baseballdork

> This is simply not a problem wired technology ever had.

I had plenty of wired sets where you had to hold the cable just so in order to get audio to play through. Happened a ton with those cheap crappy skullcandy earbuds, but would also eventually happen with the higher quality stuff too.

For myself, the point is that I don't have to download another app store ever. If fortnite wants to get me (and roughly 50% of US mobile users) to play their game, they _have_ to follow the rules of the app store we have decided suits us best. If, however, other app stores are allowed, then there are no rules. No gatekeeper.

I prefer the gatekeeper, in this case.

It's also easier to do things in parallel in rust that might otherwise not have been considered in a C version.

Their role in the Punic wars was fairly small.

> You still have to explain the magic bullet impossibilities

This has been explained ad nauseam. The bullet went in a straight line.

> Oswald as known CIA asset (CIA reports show this)

I’m sure the CIA has used a lot of unstable people all over. It’s not inconceivable that one of them went on to commit an assassination without being directed to by the CIA. Sometimes things are just boring.

Hardware-in-the-loop realtime dev for missile systems.

And if that was an actual statement people made, then you'd be right to say that. However, I think we can dispense with the strawman. Ownership exists in the real world, which means it necessarily conforms to the laws of the society in which it resides. Your view is a child's perspective on ownership.

Which is why that’s an extremely simplistic view. It’s literally the simplest possible idea of ownership.

I would say that _your_ idea of ownership is simplistic. You seem to be implying that ownership is only possible if you can own something in perpetuity without any related responsibilities. It's the same idea as "taxation is theft" and other libertarian nonsense.

> I love how smooth Diet Dr Pepper is but if I drink one - I won't lose any weight that day and will probably actually gain weight.

Because... it makes you hungry and so you eat more calories from other sources? When I'm cutting, diet soda is a godsend. The carbonation acts like a pseudo fiber and keeps me full.

What information would you add to make it more well-rounded? I think usually things like the economic cost of wolves diminishing livestock are usually included in these discussions, but that's not really articulated here.

This all makes sense to me. Reddit, as much as I loathe the latest changes, still has a ton of value when searching the web for things. Twitter, on the other hand, has lost practically all of its value. Any time I get linked to it, I can't see any of the replies or context. It's worthless except for the occasional standalone hot take.

What I thought was hilarious is that these two sites are competitive with... LinkedIn? That place just seems like the most worthless website to have ever existed. Nothing but self pontificating buffoons and virtue signalling of the worst kind.

And the printing press is just a stamp. This is an incredibly disingenuous take. The internet opened up the world. It's been a groundbreaking technology. However, it has also lowered the barrier of entry to spreading stupid ideas to large audiences, and we are seeing the consequences of that.

> By filling up seats with lower fares, it allows the whole route to be profitable.

Is this assuming that there would be empty seats if the hidden city nonsense wasn't allowed?

It's really absurd to get punished for paying for a flight and then not taking it. Sorry I either allowed you to double sell a seat or fly slightly more economically without my added mass. You could fix this by not charging me more for buying fewer seats.

It was called out because OP used "Inshallah". The argument is that it's cultural, and complaining about it is silly.

Shouldn't that be detectable?

Nope. Legal and approved only. If it became available over the counter at the pharmacy (at a reasonable price), I’d take it.

Interesting! I assumed that it would be fairly popular in the gym setting, but I had no idea it was already. I don't take gear, but I'd take GLP-1s. It seems like a no-brainer.

Great question, but unless it’s really detrimental, it wouldn’t be a huge deal. You’re likely going to be losing muscle mass on a cut anyway, you’re just trying to minimize it.

Generally, short buff folks aren't having breakdowns about being overweight and unhealthy.

I suspect GLP-1s will find their way into the gym as well. I'm currently on a cut. It takes some pretty rigid discipline and some overhead for doing things like meal prep and whatnot. Ozempic is basically the perfect cut supplement. When you hop off it, after a bit your appetite comes back and you can easily go into a bulk. It's perfect.

> In the context of weight management, the concept of "weight loss" should never be considered. This is because two people with same weight may have wildly different body compositions; this also applied to the same people but in different conditions.

Weight loss should _never_ be considered? How does that follow? Lots of people definitely need to lose weight.

I’m having a real hard time understanding what this comment is saying. Are you asking what high side computers are used for besides reading classified information?

I can believe it. Dunno how reasonable it would be to risk having someone in an altered state of mind on the ISS. What do you do if someone has a bad trip or decides to make poor decisions?

Military?

> I wish Yubico had some serious competition, but sadly they don't.

