.

Further, if you have a highly influential channel, the cost of promoting a non genuine opinion about a friend’s product would almost certainly hurt your reputation, providing a strong disincentive to do such a thing.

This is a gross misunderstanding of what a currency actually is.

A currency is a social construct. It has no inherent value beyond what people who trade in it place on the currency.

As a result people don’t want a currency whose rules of trade are defined once and it’s unable to respond to actual world events.

If you have a currency that is indeed responsive to changes in the world then there needs to be someone who you entrust with making those changes.

At that point it doesn’t matter whether that currency is digital or cash based. I mean, in actuality even the USD digital trade is order of magnitudes greater than its physical trade.

The U.S.’s monetary institutions and its role as a trade promoting superpower is what makes the dollar stronger. Now that those institutions are not as reliable anymore and the U.S. is clearly not a trade promoter anymore, the dollar is definitely at risk.

Where does the Russian company get its Philippine Peso from?

Russia overall may have exported some stuff to Philippines but it’s a huge country. The specific company would now need to find a way to acquire a highly illiquid currency available in tiny numbers which would be expensive.

Instead, they simply buy dollars which are highly liquid, available in huge numbers, until now absolutely reliable, and accepted by everyone.

Trading in dollars was at the end of the day cheap.

There are both hard and soft reasons for this.

Hard reason: Oil was traded in U.S. dollars. This was basically built off America’s status as the only open superpower and its military strength.

Soft reasons: U.S. political stability (yeah, it’s hard to understand that now after the past decade, but generally the U.S. has been extremely politically stable with Presidents largely maintaining their predecessors foreign policy even if they didn’t agree with them), US company culture which is much cleaner than the rest of the world (American companies are far less likely to bribe, for example), and strong financial institutions like the independent Fed and the publishing of reliable and open data.

> Right now Europe's own companies just ignore the statutes to keep their US trade.

If it’s the trade keeping EU companies in line, isn’t the destruction of trade that these tariffs are intended to achieve precisely the kind of thing that will then prevent them from staying in line in the future?

The problem is that the truth, that this was some haphazard nonsense thrown together at the last second using some ChatGPT prompts, is hard to believe, so people try to insert rationality where it doesn’t exist.

Europeans have a lot of alternatives to American services, including building out their own.

What Europeans truly lack is the ability to defend itself without the U.S. They have the technical know how and can build the manufacturing capacity but that will take a decade at least.

Also, European financing is just not as strong.

However, with the U.S. voluntarily walking away from its role as the center of the world, this may not be a problem for too long.

Tech is the easiest service to replace considering American tech workers by insisting on WFH have already largely eliminated the geographical advantages American tech used to have.

Yeah, but the U.S. govt funds a lot of important research so it may not fall behind technologically unlike India…

Wait, what did you just say? The U.S. government has decimated its research funding?

Oh, well, at least the U.S. has a lot of high quality colleges churning out highly educated Americans, so that still may not be as much of a problem…wait, did you say Americans are increasingly turning away from college due to the high costs and the resultant loans that cannot be terminated even in bankruptcy, because the government has been cutting back significantly on funding education for years now?

Oh well, at least the U.S. is welcoming to immigrants who have founded over 50% of unicorns and usually tend to be the most dynamic and brightest slice of their country’s populations, so it may maintain its technological edge…

Wait what? Oh god.

Why don’t you look up how they came up with those tariff numbers and come back and tell us that this is some sophisticated economics at play here.

That’s fine. All those H1Bs will go back to their home countries, work for the same companies at a fraction of the salary and instead of paying taxes and rent and other expenses in the US will pay in their home countries.

And when they are laid off, or drop off to start their own companies, those companies will be based in their home countries instead of in the U.S.

I think this is a great and moral plan to reverse the brain drain the U.S. has been benefiting from at the expense of other countries for decades.

This is a step in the right direction. I worry it’s about 12 years too late.

The decision to reduce focus on Thunderbird was remarkably mistimed with the email client market just shooting through the roof with a bunch of orivate players being acquired for tens and hundreds of millions right after.

Also, the last new Tesla model not including the Cybertruck has been many years ago.

How many countries has the U.S. annexed in the last 80 years?

You’re completely wrong.

But even if you were right that the U.S. was simply applying its foreign policy to its “sphere of influence”, surely even you can see the immense foolishness of applying the same policies you have towards countries that are your enemies or even neutral to you, to countries that are your allies?

Finally, even if we accept that it’s actually really smart to treat your allies as your enemies, in all those other cases the U.S. responded because of attacks by those countries on America, American Allies or American companies. In the current situation there’s no such excuse.

