@sliders1234's banner p

sliders1234


				

				

				
2 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 19:00:22 UTC

				

User ID: 685

sliders1234


				
				
				

				
2 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 19:00:22 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 685

It probably is. The difference here is it would be people deciding to do it to themselves. It’s the Gattaca endgame

I thought you were going to advocate for UBI instead of school spending so that poor people get a better life instead of highly funded education etc that does nothing for them.

I find your talk about genetic engineering for intelligence to be basically a form of genocide. Genetic engineering like this wouldn’t be much different than sterilizing them and giving them a smarter baby. Their child I assume would still look like them but their child’s mind would be completely different than themselves. Granted survival of the fittest is basically natures way of genociding the less fit.

In a lot of ways I feel like being mentally different from ones children would far less be like them than if they were physically different. If you changed my child’s dna so they were physically Lebron James but everything that goes into the mind was me then I think I would connect with them more than if they looked like me but were mentally different. They would have some different experiences. Like I had 2 years where I was bullied heavily and I am going to guess that wouldn’t happen to them. Or getting cut from the basketball team.

I think you are overthinking it. A lot of it just feels like cars versus no cars to me. When I am in a city anything 10 min away is a walk but everything suburban is a drive.

I also think the food industry has optimized for taste and gotten really good at it and these things are readily available everywhere and an easy pleasure in rural areas.

I don’t think Wall-Street hirers those guys anymore. Maybe a Bill Gross or Gundlach but to be honest those guys spend probably more time think about small market structure edge to squeeze an extra 20 bps versus absolutely hammering the economic outlook right and getting 10 year up or down right.

The big macro funds are going to be thinking about a lot of other things too than getting the macro call right. The guys in those shops getting the economy right just isn’t that important when your levered and have risks limits on everything. Pays much better just figuring out a sentiment shift or a trigger for a price (like at etf entrance or some quant allocation that will happen).

Any macro interview is going to start with returns and Sharpe ratio stuff not whether your calls are right. Getting calls right is just too volatile.

One example I would use is when oil when -50 (and an extreme example) it only traded negative for like 90 minutes and the entire next day was positive entire day. Even if you knew the price next day and traded that you wouldn’t make money because is in between for those 90 minutes a nice security guard came to your desks and escorted you out. What happened is some Chinese banks were long some derivatives linked to that days oil close and blasted it negative (probably illegally) causing billions of losses on those banks. But if you had mapped out all the fundamentals and macro and absolutely nailed the value of a barrel of oil you would in fact not be rich.

The only place I think kind of sometimes takes a big macro swing (usually on bearish side) is Bridgewater but they overall haven’t had great performance but somehow are a marketing powerhouse.

Why does this remind me of a completely other unrelated bill during 9/11 that allows for student loan forgiveness basically referring to 9/11 related stuff but 20+ years later was used for student loan forgiveness on things not like 9/11.

I don’t even want to blame congress for this because I think writing laws is hard when you want them to do one thing specifically but have some flexibility so congress doesn’t need to write a new law every time $5k is spent.

Thing is I wasn’t that surprised they went down the Nazi path. Slightly surprised they ended up doing “he’s doing another 1/6 but this time we won’t know when in scare quotes”. In some ways he hasn’t been defamed and it says more about the writers because I already sort of assume they thing their is no difference between a masculine white male former marine and literally Hitler foot soldier planing 1/6 (which is more like 9/11 in their view). 1/6 is a bit of a larp from everybody both those who did it and those talking about it after.

I wander if after 9/11 in 2002 if every brown person literally had OBL on speed dial. Or if the other back then was represented less cartoonishly.

The hard thing which you are describing for a defamation case is how do you draw a legal definition for “substantially the same”. This episode fulfills that for me but I have no idea how you define. It’s a bit like the old definition of porn “I know it when I see it”.

They may have done crazier.

I did pick $500k because that is about the amount I would be fine with if I let CNN agree to call me a Nazi for a day. Not a runaway jury verdict and keeps the genre viable.

I’m upset not because I don’t view him as a criminal. But because I identify with him as literally me. If they made a fictional account of me a bland white male that I too would be depicted as a Nazi. I won’t deny what caught my eye. Atleast for me I actually do believe in HBD and sort of liked 1/6 and my online writings could show that so I guess it would be more exaggeration and a small basis in truth.

In addition to what was already said.

Elon Musks losts $50 billion to Delaware Chauncery ruling from a judge appointed by a Democrat. And he’s the worst behaving censor in charge of a social media company. And of course Donald Trump got $500 million in charged from a NYC court.

These are indirect and perhaps non-traceable but there are examples of punishment for not staying in the good graces of the political power.

This is somewhat like the “where is the fraud” in the 2020 election. And just citing the obvious expansion of mail-in voting.

Obvious counter he’s not a politician or celebrity.

I would assume they have lawyers and wouldn’t cross a line making them liable. But I think most people here would agree with my assumption the real Daniel Perry suffered reputational damage.

