Friday, May 31, 2019
There Is A School Of Thought Which Says The Speaker Is Slinging Bullshit
Also one which says I am the sexiest man alive. Another, embraced by our current AG, is that the president, when a Republican, has limitless power and immunity from all oversight. So many schools of thought.
Pelosi argued on Jimmy Kimmel that "there's a school of thought" that acquittal in the Senate after impeachment means you can't be tried criminally after leaving office ... what? https://t.co/QVBItiMez4 pic.twitter.com/h5mnrdHGE5
— Quinta Jurecic (@qjurecic) May 31, 2019
Gaming The System
I have no strong opinions about what the system should be for trying to whittle down a cast of thousands into a manageable number for teevee debates (also these debates are mostly dumb but I guess we're stuck with them), but the point of the system is to whittle that number. Campaigns complaining that they're having to go to absurd lengths to game the system to try to avoid being the weakest link are just telling on themselves. Maybe the rules are the wrong rules but "wah I am having a hard time gaming this sytem" is a weird complaint.
Unless you think everyone who says "I'm running" should be on the stage, you need some rule to limit them. Maybe these are dumb rules, but then propose better ones, don't just say "wah I'm taking $40 of your money so I can collect $1 from someone else!!" If this is the only way you can move your campaign forward, maybe the problem is you not the rules.
Again, I am fine with the idea that these specific rules are dumb, but that a candidate polling at 1% is having a hard time meeting them except by engaging in these practices says more about the campaign than the rules.
Most declined to discuss their frustration with the D.N.C.’s rules on the record or to indicate how exactly they would shift tactics, saying their campaign plans were confidential. But campaign after campaign said the party’s donor requirements are skewing the way they allocate resources, forcing them to choose between investing in staff or pouring more money into ads on sites like Facebook, where prices are soaring to dizzying new heights. Two campaigns said digital vendors are currently quoting them prices of $40 and up to acquire a new $1 donor.
Democratic digital strategists said the unprecedented chase for small donors was encouraging poor habits aimed at simply stirring up internet interest or spamming existing email lists unsustainably, while also driving up the price of finding donors for down-ballot Democrats.
Unless you think everyone who says "I'm running" should be on the stage, you need some rule to limit them. Maybe these are dumb rules, but then propose better ones, don't just say "wah I'm taking $40 of your money so I can collect $1 from someone else!!" If this is the only way you can move your campaign forward, maybe the problem is you not the rules.
Again, I am fine with the idea that these specific rules are dumb, but that a candidate polling at 1% is having a hard time meeting them except by engaging in these practices says more about the campaign than the rules.
Good Conservative Nazis
We've been calling them white supremacists for years and she just... broadcast it out.
In the great and glorious year of our Gritty, 2019, the degree to which conservatives alternative seamlessly between complaining about left wing anti-Semitism and embracing actual Nazis is quite astonishing, as is the degree to which Very Serious People pretend this isn't happening.
In the great and glorious year of our Gritty, 2019, the degree to which conservatives alternative seamlessly between complaining about left wing anti-Semitism and embracing actual Nazis is quite astonishing, as is the degree to which Very Serious People pretend this isn't happening.
Thursday, May 30, 2019
Your Kids
You don't have to be as pessimistic as I am about the current and future state of self-driving car technology to agree with the idea (as almost everybody in the field does!) that what they call level 2 and level 3 technologies - basically self-driving kinda works but you still have to be paying attention 100% just in case - are extremely dangerous. I think it's worse than has usually been written about, in that the issue isn't just that drivers are unlikely to maintain 100% attention as they should, it's also that even a 100% alert driver is never going to be quite sure when s/he is going to have to "fight" the autopilot. At 65 MPH, at what point are you supposed to realize it's about to kill you or someone else? This is an impossible task, even for that 100% alert driver.
My daughter, your daughter, your son, your wife, your husband, your brother and sister, your father and mother, every single person who shares the road with an Autopilot-equipped car are in essence Tesla’s lab rats. What’s a few deaths when you’re advancing technological progress?All this is made worse when carnival barker Musk gives it names like "autopilot" and "full self driving" and at least his biggest fans truly believe that using it in ways they aren't supposed to is actually "training" the AI system. Musk encourages this view by talking about all the data they have from all the miles Tesla cars have driven, in order to suggest they have a leg up on competitors, but the cars don't send that much data to the mothership and it doesn't really learn in this way.
Tesla covers its ass by giving those “futurists” willing to use Autopilot—again, not a fully autonomous vehicle—a Terms and Conditions prompt before drivers are able to engage the system. The dialogue-box informs drivers that they need to agree to “Keep your hands on the steering wheel at all times and to always maintain control and responsibility for your vehicle.” Yet, unlike the Terms and Conditions we accept on a regular basis—those that almost no one ever reads—its effects can reach beyond the user. There are in fact other people on the road who haven’t given their tacit agreement to be beta testers, like my daughter. No amount of Tesla legalese can refute that.
Both Sides
I often think people miss the point of the "both sides" joke which is not actually that the press always feels the need to bring the universe into harmony by finding a way to match up the sins of one party with supposedly equal and opposite sins of the other. They only both sides...one side. As in, Democratic sins stand on their own, while Republican sins inspire lines like "Republican Congressman John Smith's conviction on 37 counts of child rape are a stark reminder of the time Democratic Congressman Jay Smith was arrested for whistling too loudly at a woman in public in 1926."*
*A made up sentence, of course.
And how it plays out with important things:
Needless to say this is not how the Mueller investigation of President Clinton would have been reported. The other rule is that "both sides" must be investigated by Republicans, though of course it would've been some nutter like Kris Kobach heading up the Clinton investigation.
*A made up sentence, of course.
And how it plays out with important things:
New York Times reporter Peter Baker’s analysis is a key example of journalists reporting on Mueller’s statement as a good faith disagreement between Democrats and the president. The story appeared online on Wednesday under the headline “Mueller Delivered a Message. Washington Couldn’t Agree on What It Was,” and it was splashed across the paper’s front page the next day. “At long last, the sphinx of Washington spoke on Wednesday,” Baker wrote, “and here is what President Trump heard: ‘Case closed.’ Here is what the president’s adversaries heard: ‘Time to impeach.’”
These are statements that can be assessed for their accuracy, with the reporter concluding that one party’s interpretation is correct. Instead, Baker chose to examine the remarks from both sides and then all but throw up his hands in dismay, framing his story as a case of Washington partisans simply failing to agree on the facts. But the Times scribe’s own reporting in the piece showed that Trump is not credible when he discusses Mueller’s probe. As Baker noted, Mueller’s statement “effectively refuted Mr. Trump’s no-collusion, no-obstruction mantra,” demonstrating the president’s mendacity. He also wrote that the special counsel “implied that Congress could pursue impeachment without directly recommending it,” thus supporting the opinion he ascribed to “the president’s adversaries.”
Needless to say this is not how the Mueller investigation of President Clinton would have been reported. The other rule is that "both sides" must be investigated by Republicans, though of course it would've been some nutter like Kris Kobach heading up the Clinton investigation.
Not Too Hard To Understand
Before the 2018 election, and before the Mueller report, I didn't think the Dems should have spent all their time going around making somewhat vague accusations about "Russia stealing the election for Trump" because, well, they were somewhat vague accusations and unless they were ready to really get behind those accusations by saying precisely what the crimes were, or what the path forward to deal with them was, it just sounded like complaining. "Wait for Mueller" was mostly the message, and the investigation was continuing, and Democrats mostly didn't run on this issue, but instead health care etc. Then they won the election and now they're confused.
