pstuart

nopes

If they're training to instill morality why are they working with religious thinkers?

We went through the looking glass 10 years ago...

While an intriguing concept, that doesn't sound like it could scale to the amount of "cores" needed to do the work. Or am I missing something?

Oh sure, I was less than happy to have her be my candidate. That said, she actually was one of the most qualified candidates considering her previous experience in the Whitehouse, Senate, and State Department. Add to that her training as a lawyer and the fact that she was likely the smarter one in the marriage.

For all of that, she did lack Bill's charisma.

Sure she was a finger in the air politician but there really was no contest as far as fitness for office. But then again, the typical American voter only cares about what's ostensibly immediately in it for them.

2016 was a populist referendum, and I still think Bernie could have won it (not that he's perfect either).

The whole idea behind tariffs was to replace income taxes with them. The bonus was realizing that he could weaponize it.

Tariffs today have one real value only: protecting domestic industry. And to do that correctly, it needs to be thoughtful, consistent (legislated rather than by executive order), and coordinated with the industries they are designed to protect.

> these changes were going to happen regardless

I'd agree in the context that this wasn't necessarily a case of driven by natural forces of the universe rather than some key events that could have been better addressed to hold them off. And the best way to do that is lots of sunshine and awareness.

Those key elements being:

The Powell Memo -- https://www.inequalitymedia.org/explainers/v/the-powell-memo

Reagan's embracement of evangelicals (ignoring Barry Goldwater's warning)

Rush Limbaugh's unfettered demonization industrial complex

Bill Clinton's sellout of labor to the corporate class -- https://www.theglobalist.com/bill-clinton-hillary-pivoted-am...

IMHO politics is two distinct things: control of law and the circus of those who vie to take that power. Everybody focuses on the circus because that's where the media points to and is the most engaging.

But it's the former that actually matters, and it's boring, slow, and opaque, but literally a matter of life and death to every citizen of the union.

One final thought: the creation of literal Red vs Blue was a masterclass in division and distraction. It's crazy-making to watch it play out from the sidelines.

> police needs power to protect the citizens

Those terms need to be clearly defined. SCOTUS has declared that the police actually have no duty to protect and to serve the people.

And with an overwhelming amount of evidence, the police operate with effectively no accountability and repeated demonstrate that they abuse their powers freely.

So yes, laws without teeth are pointless but the state's monopoly on violence should only be granted when it can be demonstrated to not be abused.

Oil companies have owned the federal government for decades, getting free security to maximize their profits at no direct cost to them.

As far as Venezuela is concerned, my understanding is that China is not thrilled with this deal and we've yet to see if it will actually happen. With Trump's record of actually delivering the goods, the odds are it will not.

This is guaranteed for men. You'll either die from or with prostate cancer if you make it that far.

The Iran War was predicated on a manufactured threat of them getting nuclear weapons. That's been the line for some time.

All reports about the initiation of the war was that Bibi wanted it and manipulated Trump to join in (against the advice of all of those around him warning that the very problem we have now would in fact occur).

So the Green New Deal was about enabling foreign oil producers?

arguably and partially, perhaps a bit, but they have history to back up that reluctance.

That said, Putin's gonna do what Putin's gonna do and it likely wasn't the Crimean invasion that prompted it. It was the promise of waltzing in and just taking it without resistance.

I get your point and it's clear that sticks seem to be more effective than carrots, but our supply chains are not electrified and that will take time, in the meantime this pain will propagate widely.

It looks like it started to plummet in April 2022, which was on Biden's watch (disclaimer: I voted for him). It apparently was in response to supply chain shocks spiking oil prices due to the start of the war in Ukraine.

Having the AI summarize the pros and cons of that action has valid points on both sides. But in his defense, that particular war was not of our doing, unlike the current war with Iran which was initiated impulsively.

> if UBI causes people to work less

My understanding is that UBI experiments show that is not the case. UBI is a safety net, and does not lead to a significant drop in labor. With the pending waves of AI and automation impacting labor we'd be well-served to continue to explore how to make it work.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w32719/w327...

Are you a parent? I am, and your comment indicates you probably aren't.

Of course engaging with your children is vital, and their curiosity should never be dampened.

Boundaries are about social discipline and that's akin to training a dog. Sure, every parent should do their best to make sure their children grow up to good members of society (including classroom behavior).

But when you say that "parents are not powerless" your implication overstates that power. There's no way to force a child to be curious or to care about a subject. Some kids are just "born that way" and are a challenge even for the most caring and engaged parents.

And once that kid becomes a teenager, that power starts to ebb really quickly as they learn that parents only have so many tools to enforce that discipline.

Parenting definitely plays a role, but if you are the parent of more than one child you quickly learn that it is nature, not nurture that defines the child. Nurture is a vital part of guiding acceptable behavior, but what their brain responds too is not under the parent's control.

