@DradisPing's banner p

DradisPing


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 10 11:08:46 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 1102

DradisPing


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 10 11:08:46 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1102

Verified Email

There was no trial on the merits. The judge issued a default judgment then held a trial purely on damages where Jones wasn't allowed to present any evidence that he didn't actually do what they claimed.

Trials aren't supposed to work that way. It's a politically motivated farce.

The GoT problem was that the show runners were counting on GRRM to finish the series and wrap up all of his plot lines. They would have only needed to adapt and simplify what GRRM wrote.

GRRM didn't publish enough adaptable material and D&D were left to come up with a conclusion on their own.

HotD is based on material GRRM has already published. It's adapted from about 120 pages from a book on Targaryen history.

So it won't have the depth and twists of the early seasons of GoT but there is a complete arc for the show runners to follow.

Chait argues that Pushaw wants to eliminate the idea of a journalist altogether - there will instead be "left journalists" and "right journalists". This is idiotic, because there are going to be people who synthesize the materials and present themselves as objective journalists. Both sides would do it and nothing changes. CNN will tell you what DeSantis told his favored journalist and continue on without pause.

Republicans spend significant energy engaging with CNN and other corporate news outlets. If they aren't getting any benefit then it's just wasted effort.

Automatic bans for triple parenthesis is so typical of modern big tech.

Smaller forums could have some fun with it, like s/(((/๐Ÿ’•/g and s/)))/๐Ÿ’•/g

It should go without saying that the commission being sent to oversee things is... not exactly non-partisan

It's wrong to expect them to be. Elections are naturally adversarial. All the major candidates should be able to send observers for key moments.

Actually one of the big problems with the American election system is that counties are allowed to manage their own elections, but they have a strong incentive to stuff the ballot boxes. When dealing with elections where the total votes in the state are what matter, the political power of the county is directly proportional to the number of votes cast.

If county overwhelmingly supports one candidate then they have exactly zero incentive to stop ballot box stuffing.

Observers from outside the county who support the other candidate are the only solution.

Next we'll be letting both parties at a trial send lawyers in to loom over witnesses while they are testifying.

Why can't people just trust the judges like we should?

or challenging the signatures on your opponent's petition to get them thrown off the ballot,

This is always horrible. The petition requirements should only be there to prevent random nutters with no support from making the ballot massive and unreadable. Anyone who's expected to get 5% should be allowed on without question.

The big problem in the west now is that senior bureaucrats are never held accountable. There's been a steady growth in power of the managerial class combined with a diffusion of responsibility.

Part of it is what Watergate established.

Reporters get big stories by having powerful friends in the bureaucracy. They need to protect those friends to keep the stories coming.

Any reporter who openly blames a senior bureaucrat will be blacklisted by all of the others.

Trump's Schedule F appointment system was the best idea I've seen to try to fix things, but it came too late to do any good.

In the 2020 election, at some polling locations, they arranged the desks so that it was impossible to observe anything while following the covid distance rules.

There's a resurgence in the player base lately. Apparently the latest patch fixed a lot of the issues.

So I'll just offer my response on Musk's points...

Chess isn't a simple game. But it is a solved game at the lower levels. The winner of an amateur match is going to be whoever spent more time studying chess books.

Musk has better things to spend his time on, but doesn't want a bunch of mediocre people running around bragging that they beat him at chess.

So he tweets that to avoid the whole situation.

His Twitter purchase is an interesting topic, and there's a lot of speculation. But keep in mind that there were left wing groups planning to go to court to stop the purchase, and around that time tech stocks took a big hit.

So it was probably a mix of trying to get a lower price, replacing funding that had backed out, and waiting to see if the DOJ anti trust division was going to come after him.

As for Ukraine, this is pretty straightforward. Western governments have committed over $100 billion dollars to help Ukraine, and lots of groups have gotten in on the grift. Weapons developers are getting money to fund new systems to "help Ukraine" that won't be ready for years. If you dig, I'm sure you'll find a bunch of lefty groups getting big bucks for dubious services.

No one expects any of them to work for free.

But Starlink was providing critical communications services for free and it's clear that everyone was happy to leave them holding the bag. Musk just wanted to get paid for services or for the war to end.

So it's not for attention. He's just trying to advance his interests in various ways.

So Julie Kelly is the major reporter on the right talking about J6 defendants.

Her articles are here, https://amgreatness.com/author/julie-kelly/

There's an in depth interview with her here, https://rumble.com/v1d0llb-sidebar-with-julie-kelly-and-day-3-bannon-trial-recap-viva-and-barnes-live.html

You might want to jump to about 20 mins in.

Getting specific detailed information together is going to take some time.

There's a website dedicated to collecting info, https://americangulag.org/

Has that been happening?

I'm just guessing.

You've just described the cybermats from Doctor Who.

There are some distinct cultural traits with the English, French, and Germans that southern Italians don't share.

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

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

Very loosely, under Manorialism a couple could get a chunk of farmland to work by presenting themselves to the lord as honest, hardworking, and not a source of trouble. It lead to more atomic family structures and smaller families.

