site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 23 of 23 results for

domain:web.law.duke.edu

Oil to the moon

Yeah, but the whole reason this approach is even viable is because when Red Lobster was both real estate company and restaurant operator, investors valued it at less than the sum of its parts. Since the late 1980s conglomerates have fallen out of fashion because asset managers of all kinds prefer to deal with pure play companies (especially outside big tech) and to handle allocation themselves. The big Japanese conglomerates often trade at very poor multiples compared to Western businesses not only because of the state of the Japanese economy but because when you buy into one you’re buying into like 15 arbitrary and often barely related business areas. By contrast in the American equity market an investor can more easily measure and tailor their exposure to real estate, oil, railroads, video games, b2b SaaS and so on. Those looking for a preset diversified portfolio can buy an index or buy big holding companies like Berkshire or the public PE firms that have exposure to many different kinds of business.

Evangelicals are very rare in both rationalist and reactionary spaces. One sometimes finds other Protestants, there are the Episcopalian/Anglican equivalent of tradcaths (many of which are now formally or semi-schismatic from the Church of England), the occasional Germanic Lutheran, some of the weird other Protestant denominations. But Evangelicals are rare. Aspects of Evangelical Zionism have now filtered down to some other US Christian denominations, though, I’ve met Catholics who are very pro-Israel and consider Israel to have some kind of special eschatological role, even if Rome says otherwise.

"Elite X" spelled like a h4x0r in the country of Tonga is an easy-access piracy website.

There are exceptions for:

  • self-testing to mitigate unlawful discrimination
  • diversifying
  • advertising things to underrepresented groups

But I think you're right that what you said isn't any of those?

I have a baseline high level of suspicion towards Youtube polyglot videos. These people are like magicians in that they give an illusion of an ability when their real talent is for something somewhat orthogonal (that is, less about being actually proficient, but rather about looking proficient in select settings that they tune). A few tricks include:

  1. Controlling the conversation: The main skill many of these "polyglots" have is in pushing conversations towards topics about which they have the appropriate stock phrases well rehearsed. Sentences about how much they "love the culture", "I always thought [insert country] was so beautiful", "the [insert cuisine] is delicious" etc. If someone says something the "polyglot" doesn't understand they'll smile, nod, say "that's great" or "hmm, I'm not sure" and quickly try to change the subject. The better ones can do this more subtly, but even the clumsier ones can get away with it since most viewers aren't watching critically.

  2. Selective editing: The format lets them use staged videos or simply to selectively include footage of their best performances. Given the incentives on Youtube I don't really trust most to not do these things. For every free-flowing Mandarin conversation there may have been 10 where the polyglot just totally misunderstood the native speaker.

  3. Optimizing study: Words and phrases are Pareto distributed, so you can get to a basic conversational level in most languages with about 3000. If you're good at point 1 above you can probably get away with much fewer. For comparison, a native speaker is estimated to have a vocabulary of 20k to 35k. If you're loose with the definition of "fluent" you could just study these most optimal 3k for several languages instead of becoming highly proficient in one.

  4. Piling up on highly similar languages: The distinction between a "language" and a "dialect of a language" is more political than anything objective to the forms of speech themselves. An English-only speaker could likely become fluent in Spanish, Portuguese, Catalan, Italian, and French with less effort and time than it would take to get equivalently fluent in just Japanese (or Mandarin or Arabic or Korean). By largely focusing on clusters of highly similar languages, they more easily inflate their "language count".

Most genuine "polyglots" (high proficiency in 3 or more) I've spoken with say that they can only have thorough, complex conversations in 2-3 highly distinct languages at any given moment. Even a few months of disuse is enough for them to feel significantly sluggish retrieving words and forming sentences in their native languages, albeit still highly proficient. If they know they'll need a particular one soon (like they'll be traveling to [insert country] next month), then they can review for a week or two and revive the quick access (like putting it in RAM), but trying to keep all of them active simultaneously makes organizing thoughts a bit chaotic.

I would consider dodging this question by saying that the walrus can not be a moral subject to be a copout.

"Answering the question is a copout."

You can't just declare something to be a copout and thus make it so.

Few natives are left but in many cases I do think they’d vote emotively for settlers and descendants to leave. See the New Caledonia situation right now; the natives benefit tremendously from French rule but still want France and French people to leave.

The Saudi Option, whether @4bpp knows it or not, is actually not off the table at all, although not to the level of generosity that he proposes. Kushner strongly implied it was the central option discussed with MBS. It would likely take the form of a colonial Palestinian regime under Saudi control, perhaps as some kind of quasi-independent (in theory) ‘emirate’ ruling much of the West Bank, perhaps almost all of it (but in practice granting Jewish settlements full internal autonomy). In exchange Saudi Arabia could administer large parts of East Jerusalem, would gain official control over Al Aqsa (meaning all three core Islamic holy sites would be under Saudi Arabia) and there would some kind of joint funding deal for peacekeeping. The Muslim world would turn a blind eye to harsh secret police tactics used against the Palestinians by the Saudis, and Israel would officially recognize the “State” of Palestine under Saudi guardianship. This is also the most likely near term solution, though I wouldn’t say it’s likely in an absolute sense.

