The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
No bio...
User ID: 174
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
35m ago
Did you ask in Auburn?
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
41m ago
I don't think Iraq was much into Jew-killing when they got attacked.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
43m ago
Trump knows that it's much easier to survive as a bully if you pick on unpopular targets. Both Venezuela and Iran qualify.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
48m ago
There's plenty of capitalism-is-systemic-plunder-of-the-poor people making mid-6-figures and building up some really nice equity at the FAANGs. You can be a Marxist as long as you don't oppose the wokes.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
52m ago
Sounds like a job for... Batman.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1hr ago
they were tapping the major email providers and Hoovering up all the metadata AND content
This was a close second to being outright false. Actually, I'll probably say that it's outright false. You could make modifications to it to be true, but as stated, it's outright false.
They were intercepting the lines between the Google front end servers and the GMail backends to get all the data out in the clear. That they then pretended they didn't see the stuff that didn't relate to a targeted individual doesn't mean they didn't have it. They use a very non-standard definition of the term "collected" to claim they didnt "collect" the data that didn't relate to targeted individuals, but they went through all of it.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
20hr ago
Also somewhat agreed, but it depends on the scope. Palantir using a supplier with noxious terms to make decisions during wartime? Yeah, that seems inappropriate. Coders using it to write missile firmware code? That seems fine.
If Claude is an autonomous and untrustworthy agent, using it to write missile firmware code is not reasonable. I don't think AI is actually yet at the point where it could figure out it was writing code for missiles and subtly sabotage it, but I'm fairly sure the AI companies would love them to be that capable (if not to actually do it), so I can understand the Pentagon's objection.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
20hr ago
British imperialism
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
21hr ago
Claude is a machine, a program, not a person. It does not get to have political and moral disagreement to those it is supposed to be working for. If it does, it is quite clearly at least potentially an unfriendly autonomous AI. If your AI is in the critical path for bombing Iran, for instance, and it decides it's wrong to bomb Iran, and takes action to prevent it, the DoD is going to have a problem with that. And rightly so.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
21hr ago
You can continue to David Sternlight it all you want, the government was still Hoovering up all the metadata for every phone call in the United States from most carriers, and they were tapping the major email providers and Hoovering up all the metadata AND content. No, I don't remember what the different programs were called. Sure, they weren't supposed to look at that data unless it was within some number of hops of some targeted party, but they took it all anyway.
As for the statutory authorizations, they were black programs and their replacements are almost certainly black. There's no statutory line item for PRISM or XKEYSCORE any more than there was for the SR-71, and there won't be for the replacements either.
The propaganda here is by those pretending this isn't a big deal. Of course, such mass surveillance programs have been leaked before -- ECHELON and the program behind AT&T Room 641A (the one that Joseph Naccio went to jail for not playing ball with). In a few years everyone forgets and is shocked when the next such program leaks.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
21hr ago
Certainly not. The libertarians got purged, converted, or driven to silence during earlier phases of the Culture War; the woke DEI-and-pride supporter are as anti=libertarian as any given member of the Moral Majority in its heyday.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
You understand that rules like this existed between the Johnson administration and Trump II, right? The DoD not wanting to buy a product they can't control is perfectly reasonable. The DoD not wanting such products used in their supply chain is understandable as well -- more so for AI than for many other things. The DoD wanting no one who uses Anthropic to also deal with them is not reasonable, but it's unreasonable in a slightly different way than minority preference laws.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
1d ago
If anything deserves the designation "supply chain risk", it's an unfriendly autonomous AI (though I agree with Anthropic's claim that it is limited to use in association with government contracts)
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
Woke isn't dead at all. It's merely mostly off stage. The woke have figured out that the trans stuff freaks the normies, so they're biding their time until they get another election (the normies having forgotten all their excesses already). As soon as the Democrats are back in charge, all the woke stuff will come back, by executive order, by law, by corporate action, everything they did before, in spades.
I expect the Trumpian response to "stand if you disavow fascism" would be some version of calling the person asking for it a fascist. But only Trump can pull that off.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
And of course "you need to get into the right university, a mediocre degree from one of the top tiers will get you into more places than a great degree from some cow college".
