The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
No bio...
User ID: 174
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1d ago
My read is that they literally just need to fill in that table that I mentioned on page 32. That's not a lot of reams.
I don't think the "detail" required is going to fit in that table. So it's going to be a reference to some much longer document which explains each item, in language understandable to regulators. And then all this will have to be reviewed by a lawyer specializing in UK regulations. And every time a change is made to the device, the document will have to be audited to ensure there's still compliance.
Of course just this one document isn't going to do much, aside from make new IoT devices less available in the UK and other countries adopting it as mandatory. The more regulation in more countries, the more the works get gummed up.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1mo ago
Now that we have vacuum cleaners, washing machines, and microwaves, what need for men to marry at all? They can just do those five minute tasks in between coming home from their Real Jobs and settling down to have fun with online porn, online gaming, and ordering drugs and booze online.
This, but unironically. Especially since men's standards on those tasks tends to be considerably lower than women's.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
4mo ago
It's a dead horse. The idea that poverty in and of itself causes crime (rather than crime causing poverty, or people who suck being poor criminals) doesn't have much support at all, but it's one of the axioms of modern social democracy (gotta tax the rich to give more to the poor so the poor don't revolt, after all) and also progessivism, so it's unchallengeable in practice.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11mo ago
If the failures are in their face enough, they may oppose that particular policy temporarily. But they will draw no other conclusions about other policies based on the same premise. And, as soon as those failures are not in their face any more, they'll go right back to supporting the failed policies until they fail blatantly and obviously again.
The catchphrase to remember: "The worst thing about this incident is it makes it seem like the right has a point". Because the idea the right might actually have a point is anathema.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
5mo ago
This seems like picking the criterion to suit the conclusion. Was there some prior general rule that "work" was something you'd support if your family did it? So if a family member sold medical equipment or industrial mining equipment, you'd buy it?
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1yr ago
No, it hurts Musk's credibility. The NYTs credibility is unassailable.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1yr ago
The "vision" makes no allowances for reality.
How about radical environmentalism? Here, I think Thiel is envisioning some sort of mashup of degrowth ideology and over-regulated Eurosclerosis. But when it comes to the major environmental threat we face — climate change — the solution will be the opposite of degrowth. The price of renewable technologies (solar, wind, batteries, and electrolyzers) has come down so far, so fast, that decarbonizing our economy will actually lead to increased profits, increased growth, and abundant energy.
Meanwhile, in Europe and California, they're actually doing the degrowth thing. Shut down the power plants, ban fossil fuel use. Increased profits, increased growth, and abundant energy? No, recession and shortages
Today, however, this attempt at broadening the core American polity has been hotly contested — Hamilton is hated by conservatives, Lizzo’s flute-playing has ignited a culture-war debate, and the 1619 Project is of course wildly controversial. And these divisions have been exploited adroitly by our illiberal enemies, as when Vladimir Putin cynically accuses America of racist colonialism while simultaneously railing against trans people and atheists.
You see? When conservatives oppose the 1619 Project, they're helping Putin.
These urbanists don’t want to turn the whole world into Manhattan, or even Amsterdam. Instead, their visions are of somewhat-built-up suburbs that offer more transit options (trains, buses, e-bikes), are more environmentally friendly, and combine multi-family housing with single-family housing. The person I know who has done the best job of drawing pictures of what this might look like is the architect and artist Alfred Twu:
Ah, yes, their neighborhoods are wonderful visions which offer all thing to all people (except nasty car drivers). But that's all they are, visions. And the nasty car drivers stubbornly refuse to go away.
But now we’re adding a third type, which may be the best of all: densified green suburbs.
And the only qualities they lack is that of existence and possibility. Yes, you can find architects and artists to draw a Utopian vision. But just because you can draw it doesn't mean you can build it.
I believe the answer to all of these can be, and should be, “yes”. But so far the Abundance Agenda is still just a talking point and a collection of op-eds, while no one is really presenting a coherent future vision of either good jobs or entrepreneurship.
To its credit, the "Abundance Agenda" link in the original mentions the National Environmental Policy Act and other regulations. Noah does not; he is too busy blaming conservatives for not getting with the program. He's willing to say empty words in favor of free enterprise, but not to acknowledge that his "liberal democratic future" is in conflict with itself. And it won't be the "Abundance Agenda" that wins.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1d ago
If it's really so easy there won't be any problems. But I'm pretty sure, given the absolute glee expressed in your original post, you know it isn't.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
4mo ago
The mainstream left is generally sympathetic to Cuba ("Look how great their health care is, shame on the US for not having single payer") and was sympathetic to the Sandinistas (if only because Reagan opposed them).
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1yr ago
So, suppose the Biden Justice Department prosecutes. And the case is tried in DC, where the chances of getting a jury of 12 Democratic partisans is "better than average". And so they convict him on all counts. I'd say chances of a real insurrection before 2024 rise to over 10% in that case, and prospect of convincing any Trump supporter that the government (present or future) is legitimate drops to very close to zero. I don't think the republic can survive it without violence, whether immediate or in a somewhat longer term. Even a 2024 Desantis win wouldn't calm things down, unless Desantis took clear retribution (and then you have to worry about the OTHER half of the country).
Criminal prosecution of Trump on obviously political charges is entirely insane.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1d ago
Your original post expresses considerable contempt for "tech folks" and demonstrates absolute joy for us having regulation "dropped" on us "in a much stronger way that you really won't like." This really doesn't fit with an idea that you think the regulations will be anything like easy or simple to follow -- rather, you actually think they will be difficult and painful to follow and are joyfully anticipating the pain it will cause.
