Opt-out
2hr ago
IMO I feel like age verification is a motte. I 100% support young people having limited internet. Especially now that access is in your pocket and isn’t the family computer with lack of privacy.
The issue with age-verification is the linkage to adults real identities and societies broader desire for political control through thought control. You can’t do the good thing (8 year olds not able to watch bukkake) without also making it very easy for society to do the bad thing (universal thought police).
This seems to be a universal issue with modern technology. Nuclear energy having bombs or Self-Driving enabling government to control your cars.
Opt-out
2d ago
Yes Status is more important than money. People will sacrifice a lot more for respect than money.
Re-instating Mrs. as a social norm for married or with kids does more for increasing the birth rate than sending checks.
Opt-out
2d ago
Sure. Exceptions that prove the rule on what works. Wal-Mart was essentially founded in 1969. Apple is 4x+ the value and it’s modern phone company business was essentially founded in Nov ‘2001 with the IPod(computer business was basically bankrupt).
Opt-out
2d ago
Honestly feels soft to me and a grifter. Isn’t a bug bounty just essentially an administrator? Who background sounds like someone good at politics.
But if your gift is “be good at politics” working within woke organizations then you are “extremely bad at politics” working with MAGA.
Opt-out
2d ago
Why are we claiming she’s a “proven expert”? I see nothing remarkable in her background. She went to a shitty college. And she did the thing that is a strong indicator of incompetence - filed a sex discrimination lawsuit.
Note: had to look up Wikipedia she went to a bad college. Yep 83% acceptance rate. 2 strong strikes against her.
Opt-out
2d ago
A lot less. And it’s not entirely a liquidity thing. Google was able to replace CEO’s. I think meta could probably replace Zuckerberg and people wouldn’t assume it changes company trajectory. Tesla/SpaceX value is like 75% Musks is smarter than everyone else and knows how to do innovation. It think based on the quality of Starlink as a platform that SpaceX is probably worth 500b without Musks. Tesla has a similar premium.
If an 80% holder of Pepsi stock decided to sell it would be a liquidity issue. And Pepsi stock isn’t going to crash if they change the CEO. SpaceX stock would crash 75% if he died but all his stock was in trust for all his kids that were banned from selling for 20 years.
All of the richest guys year “X” have similar issues evaluating as Musks. Pompey could just lose in battle and the new Emperor takes his assets etc.
Opt-out
2d ago
It depends what’s in the deal but pipeline construction should ramp up now. There were reasons to not do it before and let Iran have the close the Straight card because then they didn’t need the build nukes card. That seems over now.
Opt-out
2d ago
Internet = platform moat. Physical world largely = no moat so profits are temporary. Good investors do not invest in Elon style businesses they want to find firms that will develop effectively toll road monopolies that have safe profits.
Elon himself is a moat. You need to maintain a huge tech capability edge to maintain profits in the physical world.
Opt-out
3d ago
Basic terms I’m seeing is like 20-25B in released frozen assets. On net I feel like this is a win for US. I think we degraded enough military etc to make it worthwhile.
Opt-out
3d ago
Usually we pray after a game. Say some words to Our Mother. That’s a strange tradition you seem to have.”
Opt-out
3d ago
This in general is the art of IPO trading. But you do get in a game of musical chairs where everyone else playing low float games is trying to sell before the others sell.
This one is weirder because the high amount of retail size and the faster lockout periods with some accelerating if the price is up X%. Which is quite honestly a great adjustment to the ipo process. Too many small float games were played last decade.
Opt-out
3d ago
IMO when rules change to allow what everyone over 30 knows as a travel then every player has to adopt to those rules. If you limited your moves to what use to legal then your just not going to be as good of player as guys playing within the full new rule set. Honestly a bit like MLB in the steroid era. They were tacitly legal so if you weren’t on steroids you weren’t going to be a good player or at a minimum worse than you would be.