I think Dem voters did hear the "wait for Mueller" message - Dem voters also like the impartial GOP Daddy referees deciding issues - and then came Mueller day. And when Mueller day arrived the Dems had some shiny new gavels in their possession. So, now, they want the Dems to follow the course set out by impartial GOP Daddy referee Mueller, as they were told they should. And Mueller says impeach the motherfucker.
Over the past two years, it has become a part of Democratic doctrine that Russia and Mueller are strictly Beltway obsessions. Top party strategists—particularly in the lead-up to the 2018 midterms—insisted that lawmakers rarely heard about the special counsel’s probe from constituents. Campaign committees bragged about how little they focused on the topic and the members themselves proudly boasted about their laser-like focus on kitchen-table issues.
Dean, on Wednesday, was asked about health care, gun violence, climate change, and other major topics. But Mueller and impeachment were clearly top of mind. She took 10 questions total. Two of them were on impeachment—as much as any other issue. And her response to those questions drew the strongest crowd reaction of the night.
I think Dem voters did hear the "wait for Mueller" message - Dem voters also like the impartial GOP Daddy referees deciding issues - and then came Mueller day. And when Mueller day arrived the Dems had some shiny new gavels in their possession. So, now, they want the Dems to follow the course set out by impartial GOP Daddy referee Mueller, as they were told they should. And Mueller says impeach the motherfucker.
LEAVE MY FATHER JOHN MCCAIN ALOOOOOONE
The obvious joke is that while the DC press that can never be bothered to care about the impacts of actions and policy on vulnerable people, even those old white diner guys they adopt as pets, offending the memory of their favorite rich dead guy can get them up early in the morning and bring them to the green room.
Dead John McCain doesn't need anyone to take care of him because he's dead. Ignore the afflicted and comfort the dead is a weird restatement of journalism's duty, but some things, like tire swings, are just objective facts, and some are lowly opinions, and you, stupid readers, just can't tell the difference very well.
Dead John McCain doesn't need anyone to take care of him because he's dead. Ignore the afflicted and comfort the dead is a weird restatement of journalism's duty, but some things, like tire swings, are just objective facts, and some are lowly opinions, and you, stupid readers, just can't tell the difference very well.
Finally An Impeachable Offense
Can't dishonor the name of John McCain.
Commanders were told to keep a warship named for the late Sen. John McCain out of President Trump's view during his Memorial day visit to Japan, CBS News has confirmed.
CBS News senior national security correspondent David Martin reports that a U.S. Indo-Pacific Command official wrote an email to Navy and Air Force officials before Mr. Trump's arrival. It included instructions for the proper landing areas for helicopters and preparations for the USS Wasp, the ship on which the president was to speak.
The official then issued a third instruction: "USS John McCain needs to be out of sight," according to the email, which was first obtained by The Wall Street Journal. The Washington Post and Associated Press also confirmed its existence.
Wednesday, May 29, 2019
Too Late
Sargent.
The Dems said wait for Mueller (totally reasonable). Then they... had no plan for what to do if Mueller didn't send the Marshall of the Supreme Court to arrest Trump or the Republicans didn't respond with "Oh my God it turns out the president is bad!" Neither of which was going to happen. Now we have an AG who is about to turn the Justice Department into a fully partisan operation to investigate Trump's enemies, and being investigated, even if it leads to nothing, is a nightmare in itself, especially for the secondary characters who can't necessarily afford $600/hr lawyers. The beautiful thing is this will provide the symmetry that our press loves. On one hand, we have Republicans investigating Democrats. On the other hand, we have Democrats investigating Trump/Republicans.
Both sides. It's all partisan. Washington is broken. Vote Schultz!
They had to run with it right away. They didn't.
yassss.
And Democrats should be aware of the risks that dithering poses to public understanding. One side’s willingness to engage in full-saturation propaganda casting the investigation itself as the real crime -- disinformation designed to blot out shared agreement on the most basic facts about what just happened before all of our very eyes -- now has an attorney general who may be willing to help carry that out.
Given this deep imbalance, without a coherent narrative from the other side that makes Trump’s corruption and epic misconduct unequivocally central to this national moment -- one riveted around whether Trump committed the high crimes and misdemeanors that render his removal imperative -- is there not a great risk of deepened public confusion, just as Democrats prepare to ask the voters to do the hard work for them?
The Dems said wait for Mueller (totally reasonable). Then they... had no plan for what to do if Mueller didn't send the Marshall of the Supreme Court to arrest Trump or the Republicans didn't respond with "Oh my God it turns out the president is bad!" Neither of which was going to happen. Now we have an AG who is about to turn the Justice Department into a fully partisan operation to investigate Trump's enemies, and being investigated, even if it leads to nothing, is a nightmare in itself, especially for the secondary characters who can't necessarily afford $600/hr lawyers. The beautiful thing is this will provide the symmetry that our press loves. On one hand, we have Republicans investigating Democrats. On the other hand, we have Democrats investigating Trump/Republicans.
Both sides. It's all partisan. Washington is broken. Vote Schultz!
They had to run with it right away. They didn't.
yassss.
The New York Times Defense Force
One of the more amusing yet horrifying things is how the New York Times Defense Force springs into action on twitter every time there's some legitimate criticism of something published in that hell 'zine. The defense force consists of other New York Times people and most other elite journalists. It's always easy to nutpick Twitter, as with blogs or the internet generally, and find mean and unfair (not the same!) criticisms among the serious and thoughtful ones, but rarely is the substance of the criticism addressed.
It's always that angry unhinged partisans who do NOT UNDERSTAND JOURNALISM are picking on a poor defenseless reporter at the most important newspaper in the world, being highly personal and insulting, and also too this journalist is a much better journalist than you will ever be, and BOTH SIDES are picking on her (if the person in question is a woman there are accusations that criticism is all misogynistic) so SHE MUST BE DOING SOMETHING right. Never is there any acknowledgment that, hey, you know, maybe the critics have a point.
And "we're the New York Times fuck you" is actually a valid response, but that's the kind of a response which requires a stoic condescending smile, not all of this goddamn whining. These are the most ridiculous people in the world and they rule our discourse Now I know who collected all of these supposed participation trophies their whole lives. Class privilege is a hell of a thing.
No one needs a newsless misleading puff piece about your friend Hope Hicks, Maggie. Literally no one in the country cares except your future book publishers. We get it. It's a beat sweetener. PR in exchange for information for your book. The tragic story of poor Hope Hicks who has to face a Congressional subpoena which is interrupting all the time she spends rolling around in her money while collecting her Murdoch salary. Truly Shakespearean.
Why they only respond this way to criticism from The Left is an exercise left for you, dear readers.
It's always that angry unhinged partisans who do NOT UNDERSTAND JOURNALISM are picking on a poor defenseless reporter at the most important newspaper in the world, being highly personal and insulting, and also too this journalist is a much better journalist than you will ever be, and BOTH SIDES are picking on her (if the person in question is a woman there are accusations that criticism is all misogynistic) so SHE MUST BE DOING SOMETHING right. Never is there any acknowledgment that, hey, you know, maybe the critics have a point.
And "we're the New York Times fuck you" is actually a valid response, but that's the kind of a response which requires a stoic condescending smile, not all of this goddamn whining. These are the most ridiculous people in the world and they rule our discourse Now I know who collected all of these supposed participation trophies their whole lives. Class privilege is a hell of a thing.
No one needs a newsless misleading puff piece about your friend Hope Hicks, Maggie. Literally no one in the country cares except your future book publishers. We get it. It's a beat sweetener. PR in exchange for information for your book. The tragic story of poor Hope Hicks who has to face a Congressional subpoena which is interrupting all the time she spends rolling around in her money while collecting her Murdoch salary. Truly Shakespearean.