A NY jury this probably goes no where but a Texas jury a novel legal theory might work.

Well worded. I feel like real Daniel Perry suffered reputational harm. And he has real damages. Someone who watched the episode would assume real Daniel Perry has some Nazi ties. But he doesn’t. And he’s a private person and not a public person like a celebrity.

I don’t want to kill the entire genre as I feel it serves a public purpose. Ripped from the headlines gives people something to talk about and discuss current events. But the real Daniel Perry I think has real damages. I guess I feel like if you are doing ripped from the headlines but fictionalized it needs to be close to the real events or far from the real events.

Law and Order has made a ton of money. If we did fictional damages like Donald Trump gets and Perry got 300 million I would be against it. But if they paid out 500k with a press release he’s not a Nazi I feel like he would be whole.

I of course also don’t like as a white male my media portrayal is I am literally a Nazi but that’s a different story.

"The following story is fictional and does not depict any actual person or event."

Does placing a disclaimer before a show give you unlimited ability to then defame a person? Yes I am talking about Law and Order. And specifically the episode that aired last night “Facade”. Airing March 21, 2024.

The first 45 minutes or so fairly accurately portray the case of Daniel Perry who using a chokehold caused the death of Jordan Neely a homeless man who frightened passengers on a NYC subway.

Spoilers now so watch the episode or just read. The last 15 minutes show that he’s every leftist fantasy of what a white male really is. Turns out while doing the chokehold he said “blood and dirt” an obvious reference to Nazis and “blood and soil”. Furthermore the gym he goes to is ran by an undercover cop investigating white supremacists. He’s actually a full fledged Nazi collecting weapons to plan another very violent January 6. Non of this can be presented at trial because the white supremacists investigation is more important than convicting him at trial of murder.

Where am I going with this? This feels like defamation to me. There is no evidence that the real life Daniel Perry has any ties to actual Nazis.

I completely think art needs to have an ability to show real events. And I liked Law and Order back in the day. But there is a real life Daniel Perry and if I loosely followed the news I would 100% know the episode is referring to him. They followed the facts in the case accurately for 45 min. The last 15 min he is a terrorist Nazi. I would assume the last 15 min are referencing something in his background and he has some ties to real Nazis.

Without ruining the entire genre and making it impossible to do this feels like defamation to me. A midtwit would be under the impression it’s about him and he’s a real Nazi. But the real Daniel Perry is not a Nazi.

This leads to two questions for me. The lawyers can comment on the actual legal line here. The non-lawyers can discuss whether he’s damaged any differentially than if CNN just ran a bunch of made up stuff he was a Nazi. He’s a real private person and I think I can fairly say a lot of people would watch the episode and assume he has real Nazi ties.

There is one more element of art depicting reality. The FBI has instigated and put under covers in against normie Republicans and Pro-Life people on the grounds they are a national security threat but they probably aren’t in those cases full fledged terrorist.

If I were Daniel Perry I would try to sue. I feel like his reputation was damaged and he has real damages but not a lawyer to know the legal lines and I would assume NBC has lawyers but I still feel like he has a real reputational damage. Plus he’s going on trial and a juror who saw the episode would now think he has undisclosed nazi ties.

There is probably some who is the bad person thing here. In their fictional depictions from episodes 20 years ago I probably didn’t care when they added some negative stuff to a black character etc. But now that white people are bad I get upset when they add he was a Nazi about to commit 1/6 or 9/11 to their fictional portrayal of real events.

In summary his obvious fictional portrayal of his actions added a whole he’s a real Nazi plot line but they began the episode with a disclaimer it’s fictional.

Edit: I would be curious if anyone else watched the episode. Or if everyone is assuming I am appropriately representing the episode as they portrayed him as a “full-fledged nazi with a desire to kill black people” as accurate. And that exaggeration is expected now.

They reneged after a full intifada was started. That is how things work in peace processes your stop when the other side breaks promises.

At this point it would be perfectly fair for Israel to expel Palestinians completely. That is how these things work.

The Oslo Accords ended because of suicide bombings and the start of the Oslo Accord. Obviously Israel stop withdrawing when the bombing started. That was intentional dishonest (there was also a Jewish shooter).

Sorry you are just behaving in bad faith. When your very first paragraph leaves out very key details it’s not worth discussing things at all with you.

I meant the Palestinians as Nazis trying to kill ethnicities they don’t like to remove them from land.

80-100k Jew in Palestinian Mandate. They were both there but both in very low population.

I think it’s useful to put boundaries on things when people hyperventilate.

“Impoverish” feels to me like it’s doing that.

  1. They were doing nothing close to starvation level fertility decline

  2. They are likely doing as well as any other situated Arab group that isn’t an elite sitting on oil money. Better than many

  3. If Israel never existed I have extreme doubt they would have been wealthier than they were under current arrangements

  4. They are much poorer than they would be if they were Jew loving, eliminated any desire to harm Jews, and worked with the high HBD and foreign money Israel for economic development

The first paragraph is false, they have been offered numerous peace deals with self-rule. Turned them down. Everything you have said they want they have been offered.