Opt-out
4d ago
They have a lot of revenue so someone is going to regular season games and watching on TV. It’s apparently not us. NBA became Dem coded atleast a decade ago so I am a bit old man yelling at clouds over land that was lost a while ago. I don’t think Jordan era NBA was theater kid or Dem coded. Whenever America had its divorce one side got the NFL and the other side got the NBA.
I am not sure if I would go to a NBA game if I were offered floor seats for free. Maybe for instagram clout flaunting. I’d probably sit in a luxury box if offered just to socialize and drink free for the night while watching 10 min of the game.
Opt-out
4d ago
Actually gave a quality contribution on this because I think it’s a fair analysis that the NBA is different and my complaints would land stronger if I said something similar about the NFL etc.
I will correct this: “She's doing it FOR YOU. This is what you like, that's why you're an NBA fan”
I am not a NBA fan. I watched 3 games all year which were these finals despite still playing basketball a few times a week. Though for linguistic reasons a general “you” to the reader makes sense and not a specific “you” to me.
Opt-out
4d ago
If you want to simplify. Yes. It’s not comfortable to white people. It’s annoying. It ruins the moment for us.
It’s no different than if you told a gay person to go have sex with people of the opposite gender. We find it disgusting.
Opt-out
4d ago
You are right. I am thinking of the quarterfinals on New Years Day. Those were $40 get in price. Still solid games. And yes their schedule makes it hard. I am somewhat trying to avoid there were X,Y,Z logistical issue which does effect CFP. And trying to highlight that 2nd tier events depend on logistics. 1st tier events “whatever that takes to be one” play by completely different rules. People deal with scheduling hassles because they know it’s 1st tier. Going to San Antonio tonight was a hassle but seems like their are plenty of fans going from NYC (who may of had their tickets canceled).
Opt-out
5d ago
Yes. They have money. Though as far as rich universities go they are in the top 30-50 and not the richest. And the CFP playoff schedule being in random cities means fan bases won’t have the time to go to every game. But still the game before the finals for UI was $40. Versus $3000. And the game was at like 12 on Jan 1 so locals didn’t care to get up. But I still think it says something about how being the “coordinating” event really makes prices skyrocket.
Performative Fandom. In particularly the NYKNICKS floor seat celebrities. Most are like Taylor Swift - she’s a celebrity and clearly not a fan but she will get her floor seats because celebs go to big games especially when the big games are in NY or LA. It’s Timothee Chamalet who since I barely know this stuff so many here may not too is like a big Hollywood Act. At first I thought he was loud annoying Hollywood guy whose there because he did videos like this Courtside. Which to me looks like he’s performing for the camera. Turns out he’s an actual fan and won some contest for free tickets as a teenager tickets
Some reason this has been living in my head for a few days as a feeling that’s not how real fans celebrate. Perhaps theatre kids it’s so natural to perform that it’s how they celebrate. Where it’s more an internal joy. Something just doesn’t feel natural to me here.
The other thing is it’s the blackification of celebration. Where you need to do things loud and visually to show how much it means to you. Yes I am now the old man who yells at clouds.
The other interesting sports related thing is the bifurcation of the ticket market for sporting events. With the rise of television, growing wealth inequality, and the ease of air travel very big events have seen their ticket prices skyrockets. The interesting opposing side is a lack of pricing power in similar but slightly lower tier events. True events have ticket prices going to infinity (World Cup/NBA finals) far above the rate of inflation (wealth has grown much faster). Supply being inelastic means prices go up a lot. But we can build a lot of supply of second tier events. World Cup has added teams to the tournament so there are both more total games but realistically only the same amount of seats for the top teams playing and championship games. This has led to much higher prices on big WC games and empty stadiums for other games. The one example that really stood out to me was College Football Playoffs. Championship game tickets were a 3k minimum ticket price watching team 1 and 2 play each other. The semifinal game say watching teams 2 and 3 play you could scalp tickets for $30. People are going because they want to be at the game that will be an event not for the quality of football. Which ties into television because watching the game is just better on tv now.
