cjet79
Anarcho Capitalist on moral grounds
Libertarian Minarchist on economic grounds
User ID: 124
cjet79
6mo ago
Since when was trolling supposed to have a punchline? The point of trolling is to make people upset.
Faking social cred is an easy way to make people upset.
Imagine a famous person claiming to know a language really well. They then "prove" it by clearly reading a script and making some basic pronunciation errors. They deny any attempts for native speakers to have a conversation with them. The community of those language speakers would probably end up really upset with that famous person. Other people would mostly just feel confused "seemed like they were speaking the language fine, why would they fake it?"
People seem to forget that Elon is sometimes entertained by people being pissed off at him.
If you have never felt the desire to troll on the Internet then you are a better person than me. He just takes it to a new level with a billionaire's regard for cash and reputation.
cjet79
6mo ago
Yeah this never seemed like anything other than trolling on Musk's part. I didn't read the original tweets where he showed off his gaming level, but it seemed obviously ridiculous. Of course he is not one of the best players in a world at a game that takes dozens or hundreds of hours of play to reach that level.
cjet79
6mo ago
I think there is some sort of functionality for that. But switching IPs is relatively easy in this day and age.
cjet79
6mo ago
3 more posts, all on separate accounts. We really can't figure out how this is supposed to work.
cjet79
6mo ago
Reading glasses? If yes, then the prescriptions are easy enough to find cheaply and in bulk. My parents typically order like a 5 pack of them and just sprinkle them around the house.
If lasik is at all an option do it. I only wish there were more thousand dollar procedures out there that could enhance my body.
cjet79
6mo ago
Separate but closely related question, does anyone have ideas for dealing with a persistent spam account?
cjet79
6mo ago
They are usually blindfolded I think. But firing squad is also how I'd choose to go. Bullet to the brain seems like a quick and painless way to go. Most rifle ammunition is also supersonic, so you wouldn't even hear the shot. It also seems more dignified in a weird way. Its not laying down to go to sleep, its not sitting in a fancy looking chair. Instead it is standing until you are dead and then crumpling into a lifeless heap.
cjet79
6mo ago
Depends on when you think Trump knew about what was happening.
- He pre-planned it. Then ya doesn't stop him, but you've also already assumed his guilt. So who even cares if he called it off.
- He knew it immediately. Not sure what mechanism you propose for him knowing. It wasn't seeable, and if he is in the middle of a speech no one is seen actively interrupting him to tell him.
- He found out later. This seems to be the actual case. What and when he found out could easily impact his outgoing message.
cjet79
6mo ago
Castro probably has 5th cousins or something in Florida. Genetic testing can pick up on relatives that close
Two other options:
Artillery and rockets.
I can't tell if you are being sarcastic, but yes tens of billions is cheap when carbon emissions reductions are measured in tens of trillions of dollars
Edit: rereading, it doesn't seem like sarcasm. I do think the estimates are fair. The cost of carbon supression and sequestration is also an estimate. And we are ultimately comparing different climate change proposals.
The costs of global warming have been much debated over, but IPCC estimates of damages overlap with solutions like "do nothing and let economic growth solve the problem".
Everything is in orders of magnitude for these comparisons.
cjet79
6mo ago
I really enjoyed listening to the elder scrolls lore podcast
https://youtube.com/@imperialknowledge?si=qfNilNJUaUAtsjQn
It's not as much of a watching thing.
For truly mindless I go for wood spinning and epoxy pours.
cjet79
6mo ago
Wikipedia article on the topic seems fine. A while back there was a big back and forth between Bryan Caplan and some others on this topic. I've rarely seen anyone question that this is one of the cheapest methods. Usually the complaints are along the lines of "side effects"
cjet79
6mo ago
This is not twitter/X, we are not looking for quick hot takes that dunk on the people you don't like. This is not a good top level post.
Add more context and add more of your personal interpretation.
cjet79
6mo ago
There is some magic that occurs in debt collection. You can go through more and more layers additional sketchiness and eventually they just call it taxation.
A debt that is owed to "society" because you were born here. Services were sometimes rendered before you were born, and the debt is still being paid off. You get voice in what services are offered via voting, but if you don't vote you still owe money. And a candidate can lie about what they'll charge you to get your vote and suffer no consequences.
Any attempt to make these comparisons through a metaphor just make it sound like you are talking about a criminal syndicate.
And in case you didn't feel like you were taking crazy pills a majority of people think that this is a better and more fair way to pay for medicine.
cjet79
6mo ago
Not sure how much you read or watched in terms of advice, but some of the things I picked up online definitely helped my enjoyment of the game. I was also playing with another mottizen and it helped that we had some different preferences and playstyles.
- Vulcanus - this was also my favorite planet. It's where I ended doing a lot of the quality stuff. It was easy enough to just make giant quality recyclers for getting legendary base metals. I love the ability to sprawl.
- Fulgora - this is the drone planet. Whatever kovarex previously said about drones, someone else clearly got to him and convinced him to make a planet that is perfect for drones. Drone malls are the way to go here. Or just dumping things into the logistics network. By end game we had gone through something like 20 million scrap (before counting productivity mining bonuses).