This likely wouldn’t qualify as “serious competition” but I have a few solokeys and they work fine for my use.

https://solokeys.com/

> Unmetered water/sewage access is not popular with taxpayers and likely would be a regressive tax in favor of wealthy/corps.

And is already extremely rare. However, what you are advocating for is retrofitting these systems in order to support your pay-for-shit plan.

> Your issue here is not with our sewers but that you've failed to control externalities of your businesses.

You are missing the point. The issue is that this system you want to move to will be built upon a system that uses taxation to fund infrastructure. Your assertion that this is a better system falls apart if you don't use any infrastructure that was funded by tax money. In other words, if everything was taxed at use from the get-go, your septic tank would _not_ cost $5k. It would be much more expensive as the costs of building/maintaining all the things we currently have would be built directly into the septic system cost instead of from tax revenue largely pulled from the wealthy.

> Many taxpayers can't either. Yet you want to force them to when even you won't do it!

This is so disingenuous as to border on lying. What you're saying is that everyone, even the desperately poor, need pay for anything they use so that you don't have to help anyone. What I'm saying is that progressive taxation is the way to pay for public goods so the poor are spared burdens the rest of us can handle.

> I've said exactly what I've said.

Indeed, and it's the typical nonsense said by libertarians who benefit from public funds and are too ignorant or simply refuse to recognize it. So self centered that they can't even recognize the massive disparity between how little they pay in taxes and how much more they receive when compared to people who live in large cities.

> if you could just steal enough money from others

There it is! "Taxation is theft". You live in a republic, suck it up, and enjoy the sewage system you were able to personally fund on the backs of everyone else.

> Sewage systems are built under permit virtually everywhere and the pipe size or drain units is documented.

You’re just repeating what I’ve already said. This already happens, but where it doesn’t you must add a bunch of overhead to make it work.

> You tax this in pieces, you can 'tax' at consumption in pieces without each consumer building their own billion dollars in infrastructure.

That is easy to say when you _already have_ tax payer funded infrastructure to start with. If you include the costs of building all the roads, ports, rail, as well as all the tax payer services that make it reasonable for employees to live in cities near the factories this stuff is made. What I’m trying to point out here is that your $5,000 shitter is going to be significantly more expensive once that’s taken into account. You are freeloading on work already paid for by others in order to make your libertarian idea remotely feasible.

> Apartment owners mortgage the cost of their sewage pipe yes, as well as the toilet they sit on.

Not talking about owners, I’m talking about renters. I’m talking about people who really ought not to have to make the decision to go into thousands of dollars of debt in order to shit just so you can say you didn’t have to contribute.

> If you want shitters for the homeless why don't you buy them some?

Because I couldn’t afford to. I’m not rich. However, society can.

> Taxes haven't been very successful at solving the problem

This is, at best, wild speculation. We do pay taxes, taxes are used to assist and shelter the homeless. You’re saying that because it hasn’t completely solved homelessness then it’s worthless and your little libertarian faction should be able to reap all the benefits of the things paid for by cities and pay nothing back into it.

The good news is that will never happen because it is so popular to provide social benefits through tax payer funds. Most people are unwilling to be such ardent boot lickers of the wealthy.

> Metering water consumed in most cases is pretty good at finding sewage use, and water metering exists in most apartments or at least every one I've lived in.

And this is how it already works in “most places”. Where it isn’t currently doing that you propose installing meters that aren’t already there, or determining pipe size to every user to determine the proper amount to charge for their shit. How is this not adding complexity?

> your system is a complicated one

Yes, the tax code is complicated for some small cohort of people, and that should be fixed.

> Sure but under my proposal everyone pays for services consumed, if you think rural people are stealing your infrastructure taxes to build septic systems by all means that's an argument to 'tax' at point of consumption, since we're cheating you apparently.

Sure, just as soon as you pay for all of the infrastructure between your community and the septic system. I wonder how many million or billions of dollars that would add up to.

> Well in practice they pay interest either way, privately or via inflation and public debt gov uses to expand their scope.

In practice they’re spending that money on something else. This isn’t about savvy savers losing a few percent to inflation. This is about people mortgaging a way to take a shit because they need to hook up their apartment to some company’s system.

> Mentally ill and the poor shit in public largely because housing is unaffordable and it isn't convenient to have to hike a long way to take a shit.

Huh, no restrooms available in the city? Oh wait, you have to be a customer to use a lot of those restrooms… so you have to pay to shit. Crazy how that isn’t working. It’s not libertarianism that’s wrong, it’s the damn poor and mentally ill.