The games that are in the public conscious as the “Event” have high prices. The Knicks final being in NYC pulls in global wealth. The NC College Football game pulls in all the money in our Northern Indiana province which is a fairly wealthy province. These are far more than just games - also networking opportunities and serve a coordinating function of getting an entire group of people to all be at the same place at the same time. For a Knicks level event if you buy tickets at 15k get-in price even the nosebleed seats will be hedge fund manager sitting next to some rich kid from third world country or minor celebrity. For IU NC College Football it’s some dude who owns a 20m a year car parts company sitting next to a HVAC roll-up guy. I think if I were in an Econ PHD you could write an interesting paper on the modern ticket pricing market and what it means for a game to be labeled the “Event” for a population group.
I guess you could also draw a parallel with the SF escorts charge $4k an hour to ticket pricing. People supposedly have less sex now, but when they are it costs more. It’s just more enjoyable to jerk off to a porn star than put in the work or pay to have sex with a 6.
Opt-out
7d ago
It’s hard for crypto to rally when AI stocks are more fun to trade right now. That’s killed crypto. Nobody looks at it now. But what’s the price of Sandisks?
Opt-out
7d ago
A lot of the market already did this move. It’s just been the indexes that are up and a handful of names driving the index. Many low valuations etc throughout the stock market.
Question is if we do get the index level correction and AI names go south do we also get big sell offs in everything else.
Opt-out
7d ago
I think this undersells fascism. Like Pinochet only killed communists. Which I don’t even disagree with. And from a historical perspective he was proven correct. Meanwhile Milton Friedman was running his economy so you did have a lot of freedom. I would feel more free in Pinochet Chile than almost every European State today.
I’ve talked to females who feel more free in Arab Dictatorships because they are never afraid to be out at night.
Pinochet’s Chile is the best LATAM country to be from. Richer than Argentina without all the nicer of Colombia, Brazil, and Mexico and let’s not start on Venezuela….they wish they had a Pinochet now.
Of the options you give America and Europe aren’t talking about living in America and Europe. I will gladly choose the House of Saud over living in Somalia. Which is basically Europe in a generation.
The problem you have is you still think you live in Germany. That’s not what is coming.
Opt-out
8d ago
I don’t believe America has losts yet, but we probably need a hard stop on mass migration today. We have probably had enough selection effect on the Indian and Asian migrations to assimilate those populations with time. The Central American populations tend to atleast have Christianity base and tend to be fine with being apolitical. It can be an America with a little Brazil but not Brazil. The Southern Cone is the last hope. Europeans have a constitutional right in Argentina to immigrate so mass migration of the European variety would be possible there. Plus huge surging population in some religious groups like Mennonites in the region. Argentina is basically the last stand for European Civilization. And where it is most likely to re-emerge if losts.
Opt-out
8d ago
Like I said American propaganda. You immediately jumped to with a dictator and used Hitler. Who I guess I could remind me you would have won Germany the entire world without the American involvement.
Democracy hasn’t worked as well in the third world. Successful Democracies are largely correlated with high hbd qualities. Africans don’t view Democracy the same way. Either form has a ton of corruption but sometimes the dictators are better and law and order. Pinochet set Chile up to be well. House of Saud has been a success.
Basically on an immigration debate and whether a dictator would be better it basically ends up being it’s the same thing. If you import a lot of third world immigrants at best you become Brazil. You will have a dysfunctional Democracy and won’t be able to maintain all the institutions that make a good Democracy.
Unlimited freedom is a hellish dystopian society. You could say it’s freedom for alcohol companies to target customers by identifying alcoholics by having mobile alcohol trucks setting up outside someone’s house offering the first drink for free at 9 am and ratcheting up temptation. Mobile phones can be like that.
Young children often don’t have great temptation control. I don’t think having shitty parents means that children should be offered vices at 8 year olds. There is always a temptation between freedom and security.
More options
Context Copy link