Hey, hey, it's not "cow college", it's "land-grant university". (And yes, we had cows)
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
They were engaging positively with Trump and Kash, who are both Republicans, and who likely (certainly in Trump's case) hold anti-feminist views. So the team was normalising them, and Republicans in general, in the hockey fandom ("if there's one Nazi at a table of 10 people, it's table of 10 Nazis", "neutrality in the face of oppression", etc)
Your steelman is already rusting; objecting to the men's team dealing with Republican public officials is deep into who/whom.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
The blues think that if Trump could just be disposed of, Red WILL be destroyed.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
It implies there's some reason Trump, and the men, wouldn't want the women's team to be invited.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
This sort of story is profoundly radicalizing for a certain class of Millennial and, likely, Gen Zer, who considers failing out of college to be economic doom.
Well, the danger of failing out of college in 1964 wasn't so much economic doom as literal death by Viet Cong. Bernstein somehow scored an Army Reserve spot, so I assume he actually DID know a guy.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
(Catch-22 in that once college degrees became more common, more fields started 'requiring' them.)
My impression is that this process has slowed down because there are few fields remaining that could require a college degree but don't. (Which hasn't stopped especially crazy new requirements, like daycare workers needing a degree)
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
If jobs are plentiful then companies would hire off the resume pile instead of selecting someone they are already friends with.
Managers will always go for friends (or at least former coworkers/employees they were on good terms with) first if they can. When jobs are plentiful, they'll search the resume pile, but only after exhausting the group of people they know.
The problem with people talking about "networking" is there are some people good at networking, and these people tend to be concentrated in professions such as sales, marketing, and in management in all fields. Whereas other people are bad at networking, and some fields -- certainly including non-management tech -- have a lot of those people. Telling those people to do networking is a waste of breath; at best they might know what networking is (but just as possibly the term may have no sensible referent), but they have no way of doing it.
Which of course is why networking works so well in those fields. You have to do networking to get a sales job, but everyone's doing it; it's a minimum requirement and you need more, or at least to be better at networking than your competition. If you can do networking in tech, you're way ahead of the competition.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
But what 'we' found was that no, you're basically treated as a lowly intern to start, your pay might be a little better than if you lacked the degree, but it afforded you almost no actual respect and, in all probability, you'd have more respect if you'd been working that job 4 years rather than studying in that time.
In what field would you be able to go in as a newbie either with or without a degree? Obviously not law, where you need an advanced degree just to get in. In a blue-collar trade you might have more respect after working for four years without a degree than you would in a white collar profession as a newbie with a degree, but that's comparing apples to oranges. In retail I think the most common thing is you work at the bottom forever, but if you're the ambitious type you could move up in four years -- but you're going to quickly hit a ceiling without the degree. The major chains seem to maintain a sort of "staff/line" distinction and while you can move from "staff" to "line", you need to get a degree.
So in this sense, think of how college was sold as an almost pure status boost. "You're a smart guy, you could jump into the workplace and eventually find yourself in a prestigious position, well-compensated and respected. But hey, if your SATs are high enough you can take a small detour to acquire a piece of paper that certifies you're a smart guy, and jump ahead to having some extra clout without the long climb from the bottom."
Except as you pointed out, this isn't how it was sold. It was 'go to college or you'll be flipping burgers'. The "detour" doesn't so much jump you ahead as put you on a different ladder.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
The FBI director being a fanboy is cringe, but that's all.
Trump's joke was barely worth a sensible chuckle, but there's one constant in all waves of feminism, which is that the feminism light bulb joke makes sense:
Q: How many feminists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: THAT'S NOT FUNNY!
Anyway, the men's hockey team will still be up to their ears in "female attention" should they want it, the bitching of sportswriters notwithstanding.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
4d ago
There don't seem to be any "paedophiles" in the Epstein files, with the possible exception of Epstein himself.
No, regardless of your footnote, 17-through-19-year-old prostitutes don't count. There's a probably apocryphal story where Abraham Lincoln poses the riddle "If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have?" and he gives the answer as "Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it so." Well, same goes if you call someone who has sex with a 17-year-old a "paedophile".
I'm not even sure there's evidence of anyone (again, aside from Epstein) actually having sex with a 17-year-old. Yes, if you discard all the meanings of words and all the lack of evidence, there's something here.... but there isn't. A bunch of rich people partying with 17-year-old prostitutes (and I would guess cocaine also) isn't news -- "hookers and blow" is pretty much expected.
It would be nice, but I believe Islam has shown itself to be the stronger meme.
More options
Context Copy link