Why they only respond this way to criticism from The Left is an exercise left for you, dear readers.
Morning Thread
Echidne of the Snakes the first of her name, has an interesting retrospective up of her fifteen years as a blogger. Some bad, some good, all worth a read. It's also her final fundraiser of the year. Well worth any amount you can afford to throw her way.
Tuesday, May 28, 2019
A Tribute To Alastair Campbell
Who was chucked out of the Labour party for violating party rules (specifically voting for another party and then being dumb enough to announce it). He was the inspiration for Malcolm Tucker, so we can thank him for that.
It's Not The Lies, It's The Lying
I'm so old I remember when there couldn't be a story about John Kerry that didn't refer to him as a "flip flopper" or, before that, a story about Al Gore which didn't suggest he was a big liar because he "claimed he invented the internet" which he did not do and what he did say was completely true. Most of the individual Trump lies don't matter, really, and "fact checking" them is boring and repetitive and usually misses the point. Donald Trump is a big liar, has been his whole life in documented ways which clearly show that he was lying, not that he misspoke or similar, and every time he gets on the teevee he lies at machine gun speeds about everything. Objectitudinal journalists love to retreat behind faux standards of objectivity when they fail to cover something in the obvious way they should be covered, but "wow Donald Trump lies a lot" is well within the boundaries of that kind of poitical journalism. Or you can just quote someone else saying "wow Donald Trump lies a lot" which is how the smart kids do it when they want to pretend they aren't expressing an "opinion."
It's kind of a big story that the president lies so much that it's difficult to keep track, at least as big of a story as John Kerry switched his positions on a couple of issues. Also, I think, something Donald Trump has done.
It's kind of a big story that the president lies so much that it's difficult to keep track, at least as big of a story as John Kerry switched his positions on a couple of issues. Also, I think, something Donald Trump has done.
Galaxy Brain Stuff
You don't even have to dislike Biden to marvel at the mental gymnastics here.
Lying (or being delusional) about crowd sizes was Trump's game, not focusing on them. There's a bit of delusion going on here, too. And of course "crowd size... is an imperfect metric" but they all are.
As I said, if you only get 6,000 people to show up in Philly, somebody is doing something wrong. That might not even say much about the candidate, but instead a failure of the people he has hired to get people to show up. But that's an issue too, especially if they're the type of people who run to the press and say "oh no our failures are actually good."
To Biden’s campaign, attendance figures are a meaningless metric. Focusing on crowd size is Trump’s game, they say, an emphasis on style over substance that attempts to turn audience engagement into an argument about the 76-year-old Biden’s energy level.
Crowd size, after all, is an imperfect metric to measure a campaign’s vitality. While it can be a revealing indicator, it still lacks the scientific underpinning of polling or the fixed-dollar figures associated with fundraising. Nor does it account for the judgment of elected and influential Democrats across the country.
Lying (or being delusional) about crowd sizes was Trump's game, not focusing on them. There's a bit of delusion going on here, too. And of course "crowd size... is an imperfect metric" but they all are.
As I said, if you only get 6,000 people to show up in Philly, somebody is doing something wrong. That might not even say much about the candidate, but instead a failure of the people he has hired to get people to show up. But that's an issue too, especially if they're the type of people who run to the press and say "oh no our failures are actually good."
Undecided Voters
I find it useful to re-read this old Chris Hayes piece occasionally.
The mere fact that you're reading this article right now suggests that you not only think politics is important, but you actually like it. You read the paper and listen to political radio and talk about politics at parties. In other words, you view politics the way a lot of people view cooking or sports or opera: as a hobby. Most undecided voters, by contrast, seem to view politics the way I view laundry. While I understand that to be a functioning member of society I have to do my laundry, and I always eventually get it done, I'll never do it before every last piece of clean clothing is dirty, as I find the entire business to be a chore. A significant number of undecided voters, I think, view politics in exactly this way: as a chore, a duty, something that must be done but is altogether unpleasant, and therefore something best put off for as long as possible.
Monday, May 27, 2019
Almost All Of Our Wars Have Been Bad
Funny how "please do not kill more troops" is a somewhat controversial statement on Memorial Day, but America Is Already Great.
(of course all wars are bad, they just haven't all been entirely our fault)
(of course all wars are bad, they just haven't all been entirely our fault)
Sunday, May 26, 2019
The Distraction of Other Horrors
Sometimes I turn away from the horrors of the Trump administration to distract myself with other horrors for a bit. Can't hulk out 24/7, and other things can at least be amusing, as they matter less or are far away.
It has been weird watching so much of UK politics begin to mirror our own. There were always some parallels of course. Right versus Left. The Iraq war played different but still prominent roles. The media - both the explicit right wing media (print there, more TV here), and the Right's take over of the faux-objective media (TV there, more print here).
But now perhaps even more than our country, everything is driven by generational and racial resentment, which is now reaching its pinnacle with the new Tory leadership (the Prime Minister) to be chosen by approximately 80,000 members with the average age of 65+ (there are no published stats so this is a bit of a guess people have made). Needless to say this is not the most diverse and cosmopolitan segment of British society, and the people running for the position are currently trying to out-stupid each other to gain their votes.
It has been weird watching so much of UK politics begin to mirror our own. There were always some parallels of course. Right versus Left. The Iraq war played different but still prominent roles. The media - both the explicit right wing media (print there, more TV here), and the Right's take over of the faux-objective media (TV there, more print here).
But now perhaps even more than our country, everything is driven by generational and racial resentment, which is now reaching its pinnacle with the new Tory leadership (the Prime Minister) to be chosen by approximately 80,000 members with the average age of 65+ (there are no published stats so this is a bit of a guess people have made). Needless to say this is not the most diverse and cosmopolitan segment of British society, and the people running for the position are currently trying to out-stupid each other to gain their votes.
Saturday, May 25, 2019
Pity Our Poor Leaders
A UK journalist got a bit dragged on the twitter for suggesting that we should all feel sorry for Theresa May and then doubled down by complaining that people on twitter were just so mean and awful.
You know who is mean and awful? Theresa May. You know who had an immense amount of power to do awful things for several years and did them? Theresa May. You know who mostly do not have any power? Assholes on twitter.
You don't even have to agree with my assessment of Theresa May - that she a horrible racist person - to think that we aren't actually obligated to waste our beautiful minds feeling sympathy for the most powerful people in the world. Especially when it isn't something like her husband died or some other personal tragedy. She was PM. It's an important job. She'll soon no longer be PM. This is not a tragedy.
The more appropriate response to May:
You know who is mean and awful? Theresa May. You know who had an immense amount of power to do awful things for several years and did them? Theresa May. You know who mostly do not have any power? Assholes on twitter.
You don't even have to agree with my assessment of Theresa May - that she a horrible racist person - to think that we aren't actually obligated to waste our beautiful minds feeling sympathy for the most powerful people in the world. Especially when it isn't something like her husband died or some other personal tragedy. She was PM. It's an important job. She'll soon no longer be PM. This is not a tragedy.
The more appropriate response to May:
Holy hell did he snappic.twitter.com/TVWM9ONKGq
— Na'ama 🌈 (@iknowplacesmp6) May 24, 2019
It's A Car In A Tiny Tunnel And It Takes An Elevator To Get There
And the elevator takes 20 seconds so maximum you can get 3 cars per minute or 180 per hour.
I don't not understand how it isn't obvious how dumb this is. Top speed just isn't that important. Capacity and average speeds are. I mean I could write several pages about how dumb this but I think just pointing and laughing is best.