Yeah, regulation sucks. It's terrible that in the "real" engineering professions, you need a minimum 10 years of experience before you're allowed to do anything more than turn the crank on well-tested models to determine if some very slight variation of an existing thing meets all the requirements, and then fill in all the boxes on the paperwork to maintain traceability. Doing that has high costs; applying those costs to the software industry as a whole will cause it to stagnate.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11mo ago
Applying it to the Culture War, there's the argument I've made for a long time here that the Constitution is dead, or that it is ink and paper, or that it is whatever five justices say it is.
The reasoning is true, but the problem with accepting it is it removes all legitimacy from government. If e.g. the constitution and the justices say I can carry a gun, and the real power says I can't, then for what reason should I not violate every single one of the state's edicts provided I can get away with it? Where does the state's legitimacy derive? Lysander Spooner's answer (it doesn't) seems to be the only one which makes sense.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
9mo ago
Basically no one who isn't severely mentally ill and/or addicted to hard drugs ends up homeless long-term. It's not like the majority, or even a significant minority, of men are living on the knife's edge of homelessness.
Any man without a greatly above average social network is one bad tax mistake away from homelessness.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
11mo ago
A second degree manslaughter conviction is not that bad. only max 15 years for killing someone
Only. Only 15 years and a normal-life-ending felony record, for restraining a violent drug-addled mentally-ill person who the government refused to do anything about. If that's what you call "not that bad", what IS "that bad"? Crucifixion?
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
6mo ago
In modern times, anti-Zionism has always been some flavor of anti-Semitism. At the least it's "let's end the nation of Israel and physically remove the Jews to somewhere else", at the most it's ordinary universal anti-Semitism that someone is playing search-and-replace games with.
As for the colleges, it appears this time people on the left are finding out that "it's just a few kids on college campuses" is not really reassuring in the slightest. As when the conservative-leaning normies found out, it's likely too late for them.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10mo ago
The weird thing is that, perhaps unlike Lawrence v. Texas, there were plenty of real cases in the system. The original Masterpiece Cakeshop was such a case, and there have been several others (including more against Masterpiece Cakeshop) since. That it is this case -- one where all parties agree that the harm was merely expected, not actual -- which made it to the Supreme Court for a decision on the merits strikes me as the Supreme Court (or rather, the conservative majority) wanting to make a statement without any particulars to cloud things up.
And of the recent decisions, this is likely to be the only one with any effect. Harvard has already all but announced it'll use Roberts's talisman to get around the affirmative action decision. Biden has already announced he's going to work around the student loan decision AND smack "defect" as hard as he can on the deal which ended the payment moratorium. But this one doesn't provide easy outs and lower courts do accept the First Amendment as something to consider.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10mo ago
the decision leaves open the ability for universities to consider how an applicant's race affected their life "concretely tied to a quality of character or unique ability that the particular applicant can contribute to the university".
Which is a loophole you can drive the whole edifice through. Thanks for nothing, Roberts.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1yr ago
You can argue the label if you like, but "person who believes in meaningful racial differences in intelligence, and thinks it's a good idea to implement racial discrimination on this basis"
I don't think that describes the ordinary HBD type, though it does describe some of the louder ones. The ordinary HBD type believes in meaningful racial differences in intelligence and thinks it's a bad idea to implement racial discrimination to correct for this.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
7mo ago
The entire art world, root and branch, all the institutions and nearly all the artists, is left wing. There's nothing on the right to subsidize.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
23hr ago
It can be easy and simple to follow, but incredibly grating to the personality of "artists". They don't like coloring inside the lines, even if it's easy and simple to follow.
If it's that grating, it's not easy even if it is simple. The word for such a thing is common: "tedious".
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
3mo ago
Our idea of withholding personal justice is predicated on the faith that our victimhood will be satisfied by a higher civil power.
And this points to a major flaw in all social contract theories. There's no remedy within the system for breach on the part of society. Self help of the sort you describe is verboten. The sole judge of cases under the contract is society's representative (called "government").
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
8mo ago
Sure. But it might be what the constitution requires, if they authors are right on this. Keep in mind also that the constitution is "the supreme law of the land."
In practice the Constitution is what the Robed 9 say it is. Three of them were appointed by Trump, and three more aren't going to buy this one either. Not even John Roberts. That a person can be disqualified from the office of President because their political opponents can get one judge, with no trial, to say that person committed rebellion is not going to fly. Hey, I know -- instead of impeaching Joe Biden over Hunter, the Republicans can find a judge to declare the Iran deal to be giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, and bam he's out of office. Of course Democrats know Republicans are unwilling to try brazenly corrupt maneuvers like that, which is why the Democrats don't worry about the shoe is being on the other foot, but it's at least as supportable as any case against Trump.
Without a conviction, and one that’s specifically mentioned in the constitution as disqualification for office, they’d have a very strong case.
This is another basis for disqualification from office.
It is not. The Supreme Court has ruled in past cases that states may not add qualifications for the offices of President and Vice President. And the Constitution does not state that those convicted of crimes (state or Federal) may not stand for those offices.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
10mo ago
One side of the court is applying legal reasoning to the facts to reach their decision. The other side is picking a winner and tailoring their legal reasoning to reach it. You decide which side is which.
The_Nybbler
Does not have a yacht
1yr ago
It isn't. A marketing executive being fired for an atrociously bad marketing campaign is not cancellation.
The Supreme Court, and conservatives in general, do not want people to have gun rights. They want to make an abstract legal point about the Constitution, but they'd be horrified if it had any practical effect. "Sure, you have the right to keep and bear arms. But what makes you think that means you can carry a GUN?"
More options
Context Copy link