These prudes would be terrified of San Francisco, whole city is clothing optional. No one ever really does it cause it’s too cold though saw a couple out today for pride. Sucks there banning it in a place that would actually be comfortable to do it.

People would start talking about it if Biden stepped down and the Dems put up someone under 70. But since we’re comparing him to Joe those sort of critiques don’t hold as much weight.

Weathers only part of it, a large part is cost of living and especially housing costs. People have this idea that people become mentally unwell drug addicts then lose housing then move to California for the better weather/ more compassionate state. In reality a lot of it is the reverse, people live in California, lose they’re housing due to astronomical rents, then they become mentally unwell drug addicts due to the pain and trauma they suffer on the streets.

Last point still stands though, we do need a green new deal to give these people housing and employ them in meaningful jobs to help the green transition.

It’s a reference to a trump clip where he drinks water with two hands,.

Bidens about to go down as one of the worst Democrats in the last century because of his hubris if he doesn’t. His decent domestic agenda will be overshadowed by him ushering in another trump presidency by ignoring all the signs for him to drop out. He didn’t early last year when polls repeatedly showed that people thought he was too old. He didn’t when unnamed democrat was leading him by 10 points. He didn’t when his Gaza policy alienated large chunks of his base. If he doesn’t in the next couple weeks when there will probably be polls coming out showing majority support for him stepping down then he’s gone full head in the sand.

It’s like RBG all over again, if these people could just get it through there heads to quit while there ahead they could preserve a decent legacy, instead of tarnishing it by leading the way to a regressive order that overturns everything they’ve done.

That’s a pretty fatal mistake when your average person is only gonna watch a 10 second clip of the debate.

Obligatory ummm akchually it’s the burps.

ultra-orthi battalions

That’s what they’ve been doing. They station them in the West Bank and they we’re doing so many atrocities that even Biden considered sanctioning the specific battalions , he didn’t actually do it because he’s a spineless coward, but he did consider.

For the sake of Palestinians I hope they split up these nut jobs.

1 and 2 I think have pretty good consensus. The Bering land bridge opened about 10,000 years ago while the Polynesians didn’t reach Hawaii until 900 ad, so if they got to South America it was probably after that. There is some speculation that some separate group of people crossed over even before them since evidence shows that the south American coast became populated very quickly after the Bering bridge opened. Like they got to South America before they got to the interior of north America. That could be because the Rockies are large and without the fish that those people were probably eating, or it could be that some very early people, millennium before the Polynesians domesticated coconuts, made the crossing. That theory of very far in the realm of speculation but it’s a fun theory.

According to wikipedia this is the less likely and imo less interesting explanation. They did find coconuts that are genetically distinct from the ones the Spanish brought over from the Philippines, but those ones are more distantly related to the ones in polynesia so they probably didn’t float over. Instead they are more likely evidence of pre-columbian contact of Polynesians with south and central America, along with sweet potatoes originating in South America but being present in polynesia and SEA prior to columbus.

So this would boot Columbus off the podium in people who discovered America.

1. Bering strait people / native American ancestors

2. Polynesian people

3. Vikings, Leif Erickson

4. Columbus

Depends who owns it / who payed to have it constructed. If the tenets own it and payed to have it constructed, or payed someone who payed someone… Then it’s a condo or a co-op depending on whether you own a unit in the building or own x% of the building which entitles you to a unit.

If another organization, almost always some form of government, payed to have it constructed and owns it then it is public housing.

If it’s anything like cities skylines original, houses just pop up according to demand with seemingly no construction cost calculated, probably because it would add a ton more complexity with mortgages and speculative markets etc. for little gain to players who mostly just want to play with trains and metros.

My guess is the fat part of the bell curve is 25-40 here, probably similar to Twitter, younger than Facebook, older than tik tok and maybe Instagram.

What’s your issue with big tech?

I know a lot of libertarians oppose corporatism because they say the corporations market power and monopolies derive from government, but for big tech they mostly come from economies of scale and network effects, neither of which I think right wing libertarians oppose.

If you oppose it because corporate power, even if gained through fair free market principles, is a barrier to liberty than I think your on the left for a libertarian. The recognition that corporate power can be just as tyrannical and coercive as state power is not an idea held by most libertarians in the u.s. who tend to focus solely on state power. Recognizing both puts you to the left of most of them, and on the far left you have Chomsky who identifies as a socialist libertarian and thinks corporate/capitalist power is so much more of a threat than state power that we should give the state more power to be able to reign in corporations.

Alcohol is pretty unique as a drug in causing car accidents. Most other drugs will either relax/sedate you enough so you don’t want to go out (opiates, ketamine), make you anxious enough so you won’t want to drive (cannabis, hallucinogens), or stimulate you enough so that if you do drive you probably won’t be that bad (coke, meth). Only alcohol will keep you up enough to socialize, confident enough to drive, and impaired enough to crash. Even if you were to legalize all drugs alcohol would still probably be the largest cause by far for impaired driving accidents.

Trump said in a Truth Social post Tuesday. “Biden’s hatred of Bitcoin only helps China, Russia, and the Radical Communist Left. We want all the remaining Bitcoin to be MADE IN THE USA!!! It will help us be ENERGY DOMINANT!!!”

Didn’t COMMUNIST China ban it mostly because it was putting strain on their grid? Not sure how wasting states worth of electricity to fuel a glorified ponzi scheme is going to help with energy dominance but who am I to question the self-proclaimed genius.

Hosting/streaming videos is not free.

Neither is creating content. Argue all you want on how Google is evil and doesn’t deserve the money, 50% of the revenue is still going to creators and ad-blockers do cut into there paychecks.

Also doesn’t make sense longing for the days of ad-free YouTube. Besides the fact it was unsustainable and would’ve gone the way of vine after a few years, it was just worse. It was full of 2 minute compilations of guys getting hit in the balls at 240p, not the 1080p 10 minute video essays with research that people have become accustomed to. That kind of quality costs money.

And decent video quality, do we want to go back to the days of 240p?, cause that’s the only resolution a static banner ad model can support.

China subsidies vehicles, say €5000

EU tariffs vehicles, say €5000

Every vehicle purchase basically comes with €5000 from the Chinese government for the EU government

The CCP doesn’t want you to know this one simple trick

But what if there’s taki dust on them?

This would be true if chomskys claim was that he was simply studying human language acquisition and that machines are different, but his claim was that machines can’t learn human languages because they don’t have some intuitive innate grammar.

Saying an llm hasn’t learned language becomes harder and harder the more you talk to it and the more it starts walking like a duck and quacking like a duck. To make that claim you’ll need some evidence to counter the demonstrable understanding the llm displays. Chomsky in his nytimes response just gives his own unprovable theories on innate grammar and some examples of questions llms “can’t answer” but if you actually ask any modern llm they answer them fine.

You can define “learning” and “understanding” in a way that excludes llms but you’ll end up relying upon unprovable abstract theories until you can come up with an example of a question/prompt that any human would answer correctly and llms won’t to demonstrate that difference. I have yet to see any such examples. There’s plenty of evidence of them hallucinating when they reach the edge of their understanding, but that is something humans do as well.

Chomsky is still a very important figure and his work on politics with manufacturing consent is just as relevant as when it was written over 20 years ago. His work on language though is on shaky grounds and llms have made it even shakier.