I don't not understand how it isn't obvious how dumb this is. Top speed just isn't that important. Capacity and average speeds are. I mean I could write several pages about how dumb this but I think just pointing and laughing is best.
Friday, May 24, 2019
Gotta Play The Game
There should be a few Democrats who go on cable news every day and say things like "Donald Trump has brain worms from syphilis and his dick is about to fall off." Bully the bully.
Prime Minister Boris
He was a funny figure as Mayor of London, a job with not much power and he outsourced it all to relatively competent people. He is also the distillation of the upper class twit, a type we don't really have in America. Sure we have an upper class, and twits, but not quite that type. Upper class twits are not the sophisticated Downton Abbey types. They are buffoons who are dumb and their eccentricities include not knowing how to dress. The opposite of what people think they are. They do not even have the pretensions of sophistication. They reject it.
Bye Theresa
May is finally leaving and that is probably actually bad news because in this timeline the sequel is always worse.
Thursday, May 23, 2019
Justice
It is maybe a minor point in this grand story, but that rich people do not face "justice" and poor people do is... a problem.
The Best People
It actually takes a lot of skill to get indicted for something like this!
Audrey Strauss, the Attorney for the United States, Acting Under Authority Conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 515, William F. Sweeney Jr., the Assistant Director-in-Charge of the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), and Patricia Tarasca, the Special Agent-in-Charge of the New York Region for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Office of Inspector General (“FDIC OIG”), announced today the unsealing of an indictment charging STEPHEN M. CALK with financial institution bribery for corruptly using his position as the head of a federally insured bank to issue millions of dollars in high-risk loans to a borrower in exchange for a personal benefit: assistance from the borrower in obtaining a senior position with an incoming presidential administration. CALK is expected to be presented this afternoon before U.S. Magistrate Judge Debra Freeman.
Shorts
I don't do investing and wouldn't know how to short a stock even if I wanted to but I was truly tempted to short Tesla a couple of months ago because Elon is a fraud and the company is falling apart. I could've been rich!
Wednesday, May 22, 2019
Rich People Are Stupid Just Like Us
One (not the only) problem with the fact that rich people have a disproportionate influence on our politics is that they are dumb. I am dumb. You are dumb. 4th generation heirs are really dumb. Maybe they aren't more dumb than me but they certainly are not inevitably smarter than the average bear. Even the not so rich give big donations and get to chat with our presidential candidates and they are certainly not so smart. Even if they aren't advocating for their obvious class interests they are... dumb.
Tuesday, May 21, 2019
Dance A Dickless Jig
The people who swing elections are mostly dumb and usual nonvoters. I don't mean "dumb" as an insult, I mean it in the sense that they are people who spend their blissful lives worrying about anything other than politics and, unlike you freaks and weirdos, have never heard of a "Ben Shapiro."
They tend to have this strange idea that if they bother to go pull a lever somewhere, something might happen. And if it doesn't, they go back to more productive pursuits and hobbies.
They tend to have this strange idea that if they bother to go pull a lever somewhere, something might happen. And if it doesn't, they go back to more productive pursuits and hobbies.
What Choice Do They Have
The president is doing crimes and the Dems have basically one power at the moment, and that's to try to stop the crimes. "Oh no you can't possibly ask us to stop the crimes we have to pass a bunch of message bills" is the appetizer, "2020 is the most important election of our lives" is the main dish, and "fuck the voters they don't vote for us anyway, now we can't stop the crimes!" is the dessert unless they move forward.
Pelosi can't think this is sustainable.
The Post reports that at a meeting Monday night, Judiciary Committee Democrats pummeled Pelosi with the argument that initiating an inquiry would maximize legal leverage to force compliance with their oversight demands, which Trump is choking off on many fronts.
Moments ago, former White House counsel Donald McGahn, who witnessed extensive and likely criminal obstruction of justice, failed to honor a Judiciary Committee subpoena, honoring Trump’s command not to appear.
But in the meeting Pelosi pushed back, arguing that an inquiry would undercut multiple ongoing House investigations.
Pelosi can't think this is sustainable.
The Plum Line: Where are you as of this morning?
Rep. Jamie Raskin: I think that overwhelming evidence has been presented to us in the Mueller Report, and outside of it too, of high crimes and misdemeanors, and we should launch an impeachment inquiry. Remember, an inquiry doesn’t prejudge the outcome. We’re not talking about articles of impeachment.
As a member of the Judiciary and Oversight committees, I do think the logic of an impeachment inquiry is pretty overwhelming at this point.
Relaunching My Blog
Not enough of you liked the first 17 years, so I am officially relaunching it as of... now.
A Deal With Who
I don't doubt that even now the EU is willing to bend over backwards, subject to not crossing certain lines, to make life easy for Theresa May, but so much talk about Brexit in the British press is about a within-Parliament "deal," but any deal is actually with the EU and if it isn't agreed to by them it doesn't mean anything. I mean, I have negotiated a deal with myself such that you give me all your money but sadly you have not yet agreed to this.
And with Prime Minister Johnson seeming to be an inevitability, none of it means shit.
Theresa May is to set out the details of her “new deal” on Brexit in a speech at 4pm, as she paves the way for a last-ditch bid to take Britain out of the European Union before she leaves Downing Street.
The prime minister is expected to outline new proposals in a series of areas, including workers’ rights, environmental protections, and pledging a greater role for parliament in shaping the next stage of negotiations.
And with Prime Minister Johnson seeming to be an inevitability, none of it means shit.
Scorched Earth
I'm not a mindreader and I don't have any inside knowledge about why Pelosi doesn't think crimes are important, but I have one guess. No one in Congress (or, enough of them don't) wants the Barr Justice Department shining a flashlight up their asses.
Monday, May 20, 2019
Philly People - Vote For Henry Sias
Henry's been a friend for a dozen years or so. He's running for judge in the Court of Common Pleas. Hit his button tomorrow!
More People
My neighborhood could use some more people. Perhaps not a million more people, but some more people. More people means more demand for neighborhood serving local shops which means more local shops exist which means there are more things within a 10 minute walk that I find nice and useful.
This is true of a lot of urban neighborhoods, as housing stocks haven't changed much (we haven't actually built skyscrapers everywhere) but household sizes have. Same amount of sq. feet of residential housing, fewer people per sq. foot.
The problem is that over time there were also more cars per person, and more people expecting parking to be free or cheap and always available. The car people value this parking more than pretty much everything and the rest of us do not.
It is a problem.
This is true of a lot of urban neighborhoods, as housing stocks haven't changed much (we haven't actually built skyscrapers everywhere) but household sizes have. Same amount of sq. feet of residential housing, fewer people per sq. foot.
The problem is that over time there were also more cars per person, and more people expecting parking to be free or cheap and always available. The car people value this parking more than pretty much everything and the rest of us do not.
It is a problem.
Asymmetry
One (not the only) reason Democrats love getting in front of the camera and criticizing their newly elected presidents (Clinton, Obama) is that, at least if those criticisms are coming from the right, people will point the cameras at them. In the mirror universe world where Hillary Clinton is under investigation and people are talking impeachment, the first Democrat to say something like this would have been given their own dressing room at all 3 cable news networks.
The New York Times put the Amash story on... A19.
The New York Times put the Amash story on... A19.