You are really making it sound like they are just Nazis. Nazis too could have just had Germany but wanted other peoples land and more. Palestinians want Israel not to exists and remove them from the Arab world.

All the people now living in Israel and Palestine weren’t even there when all this started. It was mostly uninhabited land. In 1922 a total of 757k people live in Palestine Mandate of which 78% were Muslim. Nobody living there today can claim ownership on what was essentially abandon land.

Also it’s false that the rest of the Arab world hates them. SA sees them as a key ally in the development of the country and essential to their long term plan of not being just an oil state.

I want Leonardo DiCaprio’s gf, that doesn’t mean I get to kill him and kidnap her and lock her in my basement as a reasonable demand.

As long as Palestinians demand is the removal of Israel then Israel has a valid claim to fully evict Palestinians.

If that demand changes Palestinians have legal claims to reasonable divide of territory.

And you did a lot of bad whataboutism comparing Palestinians to other conflicts. The Palestinian claim to all of Israel is much more like the Russian claims to Ukraine that the people on those lands centuries ago were more like themselves and therefore it’s still their land.

Israel doesn’t have a mandate to kill Jew loving Palestinians. They would be forced to make peace immediately if Hamas rebranded to Jew loving Palestinians and the first step in that direction would be to release the hostages.

Palestinians have had very healthy birth rates and population has grown faster than Israel. It’s a very big stretch to say they are impoverished. Impoverished perhaps relative to Western Society. Not impoverished by their ethnic cohort in other nations.

If you take possession of Gazans then you are now seen as responsible for anything that goes wrong. If Hamas is in possession then they are responsible.

I also found this tweet interesting

White House National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan has a message for the 'Ceasefire Now' people and its 🔥🔥🔥

“One of the things that I have found somewhat absent from the [media] coverage is that what we are talking about in the first phase is women, elderly, and wounded civilians.

Those who would like to see a ceasefire in Gaza. A ceasefire is on the table today for six weeks to be built on into something more enduring if Hamas would simply release women, wounded, and elderly.“

https://twitter.com/avivaklompas/status/1767692156179726699?s=46&t=aQ6ajj220jubjU7-o3SuWQ

So when things are real this administration seems to know what a women is?

I believe it’s Hanania who has made comments that if you take a liberal woman and asks her beliefs on a host of woke topics she will answer correctly. But then make a comment about her weight and she will become upset and apparently all women aren’t beautiful, etc.

And for the record I 100% think women should get special treatment in times of war.

I had to look up Yass again to figure out why he was so involved in Tik-Tok being that I knew he was already rich from SIG. Turns out he has $7 billion from SIG but Tik-Tok is another $21 billion so I can see why he’s fighting for it.

I lean towards banning Tik-Tok but admittedly haven’t made up my mind.

I have an acquaintance who was sued by SIG when he left. I’ve read the lawsuit and it’s basically they put Nasdaq/SP500 on a tablet and used it trading on the floor. Sounds so basic now.

Need a trust fund kid in the group. I’ve also gained respect for Saudi political history and building a stable society in the Arab world. MBS has also been aggressive on reform from the day he started. He fills a rich kid spot but I also think he likely has some interesting ideas and strategies.

I thought about this but if I created my crew it would be something like Elon Musks, Michael Jordan, Milton Friedman, MBS, Milei. Visionary people with a lot of accomplishments.

You just go too far saying men would have to hate women.

A simple thought experiment for me is if I were the coolest guy in the world and anyone who I wanted to be my friend would gladly be my friend and I then I got to pick 5-10 people as my crew all the people I would choose would be male.

Now if I lowered the standards to those who would be my friend as I am now and not picking from my betters a few women would make the cut.

I love women and it’s far more than just wanting to Fuck.

If you made me gay or asexual I do not see any reason to ever talk to a women again. I can barely think of any women with any capability to be interesting. There are no female Elon Musks. No female econ writers I’ve ever read. The only fintwit personality I follow ended up being tran. Ruxandro Teslo is the only female writer I’ve found that has said interesting things. Jane Fraser is the only female executive I know of who seems to be talented. I feel like I’ve looked for smart females they are just very hard to find. When you remove the female energy and traits there just aren’t many doing anything.

I don’t believe I’m discriminating and setting a higher bar for female writers and thought leaders but it seems statistically significant of the two twitter “females” I found worth a follow on Twitter one ended up being a man.

The people you claim are saying “fuck black people” made their black neighbors the wealthiest black community in the world and regardless of race one of the most influential global cultural communities.

If that’s getting fucked sign me up for a good fucking.

You also seem to be overgeneralizing. And missing the dogs that don’t bark. Are they anti-Italian? Or have those people assimilated and function in society now so there is no issue? Are they anti-Asian? Anti-motorcycle Aficianados?