Looks like the private equity is the “real estate company” and Red Lobster is the leader

https://www.businessinsider.com/red-lobster-endless-shrimp-bankruptcy-private-equity-debt-real-estate-2024-5

In 2014, amid flagging sales and pressure from investors, Darden sold Red Lobster for $2.1 billion to Golden Gate Capital, a San Francisco private-equity firm. To raise enough cash to make the deal happen, Golden Gate sold off Red Lobster's real estate to another entity — in this case, a company called American Realty Capital Properties — and then immediately leased the restaurants back

"The thing that private equity does is just unload assets and monetize assets. And so they effectively paid for the purchase of Red Lobster by selling the real estate," he said. "It'll probably be fine, generally, but there's going to come a time in which your sales fall, your profitability is challenged, and your debt looks too bad, and then suddenly those leases are going to look awfully ugly."

"Once they sell the real estate, then the private-equity company is golden, and they've made their money back and probably more than what they paid," she said, noting that this was a common theme in other restaurants and retailers and adding: "The retail apocalypse is all about having your real estate sold out from under you so that you have to pay the rent in good times and in bad."

Fighting entropy is a noble act. It's sitting in traffic that we should eliminate

I tend to think those things are secondary and partisans tend to flip flop on them whenever it suits them.

Take a look at the left wing catholic framing of the church’s teachings on capital punishment and compare it to their approach to teachings on the family.

All those debates about magisterium seem very contingent to me.

This is a world history shattering fact for me

Yeah, I just don’t see it happening.

Yes, but in practice that would be it, since once reclaimed by the Arabs Jews would likely never again be able to win it militarily.

God, I hate doing chores. Ah yes, take a significant chunk out of your day just to fight entropy, and do the same thing for the 10,000th time. Why are they seen an some sort of noble act and not a necessary evil like having to sit in traffic? Something we should eliminate?

Red Lobster isn’t located in the areas with strong real estate markets. Those are all Gateway markets (defined as NYC, San Fran, LA, Boston, Miami) mostly coastal. Not 4th tier cities and exurbs where Red Lobster largely operates.

This is such an extreme claim about Hamas that I would want to see evidence from it,

This claim of fact isn't central to my point and if you don't accept it I withdraw it. The point is this:

If you wanted to (validly) argue that the Palestinian response is moral, you would have to either (1) assert that the Palestinians have gotten shafted worse than any other group in history ever has, or (2) point to historical examples of morally justified campaigns of homicide against civilians, morally comparable to that of Hamas in terms of their justification and methods (e.g., in their use of human shields, the degree to which they preferentially target civilians, and their stated objective of genocide)

So do you want to (validly) argue that the Palestinian response is moral? If so do you accept that you would have to agree to either (1) or (2), and if so, which do you agree to?

In simple utilitarian terms Palestinians obviously suffer more. The end.

That’s entirely irrelevant even when making a utilitarian argument in this war, since the hypothetical is about who would suffer more if the other side achieved its military aims.

Almost all Palestinian Christians left (many long before Israel’s founding) so there aren’t really many left.

Many tradcaths seem to consider other tradcaths apostates especially because there’s a big gradation in terms of their relationship with the actual church as an institution (see FSSP vs SSPX), views on the pope and so on.

I think your mistake here is conflating straight women's goal of "trying to attract men" with "trying to maximally arouse men."

While I have various issues with that Aella Good At Sex/what-women-want blog series, one useful concept she established was the idea of "werewolfing" as a state of goal-driven, uncontrolled male arousal that many women find a little scary and unpleasant. A woman would have to live under a rock not to realize that men want big tits in the sense that they'll werewolf and pant and slaver over them; this is a literal cartoon meme. But most women are not sure how to channel that kind of raw animal attention to produce the social and romantic benefits they themselves might actually want, like having the guy attend to their needs, listen to their ideas, praise and admire them, stay intimate even after orgasm, etc. In some cases arousal actually seems to work against romance, in that men seem disproportionately likely to demean the intellectual capacity of extremely voluptuous women, something I'd love to see properly explained from the male end.

I suspect that when young women try to appear sexy in ways that seem puzzlingly suboptimal to straight dudes, a big part of this may be trying to refine or control the type and level of sexual attention they receive, trying to keep men interested enough to be solicitous and respectful, but not fully pushing them over into werewolf mode. If what you did was helpfully point out that they could evoke a bigger boner if they just [X], my guess is it was interpreted as "Since respectful and moderate male attention isn't a thing and women are only good for werewolfing over, here's what my inner werewolf would want." Frankly, I'd respond with a hate-filled glare too.

It also involves listening to the Argentinian socialist in Rome, which American Catholics often seem to chafe at.