The Bubble
Most people - even people who live in the evil coastal liberal enclaves - don't live in the "bubble" the reporters and centrist goober pundits are always yammering about. The people who do live in the bubble are... those people. New York City, for example, is a city of 9 million people and not all of them went to school near Boston and then had their parents float their entire lifestyle for their 20s so they could afford to live in New York City while "hustling" for a job in elite journalism by networking with other similar people. I mean, the way to get outside the "New York City" bubble that they keep talking about is to strike up a conversation with literally any random person walking down the street in New York City who isn't walking in or out of the NYT building, because that bubble isn't about New York City, or mostly not even the rural/urban divide, it's about about class. Not class having to do with money - though that too - but a tiny sliver of of the population that had a very particular path through life which put them in a position to write about "the heartland" as if it was Mars. Bitches.
Sunday, May 19, 2019
HIGH SPEED MAGLEV MONORAIL
It's like dumb mass transit idea bingo. Why does nobody understand how public transit works.
Even before getting to the technology, what people really value is a one seat ride. Make them switch and they're not going to want to ride it.
I think the proposal is to take it from Seacucus Junction to the Meadowlands, which is about FOUR AND ONE HALF MILES. Nothing traveling four and a half miles needs to be either high speed or on magnets and I will never understand the obsession with monorails and also too if it's maglev it isn't on a rail oh never mind.
What you need is high frequency and high capacity. Get something up to the space age speed of 60MPH and it will take FIVE MINUTES to travel this distance.
Even before getting to the technology, what people really value is a one seat ride. Make them switch and they're not going to want to ride it.
A magnetic monorail is being considered to spare drivers the extra time in traffic getting to and from the American Dream in East Rutherford.
The high-speed Maglev monorail -- which floats on magnets -- would be an alternative to the extension of the Meadowlands rail line, currently operating out of MetLife Stadium, Gov. Phil Murphy said.
I think the proposal is to take it from Seacucus Junction to the Meadowlands, which is about FOUR AND ONE HALF MILES. Nothing traveling four and a half miles needs to be either high speed or on magnets and I will never understand the obsession with monorails and also too if it's maglev it isn't on a rail oh never mind.
What you need is high frequency and high capacity. Get something up to the space age speed of 60MPH and it will take FIVE MINUTES to travel this distance.
2016 Was Already Great
I suppose it's true that Obama would have won a third term against Trump if he couldawoulda run again. But there's also a reason voters chuck out the incumbent party, and Obama was, whatever his flaws, a uniquely talented politician.
Joe Biden is not a uniquely talented politician. You can get 6,000 people to show up in Philadelphia for free water ice day. Next time, offer free water ice at your campaign rally.
local delicacy wooder ice
Joe Biden is not a uniquely talented politician. You can get 6,000 people to show up in Philadelphia for free water ice day. Next time, offer free water ice at your campaign rally.
local delicacy wooder ice
Even I Leave The City Occasionally
NYC reporters, man.
Observations from Iowa - it is very flat, driving is monotonous, there is more unbuilt land in one block than NYC has in an entire borough, dirt roads are terrifying, no one carries almond milk and caucus-goers are extremely well-informed.
— Sally Goldenberg (@SallyGold) May 18, 2019
Saturday, May 18, 2019
Friday, May 17, 2019
Jeffrey Goldberg
The post-9/11 era was... really it's impossible to explain it to people who didn't live through it. And it was about a 5 year period, not a few weeks. It also made the careers of people who are still with us now. The wronger they were the more successful they have been! Such is The Discourse.
The Atlantic is a bad magazine run by a bad person who occasionally runs good things by good people in order to cover for the fact that it is a bad magazine.
My "favorite" post-9/11 nonsense was in the greatest of magazines, the New Yorker, which is known for its attention to detail and truth and its fact checking and the amount of shrooms someone must have eaten to have written this.
The Atlantic is a bad magazine run by a bad person who occasionally runs good things by good people in order to cover for the fact that it is a bad magazine.
My "favorite" post-9/11 nonsense was in the greatest of magazines, the New Yorker, which is known for its attention to detail and truth and its fact checking and the amount of shrooms someone must have eaten to have written this.
Republican Cops
Congress - and that means the Dems in the House - are going to have to use what powers they have. Mueller was never going to save us.
The Wanker Party
Imagine if, say, John McCain (when alive, not Zombie McCain), Joe Lieberman, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, and Claire McCaskill had come together at some point to start a third party. Jon Chait would have had a cover story about them being the future of politics in the Old New Republic. David Brooks would have gushed. Front page stories in the New York Times about how this was going to DOOM the Democratic party (but not the Republican party because reasons). Morning Joe would've dedicated 3 solid weeks to their unveiling. And then... nobody else in the world would have given a shit. That's Change UK.
Fawlty Towers, Alan Partridge, The Office: finally the great British tradition of it’s-so-awkward-you-want-to-look-away-but-you-can’t comedy has a new addition, and it’s called Change UK. The critics may argue that this iteration lays the cringe factor on a little too thick, however. When Change UK’s Joan Ryan asked her audience in Bath to “look at your hands, please”, followed by “that’s it, it’s there, that’s the answer to this, it’s in your hands” – in what can only be described as panicked primary school teacher meets David Brent’s infamous motivational speech – the horror was compounded by the fact she’d clearly done this before, and that the audience clapped. Is this a political party, or is it performance art?
The tragicomedy of Change UK is principally one of hubris. You can see, to be fair, why they thought success might beckon. There is a rich seam of sympathy for their brand of politics within the British media, and there’s no doubt that many remain voters feel disillusioned, angry even, about Labour’s Brexit triangulation. But the principal flaw in their plan was this: former Labour MPs Chuka Umunna and Chris Leslie believe that being a Blairite means automatically inheriting a political elixir from 1990s Tony Blair, of electoral success, and generally being very good at politics.
Robotaxis
I don't care about Tesla the company, but I do care about Tesla the menace to society. Musk's most recent bet is claiming that all relatively new Teslas are hardware capable - with a minor computer upgrade - to be a fully automated robotaxi. Once they figure the software out. They'll never figure the software out because they won't, so this is just a scam, but they also aren't hardware capable.
The "enhancements" refer to enhanced use of, not actually a hardware enhancement.
With systems like these you can't separate out "it's the driver's fault" (unless, perhaps, he was napping in the back seat) from "it's the system's fault." The two work together and no matter how much a driver is paying attention, there isn't time to react quickly enough from the moment you realize your HAL-9000 is about to drive you into a truck.
Among the NTSB’s findings was that the car’s sensors weren’t designed to identify the side of the truck and, therefore, didn’t slow the car.
Four months after the May 2016 crash, which killed former Navy SEAL Joshua Brown, Tesla Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk held a call with reporters to discuss a new version of the Autopilot software. Enhancements to the radar used as part of the company’s driver-assistance system likely would have detected the semi trailer, he said at the time.
The "enhancements" refer to enhanced use of, not actually a hardware enhancement.
With systems like these you can't separate out "it's the driver's fault" (unless, perhaps, he was napping in the back seat) from "it's the system's fault." The two work together and no matter how much a driver is paying attention, there isn't time to react quickly enough from the moment you realize your HAL-9000 is about to drive you into a truck.
Stop Talking About Harvard
For some reason minor things that happen at Harvard are always national news. The latest is the law professor who moonlights as a House Dean (which means he lives in a dorm apartment and has some custodial/guidance role for students, including where they go to report things like Title IX issues) who also is going to moonlight as a highly paid defense lawyer for Harvey Weinstein because I guess that's just the kind of thing law professors do. Nice work! Humanities professors other than law professors (who are also, too, humanities professors even though they pretend otherwise) are a bit confused by this state of affairs, but that's another issue.