- Gleba - the secret here is that you just don't need many buildings period. All the recipes are so damn efficient and productive. I ended up building self sufficient tile blueprints, they'd take in just a few inputs and then produce what was needed and burn all excess biowaste. I thought I'd then need to replicate these tiles a bunch, but when I was done I realized I only needed like three of the tiles for base resources. This is also a planet that benefits from drones, and power is basically free once you unlock the burners.
- Aquilo was tough. Tiling builds that connected was the right approach here. Efficiency and productivity modules were very useful. There are some recipes on aquilo that you can burn the end results, it's important to just have them on a loop and things will run themselves. I never needed a ton of space or output on this planet. I was almost done with the game when I tapped a second oil field.
- Space - was actually the second most fun for me. I just had to embrace tossing excess crap overboard as a way to balance things. Getting used to the way space logistics worked was a little annoying, but once I had it figured out it was pretty smooth.
cjet79
6mo ago
Lava planet is needed for artillery, so I always considered that the first stop before improving the Nauvis base. That and the smelters with 50% bonus to productivity. Less need to expand, but also the ability to expand and still keep the base safe.
cjet79
6mo ago
One disagreement I'm having with both sides in this debate is how they conceive of the labor market. The market is fixed from an individual perspective in the short-term, but flexible at the market level and in the longterm, and policy makers should keep the latter things in mind. But our supposed policy makers are only thinking and speaking from an individual perspective.
@Rov_Scam has a good summary below that points out that the disagreement is partly around a management vs employee understanding.
From the short term perspective of both an employer and an employee the labor market is mostly fixed. There are a set number of roles that need to be filled and a set number of jobs that can be found.
The problem is that in the long term the labor market is absolutely not fixed. It is very flexible. Lots of personal money and well-being, and lots of corporate money is on the line to eke as much efficiency out of the labor market as possible.
If conditions change way too quickly (like they often do when the Fed YoYos its monetary policy, or when you have big external shocks like covid) there is going to be a lot of pain and suffering in the transition. Workers are likely to suffer the brunt of this pain. It simply takes longer to train and reskill then it takes to fire someone that no longer makes monetary sense for the business. There are levers that the federal government has to lessen those burdens. They could make training expenses tax deductible. They could lower employer contributions to social security during economic shocks (though this would require the discipline to lower them once again during economic booms).
But stopping this transition from happening altogether is not a good thing. A flexible labor market is the goose that lays the golden egg in America. If you want a Western world economy with low labor market flexibility then Europe is the go to example. And I think a few decades ago when the split really became apparent and obvious it looked way better to live in Europe. But now, after a percentage point or two of higher growth in the US has had its time to work the magic, the European bargain doesn't look that great. They are about 20% poorer than the US on a per capita basis, and the labor problems became severe enough that they had to start importing large number of migrants to do the shit work. Europe raised a welfare loving underclass, and they got it good and hard. Their migrant crisis is made far worse by the fact that portions of their economy would be collapsing if not for that immigration.
Work vs Ceremony
American society, for better or worse, tends to intermix what a "job" is supposed to be. There are two definitions:
- A job is work to be done. Getting the work done provides something valuable to people. Its valuable enough to other people, that they will pay you money to do it. Pay is determined by the work done.
- A job is a ceremonial position designating your social status in society. It is to be rewarded to good people, or people you like. Yes there are some activities associated with the job that must be done by the job holder, but they aren't super important. Pay is determined by the social importance of the position, or people holding the position.
One of the major complaints about DEI in the workplace is that it turns every job into a ceremonial position, and that is just not a sustainable practice for a profit oriented company. Nearly all government jobs are ceremonial positions. Notice that all nearly all requests that teachers, firefighters, police officers, etc get paid more is because they do important things, and that we shouldn't let person doing important thing be poor. It is rarely suggested that these positions should get paid more, because they will do more work.
If you get deep enough in the bowels of the federal government and its myriad of agencies, you'll realize just about all of those jobs are ceremonial, and they contract out when actual work needs to get done. Which is why there is an absolute army of federal contractors and federal contracting businesses. It is very common for the federal government to attach ceremonial job type requirements to these contracts. They want veterans, women, or minority owned businesses to serve the contracts.
I think the "job as a ceremonial position" is a toxic idea for an individual to hold. It stagnates your skills, and makes you focus not on what you are adding to the world and to the economy, but on your personal characteristics that are often immutable.
cjet79
6mo ago
This is totally on point however, figuring this out is how I stopped getting banned all the time.
Which user were you when you got banned? Cuz it wasn't this one.
cjet79
6mo ago
I mean it's a bit discordant.
It's like hearing
"The barbarians are in the gates, the Muslims, Pakistanis, and Indians are part of a gross rape ideology and we've let them in the country. They are of course supported by the worst group of all, the Scottish Protestants."
It stops sounding like a coherent set of problems, and more like just someone angry and ranting about all the people they don't like. As a piece of rhetoric it's bad because it makes whatever legitimate issues you have with the first set of groups sound less convincing.
I don't see why it's not trolling. And to your second paragraph, yes. I'm not an Elon fanboy, he seems like a clearly flawed individual. The take I've seen that best explains him is that he has been taking lots of testosterone.
More options
Context Copy link