@VoxelVexillologist's banner p

VoxelVexillologist

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Multidimensional Radical Centrist

1 follower   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 18:24:54 UTC

				

User ID: 64

VoxelVexillologist

πŸ‡ΊπŸ‡Έ Multidimensional Radical Centrist

1 follower   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 18:24:54 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 64

I've heard some anecdotes at times describing Manhattan positively this way. Sometimes Boston or SF, too. If you can afford rent downtown, some blue places can be like this. But for some reason in the nicer places the rent is really high...

You can reduce the number/duration of total car trips if you manage to densify the other infrastructure too: if your towering apartments are walking distance (within a block or two?) of the grocery store, bar, gym, or employer. Probably not to zero, but it'd help.

While Houston's lax (lacks?) zoning laws have arguably been successful at keeping the rent reasonable, it does get lots of criticism for its urban design and walkability. Amusingly, people do cite its (non-housing price) approach to homelessness as working better than most.

After the LeMond-Fignon battle there hasn't been a French winner of the TDF.

They didn't schedule the final stage as a time trial again until 2024, which I was honestly a bit surprised at.

Downtown courthouses often don't have good parking options, especially short-term. If you live (and maybe even work) in the 'burbs, when you have to show up downtown for one day, or maybe a week, the bus or train isn't a terrible option. For me, the most convenient option is to park at the office and take the bus directly downtown from there.

I could take the bus (directly!) to work, but it's 3x the time commitment as driving, and there isn't any shelter from sun/rain at the stops at either end. So I drive. On nice days I'll bike.

I haven't taken the bus literally anywhere else in the city I live in.

This might work, but I doubt stores that close together can match the selection of the one I have to drive five minutes to. It probably takes a minute or more just to walk across the store. Some of it is duplicative (multiple brands of milk), but you'd still lose selection pretty fast.

Great question!

This is a tic that makes me think LLM these days. Not necessarily accusing you of using one here, more commenting on the sad closing of the linguistic frontier as various phrasings become associated with "artificial" text.

barriers to entry which effectively exclude the lowest-quality providers(and lots of others, it needs to be acknowledged

The extent to which 20th century unions were also racial/ethnic spoils systems is, IMO, underappreciated for political reasons. Not saying it always worked that way, but there isn't a shortage of "and then they hired/imported (across state or sometimes country borders) minority scabs workers to break the strike" tales. But it's inconvenient to observe this because "union labor" and minority workers are supposed to be part of the same big tent.

Maybe people will start noticing more if union labor keeps swinging right.

I hear this a lot, and I can appreciate that it's probably true to an extent, but "milspec electronics" and "next gen process nodes" don't really overlap as much as you'd expect, as best as I can tell. I can imagine some things it matters for (radars and such), but I don't think process node differences within the last decade are really driving, say, artillery battles or even drones in Ukraine. Maybe in a few years we'll be talking about mostly-autonomous targeting systems with ML, but half of the impact of drones seems to have come from how they became commercially ubiquitous in ways that drove the price down into the "expendable" regime.

Generally I don't see this claim with listed categories of weapons systems, but maybe there is something I haven't thought of. What can you do at 3nm that you can't at, say, 65nm?

If unclear, my suggestion is that putting Jackson on the most popular bill issued by a bank of the United States is pretty close to pissing on his grave rhetorically. His vociferous opposition to the (second) Bank of the United States is well-documented. A choice quote of his (although the provenance is questionable, it's at least aligned in sentiment with official speeches):

Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!

Andrew Jackson belongs on US currency for irony's sake because he'd be dead set against the existence of the institution that prints it.

I'm pretty sure it is in reference to that meme.

It also highlights why some of Scott Alexander's takedowns of people are so damn effective and brutal. He will spend a lot of writing space saying many nice things about people that seem objectively bad. And then he will end by saying something slightly not nice about one person, and you come away thinking "damn that person must be the worst piece of shit ever".

Honestly, this also describes most of Singal's work, which is I suspect part of why he's so hated for, as far as I can tell, things like questioning small-n studies that have been embraced broadly with shockingly few published followups now that drastically more data should be available.

I wish we put this much effort into teaching everyone other equally important lessons.

Just curious, do you have any specific lessons in mind here? The idea is at least intriguing.

Somebody has to pick the crops and slaughter the chickens and thats a very reasonable principled exception.