Lots of people are up in arms because apparently if ever someone receives any criticism for being a defense lawyer then no one can ever get an adequate defense again, and the shortcomings in our justice system begin with Harvey Weinstein, a very rich guy who will have a team of very high priced lawyers, including this one who has lost has dorm apartment after a long history of complaints. I, too, think all people should get adequate defense and think that lawyers should generally not be criticized for taking on clients, even ones accused of doing horrific things. I am not sure how this inviolate principle, which most people talking about just decided was important 3 days ago, extends to the idea that the undergraduate college at Harvard University should never consider whether someone's third (!!!) job might conflict with their second. No one's trying to banish the guy from polite society for agreeing to earn buckets of money to defend Harvey Weinstein (although to be honest, if lawyers make their reputations defending high profile clients, I don't see why this can't break them, too, but I digress...).
The idea that lawyers should be able to defend scumbags (fair!) does not mean that lawyers are free from all criticism and it certainly does not mean that another employer could ever find a reasonable conflict between their lawyer job and their non-lawyer job of running a college dorm.
It is dumb that the hiring decisions for a dorm counselor (despite the fancy title, that's what it is) at Harvard becomes national news as there are almost always better examples to use to defend whatever important principle you are defending, though generally the important principle in all of these situations is "the right of Harvard professors to not be criticized by students - except when I agree with those criticisms - shall not be abridged." I have no opinion on who Harvard should hire for their dorm counselors!
But the Weinstein trial isn't just about defending a scumbag. The alleged victims are going to be dragged inside and outside of the courtroom. High profile cases with expensive lawyers such as this aren't just about what goes on in the courtroom, they also involve an extensive PR battle. It may not be obstruction of justice to smear the accusers in the press as a way of pressuring them to go away, but that's what is going to happen. The trial is going to be gross in every way, and much of it will be how it plays out in public. This isn't To Kill A Mockingbird. It's gonna be a sleazy. 19-year old college student might not feel comfortable reporting her sexual assault to the guy helping to smear accusers in the press! Not so crazy!
Weinstein deserves representation and he's rich so he's going to get a lot of it! Congratulations to all the lawyers who are going to get rich doing this very important job. Sorry one of you lost your dorm apartment.
Lots of people are up in arms because apparently if ever someone receives any criticism for being a defense lawyer then no one can ever get an adequate defense again, and the shortcomings in our justice system begin with Harvey Weinstein, a very rich guy who will have a team of very high priced lawyers, including this one who has lost has dorm apartment after a long history of complaints. I, too, think all people should get adequate defense and think that lawyers should generally not be criticized for taking on clients, even ones accused of doing horrific things. I am not sure how this inviolate principle, which most people talking about just decided was important 3 days ago, extends to the idea that the undergraduate college at Harvard University should never consider whether someone's third (!!!) job might conflict with their second. No one's trying to banish the guy from polite society for agreeing to earn buckets of money to defend Harvey Weinstein (although to be honest, if lawyers make their reputations defending high profile clients, I don't see why this can't break them, too, but I digress...).
The idea that lawyers should be able to defend scumbags (fair!) does not mean that lawyers are free from all criticism and it certainly does not mean that another employer could ever find a reasonable conflict between their lawyer job and their non-lawyer job of running a college dorm.
It is dumb that the hiring decisions for a dorm counselor (despite the fancy title, that's what it is) at Harvard becomes national news as there are almost always better examples to use to defend whatever important principle you are defending, though generally the important principle in all of these situations is "the right of Harvard professors to not be criticized by students - except when I agree with those criticisms - shall not be abridged." I have no opinion on who Harvard should hire for their dorm counselors!
But the Weinstein trial isn't just about defending a scumbag. The alleged victims are going to be dragged inside and outside of the courtroom. High profile cases with expensive lawyers such as this aren't just about what goes on in the courtroom, they also involve an extensive PR battle. It may not be obstruction of justice to smear the accusers in the press as a way of pressuring them to go away, but that's what is going to happen. The trial is going to be gross in every way, and much of it will be how it plays out in public. This isn't To Kill A Mockingbird. It's gonna be a sleazy. 19-year old college student might not feel comfortable reporting her sexual assault to the guy helping to smear accusers in the press! Not so crazy!
Weinstein deserves representation and he's rich so he's going to get a lot of it! Congratulations to all the lawyers who are going to get rich doing this very important job. Sorry one of you lost your dorm apartment.
Thursday, May 16, 2019
Shut It Down
Because it's my bad hobby, I've been paying close attention to this stuff and Tesla's bullshit system is dangerous and needs to be shut down.
It's clearly worse than other similar systems and they make it worse by suggesting, in various ways, that it's much better than it is. Tesla drivers believe they are "teaching" the system when they get in near accidents [narrator: they are not]. It's a menace.
David Friedman, who was acting head of the NHTSA in 2014 and is now vice president of advocacy for Consumer Reports, said he was surprised the agency didn’t declare Autopilot defective after the Gainesville crash and seek a recall. The Delray Beach crash, he said, reinforces that Autopilot is being allowed to operate in situations it cannot handle safely.
“Their system cannot literally see the broad side of an 18-wheeler on the highway,” Friedman said.
Tesla’s system was too slow to warn the driver to pay attention, unlike systems that Consumer Reports has tested from General Motors Co. and other companies, Friedman said. GM’s Super Cruise driver assist system operates only on divided highways with no median turn lanes, he said.
It's clearly worse than other similar systems and they make it worse by suggesting, in various ways, that it's much better than it is. Tesla drivers believe they are "teaching" the system when they get in near accidents [narrator: they are not]. It's a menace.
But Human Drivers Are Unsafe Too!!!
Compared with some hypothetical nonexistent system, maybe human drivers are worse, but compared with Tesla's bullshit system, the problem with human drivers is they think they can trust it.
Tesla supposedly requires that drivers keep their hands on the wheels at all times, and there's some easily bypassed system which performs some check, but keeping your hands on the wheel doesn't do much if your "autopilot" system goes rogue at 65 MPH. You can't react fast enough even if you are paying attention.
There's a lot to be said about this. A big thing is that no matter what the fine print says, Musk likes to suggest that these driver assist features are much more capable than they are. And since they push out software updates regularly, there's no authority performing any actual safety checks on these things. Also, given the regular updates, drivers can't even get used to how the system "behaves" as it changes.
Tesla wants to have it both ways - their system is awesome and safe and can drive itself if ever it goes wrong it's the fault of the driver.
Tesla’s advanced driver assist system, Autopilot, was active when a Model 3 driven by a 50-year-old Florida man crashed into the side of a tractor-trailer truck on March 1st, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) states in a report released on Thursday. Investigators reviewed video and preliminary data from the vehicle and found that neither the driver nor Autopilot “executed evasive maneuvers” before striking the truck.
Tesla supposedly requires that drivers keep their hands on the wheels at all times, and there's some easily bypassed system which performs some check, but keeping your hands on the wheel doesn't do much if your "autopilot" system goes rogue at 65 MPH. You can't react fast enough even if you are paying attention.
There's a lot to be said about this. A big thing is that no matter what the fine print says, Musk likes to suggest that these driver assist features are much more capable than they are. And since they push out software updates regularly, there's no authority performing any actual safety checks on these things. Also, given the regular updates, drivers can't even get used to how the system "behaves" as it changes.
Tesla wants to have it both ways - their system is awesome and safe and can drive itself if ever it goes wrong it's the fault of the driver.