And obviously a kid that is a disruption in the classroom degrades the experience for all the other students.

Those digital devices should be an augmentation of their education, not a replacement for what has already existed.

Teaching kids is incredibly challenging -- if they view school as torture or a prison then we have failed them.

I have three kids who've gone through K12 public schools and have been lucky enough to do so in well-funded school districts. Adding to that, we did our best to augment that with a parent organized weekly sessions with a host of different teachers hired to give lessons on things that the school curriculum did not cover.

We also had them participate in Odyssey of the Mind for many years (it's a really cool program worth checking out: https://odysseyofthemind.com/)

Even with all of that, it was clear that while much of their education stuck, other parts were effectively just tolerated.

I think there are really two core factors that lead to educational success:

1. A good teacher who can connect with students and inspire them to learn

2. A curriculum that can be understood by the student as having value and aligns with their life needs.

Teaching anyone is effectively futile unless they are curious or can find value in the subject material. Good teachers are the foundation of that, and outsourcing that to some sort of "educational platform" is doomed to failure.

If you read the link I provided it shows that what happened was an administrative error and a relatively small number (~400) of those people voted, but they likely didn't engage in intentional fraud -- they likely thought they were entitled and did so.

But to the point of even 400 non-eligible voters participating, that is 400 too much.

If find the framing of your question bordering on disingenuous but I'll charitably assume that it is willfully ignorant.

We should have zero voter fraud. We should have zero electoral fraud.

Voter fraud itself is incredibly rare in US elections:

https://www.brennancenter.org/topics/voting-elections/vote-s...

But you position yourself as expecting fair elections, and if you really do, you would understand that fair comprises not just keeping ineligible voters from doing so, but also allowing eligible voters to do so.

There's been an incredible amount of fuckery by the GOP to disenfranchise citizens of their rights to vote. But do you care about that?

Do you care that Trump is working to install loyalists into positions of election officials who are loyal to him, rather than the historical position of neutral officials who honor the democratic process?

https://nlihc.org/resource/history-voter-suppression

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression_in_the_Unite...

https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/historyvotersuppression/web...

There's plenty more where that came from, but I doubt you'll look at any of that because that isn't likely a concern of you.

So I ask you: is your concern about "your team" not winning or about free and fair elections. I'm pretty sure what that answer is but would welcome your response.

What makes you think that the NSA cares about rules or laws?

Snowden showed that was the case, and that was a long time ago. Lots more compute and toys for them to play with now.

For the amount of financial crime that is likely being committed, versus the reports of actual prosecution, it doesn't seem like a very good track record.

It's not a real issue but it has the base riled up. A MAGA acquaintance told me he was a "single issue voter" based on that fear. I think he phrased it that way to sound principled but the very aspect of being a "single issue voter" shows a lack of understanding of the full impact of that vote.

What the Right has done is take the fact that there are some communities (in liberal areas) that have allowed non-citizens to vote in community issues, which is not entirely unreasonable. They then mash up that "fact" and trumpet it as an attack on our system by "illegals".

Their dishonesty knows no bounds.

Every "concern" raised by the Trump administration is cover for voter disenfranchisement. Period.

Voter fraud is incredibly rare, but I have a gut feeling that electoral fraud has happened and will continue to get worse, courtesy of the same administration.

It must be remembered that every accusation from them is a confession.

For the acolytes that down vote me, at least make your case on where and why I am wrong. My comment is as a citizen, not as a partisan.

Fair enough, but running VSCode on a prod machine is also bananas.

I'm advocating for all drugs to be legal -- regulated and taxed.

Keeping them illegal does not "protect" anyone and just creates more crime, death, and misery. You've swallowed the propaganda -- it was never about protecting people, it was designed for oppression and it's wildly successful at that.

Take a look at any video of police busting people for drugs: does it look like they're trying to help those poor innocent victims or are they gleefully enjoying their ability to completely fuck with those people in the name of "protecting" them?

The fact that drugs are still such a problem despite countless billions of dollars shows that it's never going to work in the way that they promise.

Drug addiction is a health issue, not a crime. My brother died of a heroin overdose and the law did not help him and the fact that the only resources public money went to were jails and prisons vs clinics shows where the priorities lie.

Feel free to read up on the truth of this matter: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/race...

That and investing in better rainwater management -- those muddy torrents of water that pour into ocean would be much better if slowed down upstream and allowed to percolate into the aquifers.

Junkies and meth-heads are a different kind of animal from your average drunk, and the reality of the proposal that you responded to is a simple economic analysis of investing in keeping them placated or paying for the damage they cause. It's far cheaper to prevent rather than react and repair.

If we ended the War on Drugs we would be doing exactly this thing and saving billions of dollars doing it.

They're starting to catch up with NVIDIA. Because AI.