People were literally sent to El Salvador against a court order stopping the government from doing so.

Where’s the exaggeration?

Also, the quotes you’ve excerpted do not mention due process even once, but do in fact mention that those people may perhaps be sent to El Salvador.

So your own quote only contains evidence for people being sent to El Salvador, and contains no evidence for them being provided due process, not even a “perhaps” they may be provided due process.

The amount of indoctrination and brain twisting it takes to take a quote that does not mention due process, but does mention the possibility of people being sent to El Salvador, and use that as evidence that there will be due process but people will not be sent to El Salvador absolutely astonishes me.

Tourism is gonna be hit. Education is gonna be hit (especially if the rumors that the US is canceling hundreds of student visas as we speak for crimes such as liking certain tweets). Exports are gonna be hit thanks to tariffs in raw materials and retaliatory tariffs by other countries. Government sector jobs will be hit. Retail will be hit due to tariffs.

We are already seeing a reversal in sentiment and none of these impacts have actually been felt yet.

Lots of countries do call them import taxes, or import duties, or just duties.

That’s where the term “duty free” that you see in airports comes from.

But I guess until a certain influential individual started lying about tariffs, this wasn’t really necessary because no one was really confused about who paid the tariffs, because the people who knew about them clearly knew it was the importers paid for them and the people who didn’t understand how they worked had no reason to be confused because everyone who did would clearly explain that importers paid them.

The Mennonite community that is the center of this measles outbreak is particularly famous for growing their own food.

Also, germ theory WTF.

What is the lesson here?

USA/Greenland was never a land dispute.

In fact, people thought it was a joke all the times he mentioned it.

So if it does become a real thing, it sets the stage for new “disputes” to be created, which aren’t actually disputes but larger countries deciding to take over other countries’ land simply because they can.

The natural pendulum swing of “Rs get in govt, f things up, so people get mad at them, elect Dems, who largely stabilize things, and so people forget they got mad at the Rs because they f’ed things up, reelect them because they’re better at lying about their promises, and then the R’s f things up and people get mad at them…”.

This cycle has basically continued ever since Reagan.

There’s so much survivor bias in these comments.

We know what happens when ADHD is underdiagnosed and not recognized in society (which requires it to be labeled appropriately). You have scores of children who get labeled as “problematic” or “bad students” ans suffer from that discrimination for the rest of their lives.

Labeling may not help a particular individual but helps all in society as a whole

Considering ADHD is poorly understood, historically highly underdiagnosed and significantly prevalent it’s not surprising there’s a lot of content about trying to to understand it for both people with and without ADHD.

> What do you get out of Next.js over vanilla React?

The biggest problem is that React itself recommends against using Vanilla React.

https://react.dev/learn/creating-a-react-app

> If you want to build a new app or website with React, we recommend starting with a framework.

This, frankly, is insane. The whole point of React was that it was this relatively lightweight UI library you could drop into pretty much any workflow.

The fact that the React docs themselves recommend against using the React library as a library is just mind boggling but also another instance in the long history of React devs being absolutely hostile to their users.

If that’s the case then the likelihood of the remaining net assets being worth more than $8/share are even lower.

Which is still gonna be significantly worse than the $8/share offered.

If the value of assets after paying off debtors is > $8/share, then that’s the easiest arbitrage opportunity considering it’s currently trading at $1.80.

Just buy the whole thing for $3/share (an irrefutable premium of 67%), shut down operations entirely, pay off the creditors, and pocket the net assets of > $8/share and more than double your money almost instantly.

If the claim is the CEO ran it into the ground then the board messed up even worse by not replacing the CEO.

Long time immigration lawyers are not randomly advising their clients to not travel outside the U.S. and to use burner phones if they do.

The threat is real and elevated.

Tesla’s stock is valued on the basis of the self driving tech.

That’s slated to be out this summer, but the insiders are certainly not behaving as if it will be. In fact, they’re acting exactly as one would if they expect it to be delete once again and/or underwhelm greatly.

So your recommendation is that instead of picking a system that is simple to implement and understand and has been successfully implemented in multiple cities across the world (and now in NYC as well) they should have opted for a novel system that is way more complicated to implement and understand which would even if it worked perfectly have extremely marginal benefits over the tried and tested system.

True but in most of the country even the poorest have to drive.

In Manhattan only 22% of households own a car, and the number is probably a fraction of that in the congestion relief zone.

It also ignores the fact that people driving in Manhattan are disproportionately among the richest people in NYC.