Problems For Other People
It's always fun to mock the various entries in the neverending series "Lifestyles Of The Not Quite Rich Enough" in the NYT, but mocking aside it is true that financial anxiety is creeping higher and higher up the income distribution. My favorite way to read the funny pages (when I remember) is to be attune to the we versus they distinction in reporting. Some things happen to "us" and some things happen to "them." One would think this is the kind of thing that objecitudinal reporters would have beaten out of them in journalism school, but it's usually quite obvious, especially in a certain New York paper where much of the rest of the world is merely a fantasy in a child's snow globe.
We worry about our helicopter rides to the Hamptons, they worry about paying for dentistry. Until we do, too.
We worry about our helicopter rides to the Hamptons, they worry about paying for dentistry. Until we do, too.
Mayor of New York City Is A Big Job
Powers of the local executive are not always as great as one imagines, between the state on one side and city council on the other, but I'm still reasonably sure running a city of 9 million people, even if you don't get to do much other than ribbon cuttings and elementary school assemblies, can take a bit of time.
Aside from the question of whether de Blasio is Good or Bad generally, I do not get thinking well, hey, this job is kinda boring so I'm gonna go run for president too. Especially as he is not exactly known for his 16 hour days.
Aside from the question of whether de Blasio is Good or Bad generally, I do not get thinking well, hey, this job is kinda boring so I'm gonna go run for president too. Especially as he is not exactly known for his 16 hour days.
Priorities Change
People get mad at the generational stuff...but in different phases of life your priorities change a bit. I'm not saying I have radically different views about things than I did when I was 30, but it's fair to say that the priority list has been shuffled.
Some of that is being selfish because I am human. Some of that is having a growing understanding of some issues (retirement planning! elder care!), and a receding understanding of others (the kids today and their avocados and iphones). Some of that is just getting worn down by caring about the same unsolved shit for so many years.
The boomers are getting old. Even the good ones (and, no, they aren't all good) aren't going to care about the same things they did 20 years ago.
Some of that is being selfish because I am human. Some of that is having a growing understanding of some issues (retirement planning! elder care!), and a receding understanding of others (the kids today and their avocados and iphones). Some of that is just getting worn down by caring about the same unsolved shit for so many years.
The boomers are getting old. Even the good ones (and, no, they aren't all good) aren't going to care about the same things they did 20 years ago.
Wednesday, May 15, 2019
Women...How Do They Work?
I know I keep pushing this but proper and necessary medical treatment is incompatible with abortion restrictions, and not simply because (even though it's true!) abortion is a part of the set of proper and necessary medical treatments. I do think anti-choice movement people are quite serious about their vision of Gilead - with the usual "rules for thee and not for me and mine" caveat - but I'm not entirely sure about all other self-described anti-choice people. Some will be in denial (truthfully or not?) and some I think genuinely think whoa I said criminaLIZE not CRIMINALize as if somehow you can outlaw abortion without outlawing it. Some people are just dumb and think The Law in All Its Majesty will effortlessly distinguish between Good Abortions and Miscarriages and Bad Abortions and Miscarriages because cops and DAs are very well-trained in divining the wisdom of Jesus on these matters.
I guess my point is that it's as bad as the real anti-life movement people want it to be, and I'm not quite sure about the rest? Not a defense of any of them. They signed on to this.
I guess my point is that it's as bad as the real anti-life movement people want it to be, and I'm not quite sure about the rest? Not a defense of any of them. They signed on to this.
Pretending To Be Stupid For Jesus Or Lying For Jesus
The eternal mystery.
It means prosecution won’t touch miscarriage cases bc they would lose, as they should. I don’t know a single pro-life person or lawmaker that wants to criminalize miscarriage, that is insane. But AL WILL go after abortionists profiting from the deaths of children + women’s pain https://t.co/m4VLR3CAJp
— Lila Rose (@LilaGraceRose) May 15, 2019
No Medical Care For Women
I know the conventional wisdom is that when abortion is banned, rich white ladies (and the mistresses of rich white men) will still be able to get abortions. And, sure, true enough for people rich enough, but abortion isn't just about abortion qua abortion. It's about anything uterus-related or about anything that might affect fetal development. It's about miscarriages. It's about needing emergency (especially, but not just) treatment for anything and having the doctors be unwilling to treat you because there's a fetus in there and anesthesia might disturb it.
Even rich white ladies won't be able to escape this. Women won't be able to get needed medical treatment at all, even if it has nothing to do with wanting an abortion. And doctors are going to flee these states because how could you not?
Even rich white ladies won't be able to escape this. Women won't be able to get needed medical treatment at all, even if it has nothing to do with wanting an abortion. And doctors are going to flee these states because how could you not?
Tuesday, May 14, 2019
What Is Journalism
A problem is that the correlation between "the noble ideals of journalism" and "how much you get paid for journalism" is negative. People who get paid to read teleprompters on teevee get paid the most. Everyone wants a piece of that, eventually, so no one is going to point out that Wolf Blitzer almost never does anything that actually resembles "journalism" (once in awhile he probably manages a decent interview question) or that the Pentagon having CNN pay their spokesperson Barbara Starr so that the taxpayers don't have to is a strange system.
One doesn't even need to single out Fox (as opposed to CNN or MSNBC or much of network TV news or...) to note that most of what we call "journalism" does not resemble some necessary-for-the-Republic investigative reporting.
One doesn't even need to single out Fox (as opposed to CNN or MSNBC or much of network TV news or...) to note that most of what we call "journalism" does not resemble some necessary-for-the-Republic investigative reporting.
Slay Queen
Fox News is a hate-for-profit racket that gives a megaphone to racists and conspiracy theorists. I won’t ask Democratic primary voters to tune into an outlet that profits from racism and hate in order to see our candidates. Sign up now to join me and take a stand.
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) May 14, 2019
Going to be a lot of journalists taking to the fainting couches, because while Republicans can build their entire political movement around calling reporters "the enemy of the people" - often on Fox News! - Democrats have to pretend that even Fox News is Actually, Good, because journalism is important.
Own Your Own Robotaxi
Apologies because this is admittedly entering "people on the internet are wrong" territory, but one of the fantasies peddled by Elon Musk about his "full self driving" vaporware is something called the "Tesla Network." To varying degrees he hints, suggests, and claims that any day now he's gonna send a software update and everyone with a relatively new Tesla is going to be able to both drive itself everywhere and make you lots of money operating as a taxi while you work or sleep or otherwise don't need the car. This is ridiculous, but Musk fans are true believers and a lot of them believe it.
Even leaving aside the technological fantasy (narrator: they will never work), don't people have any idea how much wear and tear taxis get? Every suitcase is likely to scuff the paint (as an aside, not sure how granny's get her suitcase in the trunk) or the seats. Minor scrapes and fender benders are inevitable, even if it isn't the fault of your robot taxi's brain. And cars just don't last all that long with that kind of driving without a team keeping them together with gum and twine. Which is fine for beaters, but Tesla owners have or think they have a luxury car, and repair costs absurdly high for them. And that's before we get to drunks puking in them, which is of course a thing.
I have read the internet, and it contains madness.
Even leaving aside the technological fantasy (narrator: they will never work), don't people have any idea how much wear and tear taxis get? Every suitcase is likely to scuff the paint (as an aside, not sure how granny's get her suitcase in the trunk) or the seats. Minor scrapes and fender benders are inevitable, even if it isn't the fault of your robot taxi's brain. And cars just don't last all that long with that kind of driving without a team keeping them together with gum and twine. Which is fine for beaters, but Tesla owners have or think they have a luxury car, and repair costs absurdly high for them. And that's before we get to drunks puking in them, which is of course a thing.
I have read the internet, and it contains madness.