It replaced a clan centric system, where individuals had to preserve the honour and reputation of their clan. Tolerating an insult could lead outsiders to think that your clan would tolerate injuries. So it was critical that everyone understood that they should not mess with your clan.

For instance the Scotch-Irish were famous for feuds like the Hatfields & McCoys.

There's also a zero-sum aspect to altruism where the more you care about your extended relatives the less you care about your unrelated neighbours.

So for a traditional resident of small town America it's expected that they would help their old school friends and neighbours before their second cousins.

That's not going to be the case for more clannish societies.

There's no good name for "within Hajnal" societies but it's generally what people are thinking.

"the government shouldn't come between me and my patients"

"unless I want to prescribe Ivermectin or HCQ"

Less than you think. Doctors are supposed to be able to prescribe approved drugs for off label uses. Excluding drugs scheduled under the Controlled Substances Act of course.

Pharmacies refusing to fill prescriptions for Ivermectin and HCQ was really unprecedented.

The FDA is only supposed to have labeling power, it's not supposed to be able to micromanage treatment.

I think this was the Freakonomics guy, but there was someone who as a grad student who had to go to low income housing an get answers to a survey.

One of the questions was something along the lines of

How do you feel about being poor and black?

a) Very good

b) Good

c) Uncertain

d) Bad

e) Very bad

Of course the most common answer was

f) Fuck you.

This is actually a case where a fan project is the probably the best bet.

There are some unique issues. Different elements update at different frame rates. Also they will scroll at full frame rate while animating at a lower one.

But there's not enough commercial or academic interest to pump money into research.

Fans and animation enthusiasts can put together great training sets on their own. There are enough nerdy types to play around with models.

Hopefully the links work for you all. Sometimes automatic redirect to international sites can break things.

I've always been interested in maps that show how government policies affect development.

Northern Ontario has some interesting cases because of the "little clay belt" or more ambitiously "the great clay belt", a strip of fertile land that departs from the thin acidic soil that is found in most of Northern Ontario.

Circled here: https://imgur.com/a/Du5LqQi

Apologies for the low quality, the image also seems to be a failure case for chroma subsampling. original map link

The clay belt crosses over the Ontario / Quebec border. The Ontario side used traditional farm lot shapes from the UK. The Quebec side used French farm lot shapes. The French style uses thinner strips.

It's highly visible on this map.

https://goo.gl/maps/Bd6UYrYgoAT5VZQJ7

Looking a bit farther north, here's lake Abitibi. The farm development stops hard on the provincial border.

https://goo.gl/maps/qKvt1XKn7irr8zw89

That's the direct result of federal policy. Just to the east, Timmins had extensive gold mines. The Quebec side did not. So the government suppressed farming on the Ontario side.

As a little bonus, a folk singer visited the area (actually little lake Abitibi, a bit to the northwest of lake Abitibi) and was inspired to write a song about it.

About the rustic beauty? About the unspoiled nature? No. About the biting insects.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=f389hIxZAOc

Sorry, yes to the West.

I don't have detailed information about the reasons... these decisions were made over 50 years ago.

But my understanding is it's a few different things. There were more trade barriers between provinces at the time. Even now trade between provinces in Canada ends up messier than trade between states in the US.

I think that Quebec farmers output would have needed to have been double inspected -- once by Ontario authorities, once by Quebec authorities. This would have put them at a disadvantage relative to Ontario farmers for Timmins which would have been the primary market in the region. That would have led to Quebec side farmers being poorer and resenting Quebec provincial authorities. Which would have been politically problematic.

Steve Sailer wrote a race FAQ back in 2014 2007 that holds up well: https://archive.ph/28BSp

tl;dr: Trying to talk about race in terms of traits fails, but that's because race is about ancestry.

Politcio has started off their election day coverage with a tweet that's enraging Republicans....

The 2020 presidential election was rife with allegations of voting machine hacks that were later debunked.

Yet there are real risks that hackers could tunnel into voting equipment and other election infrastructure to try to undermine Tuesdayโ€™s vote.

https://twitter.com/politico/status/1589568452699820032

The flip from "election deniers" to "legitimately and patriotically questioning the election" is going to be fun to watch and compare.

There's a famous story where the KGB had two agents who were stewardesses sleep with Indonesian President Achmed Sukarno. They recorded it.

The Russian ambassador got a meeting and told him they had it all on tape.

He immediately asked for a copy because none of his friends believed him.

In the US the structure is a little different. They don't seem to use explicit threats, instead they remove people for whatever reason.

Generally they seem to send someone to demand blackmail money, then use the blackmail payments to allow the FBI to open an investigation. It's a lot easier than trying to prove the charges.

An example in the US is Dennis Hastert. He was the US Speaker of the House (R). He was previously a high school teacher and was the coach of the wrestling team. He molested 14 yr old boys in that role.

Realistically a lot of people must have suspected. He was famous for dating 18-19 yr old men in DC. Combine that with "former gym coach" and people have questions.

Someone demanded money, he paid, the FBI investigated him under "structuring" laws. He had to resign.

The Matt Gaetz allegations follow the same pattern. Stephen Alford tried to shake him down for money, but Gaetz went to the FBI instead of paying. The agents out to get him haven't been able to make a case, and it looks like it'll fizzle out.