Without really wanting to weigh in on whether this statement is true or not, it's at least possible to note that Congress in its wisdom created visa categories (H-2A, H-2B) for these sorts of jobs. Is it completely crazy to think "maybe we should actually use (or expand/modify as necessary) the existing visa program, rather than allow 'anything goes' under the table"?

Although there's probably an interesting tangent on using AI and robotics in slaughterhouses.

What if the Democrats spin up the "super ATF" who start kidnapping people who fuck up their gun paperwork into unmarked vans to be sent to Romania?

That's been tried before: in 1992 (admittedly under the elder Bush administration) Randy Weaver (not the best of characters, mind you) had an undercover informant request illegal shotgun modifications, then ATF agents shot his dog, shot his son in the back, and shot his unarmed wife who was holding a 10 month old baby.

And they followed this up a year later by, on a rather flimsy set of weapons allegations, (allegedly) lighting on fire and demolishing the Branch Davidian (David Koresh again not the best of characters) compound near Waco, killing 76, including 25 children.

The resulting backlash was complicated [1] (and also pretty terrible, but Weaver did win a civil suit and there were some later investigations of the Waco incident that weren't entirely supportive of the government side), but seemed to usher in a ceasefire in practice, with the gun folks (mostly) filling out all their paperwork and ATF not shooting up (too many) places (see the two Bundy standoffs in which they didn't go scorched earth). Although the two sides, as far as I can tell, don't really have tremendous fondness for each other still.

Fair, but the valence of "we're going to enforce the letter of federal law because the feds have chosen not to" hits differently than "we're going to willfully obstruct federal enforcement efforts". That's probably a bit charitable to Abbott there, but he could at least claim it was seen as an act of loyalty to federal law.

The big difference from the actual Civil War to me is a seeming lack of enthusiasm for fighting under a state flag. Despite a recent surge in state vexillology interest --- I like Utah's new flag --- I think governors aren't going to be able to command legions, leaving a pretty big gap for who would command anti-federal forces.

The only way I can even hypothetically see the states winning is if disagreement within federal forces causes them to not show up. I think that'd happen if they were ordered to drop bombs today, but I think that's beyond the pale for even the current administration.

This feels like the right take. "How do you do, fellow kids white dudes?"

For all the talk about "permission structures" as a joke, I think the Democrats lack such a permission structure among themselves to talk to men, especially white men, qua men. The idea of such an affinity group seems anathema to them --- although to be honest I have no desire to join such a group, and they're not completely wrong that such affinity groups have done, uh, some bad stuff in the last couple centuries. "White dudes" seems about the least threatening way to identify them, but nobody asked how they feel about the label.

It might be easier to turn down the volume of the affinity group messaging altogether, rather than grapple about how to accept perceived "majority" affinity groups, but that would be a pretty big course change for the party. But I'll note this plan also flatters my personal "post-racial society" sensibilities from growing up in the 80s and 90s. Ultimately it feels like they've put a lot of effort into advertising what they aren't, but that's a set they seem to think includes me.

I have seen a few ads out there recently that are clearly right-coded and anti-porn, usually treating it as a personal failing (addiction). I don't think there are that many "porn is a great thing, actually" advocates out there, and most that exist are probably left-of-center by a decent margin.

I could see the median male voter being both a consumer of the, uh, content, but also thinking it should be less accessible. Not high confidence in that, though.

Without directly encouraging it here, a concerted campaign by the right could probably severely undermine the (left) cultural cachet of Reddit and Bluesky purely by constantly juxtaposing the brand names with things the users endorse in words or (in)actions on such content from the moderators.

IIRC at least Parler and Gab were kicked out of both the Apple and Google app stores for what is demonstrably less "violent rhetoric" than is frequently seen posted on Bluesky (by public figures, no less) about Jesse Singal, plus whatever you can find about Charlie Kirk.

Which matters more, act or conviction?

Isn't this one of the classic post-Reformation Christian theological arguments? Whether faith alone is enough (common among Protestants), or whether good works are required in addition to faith (IIRC approximately the Catholic view), or as a pathway to faith. Or whether those works are an orthogonal separate good. Or maybe its just predestination all the way down (Calvinism).

But I am curious when OP's essay was written: Obama hasn't been president for a while, and I haven't heard the name Ben Bernake at all recently.

LISP programmers of the world unite!

Ideal answer would involve a PTZ self-resetting fuse

These at least used to have a failure mode where they failed short when abused often, and I've typically seen them paired with a real fuse that handles that case.