Also, Too, Labor Costs
My theory about one reason firms are especially sociopathic about labor costs is it's something everyone can understand. Similar to WE ONLY PAID X% IN TAXES is something simple people can understand, even if the cost of achieving that is murky. "Nobody" knows how much some piece of equipment for the factory should cost - and even if they do they don't have much control over it - but they do know that FIFTEEN DOLLARS PER HOUR sounds like some ridiculously high amount of money to pay the proles. No one's going to lose their job (or get rewarded) for overpaying (underpaying) for things nobody understands the cost of. But labor costs and wages are something people have a good sense of.
This is especially true in franchise retail businesses, like fast food. Owners and managers control almost no part of their business except labor hours and costs. A McDonald's franchise is mostly what McDonald's says it is, except the manager/owner manages the workers.
This is especially true in franchise retail businesses, like fast food. Owners and managers control almost no part of their business except labor hours and costs. A McDonald's franchise is mostly what McDonald's says it is, except the manager/owner manages the workers.
Sport
I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that rich people and corporations would pay $10 to save $1 in taxes. It's a bit fuzzier with corporations because corporations are collections of people, but certainly the people whose job it is to worry about such things in corporations would happily pay $10 to save $1 in taxes. Creative finance by the people you pay to do creative finance.
"Not paying taxes" is just one of those rich people sports, like hunting elephants.
"Not paying taxes" is just one of those rich people sports, like hunting elephants.
RT IF YOU AGREE
I know I am old and what kind of dumbasses ever thought there was any point to this blog thing (probably wasn't, tbh), but Twitter "activism," man...
Monday, May 13, 2019
Mars, Bitches
This made the rounds again after Jeff Bezos revealed his Elysium plans, but it applies to every dumb billionaire and non-billionaire nerd fantasy that we have to go to the "stars" in order to save humanity when the Earth gets all blowed up somehow.
Maybe we'd better figure out how to transform our selves into sentient space cloud beings before the supernova, but, otherwise, doing our best to keep this little blue dot going for a little while longer is a bit better use of our AmazonBucks. Generally "ameliorating human suffering, whatever the current circumstances" should be our concern, and I don't think our billionaires with their lego space toys care much about that, really.
Let’s start with Mars, which is a favorite planet for colonization scenarios, including for Elon Musk who thinks we should colonize Mars because earth will eventually face a “doomsday scenario”. The problem with this is that there is almost nothing that could happen to earth that would make it less hospitable than Mars. Whether it’s nuclear war or massive global warming, post disaster earth would be way more habitable than Mars.
Maybe we'd better figure out how to transform our selves into sentient space cloud beings before the supernova, but, otherwise, doing our best to keep this little blue dot going for a little while longer is a bit better use of our AmazonBucks. Generally "ameliorating human suffering, whatever the current circumstances" should be our concern, and I don't think our billionaires with their lego space toys care much about that, really.
Everybody Who Talks About Politics Sounds Like An Idiot
I know this is a problematic observation given what I do all day, but have you ever noticed this? Ever been sitting at a cafe overhearing the conversation at the nearby table where people are talking politics and not thought "wow, these people are fucking idiots?" And I mean that I am sure if people are at the next table overhearing my conversation about politics they are thinking, "wow, what a fucking idiot." This isn't about agreement or disagreement it's just that it's a topic that no one can actually sound smart about in casual conversation, even if they are. It's hard to not sound like you're just auditioning to be an NPR contributor or recycling some stuff you read in an op-ed even if that's not what you intend to do.
I have no bigger point.
I have no bigger point.
The End Of The Second Internet Boom
Sort of kidding, but I do suspect this cycle is over. There were a few years when "uber, but for..." or "an app for" or "a magic box that tests drops of blood which only has to do with the internet because we call it TECH" seemed to be the possible way to absurd riches, and while of course there is still money to be made in them hills I doubt the "throwing billions of dollars at a Bus, but with an App" thing will continue.
Of course I know nothing.
Of course I know nothing.
WHEEEEEE
Stock market indices are simple enough for My President to respond to so mildly curious how days like this go with his advisers.
Just To Watch It Burn
We have different sets of issues, if oddly parallel in some ways, but both the UK and US press (in broad brush general terms of course) seem to be amazingly committed to watching the reality show that is, well, reality, and treating it as a show. I don't care about bullshit claims of objectivity because in very obvious ways, not just subtle ones, they decide what matters and what doesn't matter every day. What to get upset about, what they think "we" should get upset about, etc.
Yes it's the political press and Not All Journalists but the political press are the reality show editors. Their colleagues film a bunch of stuff and then they pick and choose what gets into the final cut that most people see. At some point they decided the best way to cover the reality show president was as a reality show, but even most dumb teenagers know that reality shows aren't real.
Yes it's the political press and Not All Journalists but the political press are the reality show editors. Their colleagues film a bunch of stuff and then they pick and choose what gets into the final cut that most people see. At some point they decided the best way to cover the reality show president was as a reality show, but even most dumb teenagers know that reality shows aren't real.
Sunday, May 12, 2019
I Could've Voted For A Democrat, But Then They Nominated That Communist Joe Manchin
I do believe most professional Democrats do not get that it wasn't the fault of extreme liberals Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry, and Hillary Clinton that Republicans characterized them in that way.
Republicans are playing to win, and aren't going to stand down because Dems nominate a guy who agrees with them 99% of the time. They want team R to win.
Republicans are playing to win, and aren't going to stand down because Dems nominate a guy who agrees with them 99% of the time. They want team R to win.
"...and your 85-year-old Father-in-Law Has To Figure Out How To Do this."
Any time wonks start devising their exciting complicated "shop every 3 months on the internet to get a good deal on electricity" or whatever plans they think will make life better for all of us, just append that to their suggestions and throw it back at them.
The Team That Scores The Most Points Wins, Even If The Scoring Rules Are Complicated
There will come a moment when a team of people take responsibility for spending a billion bucks or so to unseat the incumbent president, Donald Trump. Some of these people will be mercenaries. Some will be true believing dogooders. Some will be thinking more about their careers than baby cages. All of those are actually fine as long as they understand it's their job to get it done, and that "we would've won if not for [russia, jill stein, jim comey, the new york times, berniebros, susan sarandon, stupid fucking voters, the kids today, whatever new exciting thing 2020 offers]" while perhaps was/is/willbe true, doesn't actually matter. You'll have chosen a candidate and taken a big person job and the excuses, even true ones, won't mean shit.
Saturday, May 11, 2019
Uber'd
The thing about Uber is... the really do have no model for achieving profitability. The fantasy model was achieving monopoly but there was no way to do that. IP law is a bit above my pay grade and I never asked the question, but how they never managed to patent "a means for summoning a car with an app" is curious given some of the ridiculous software patents that have been out there, but apparently they didn't. So they will always have competitors. The thing about setting up a low entry cost business is that it's low entry cost and while there is some scale benefit of a network it just isn't that hard to replicate with a taxi fleet because you can do it pretty locally. Not that their competitors will make big money, either, but there's nothing preventing them from existing.
Even the earlier fantasy of having a self-driving taxi fleet didn't make any sense, unless they had a monopoly on the self-driving taxis somehow.
Lots of businesses make enough to stay in business even if they don't make The Big Money. Like cab companies.
They've squeezed as much as they can (or more) out of driver costs and... what's left? "I like Uber" seems to be the rationale for people throwing their money at them, but...
Even the earlier fantasy of having a self-driving taxi fleet didn't make any sense, unless they had a monopoly on the self-driving taxis somehow.
Lots of businesses make enough to stay in business even if they don't make The Big Money. Like cab companies.
They've squeezed as much as they can (or more) out of driver costs and... what's left? "I like Uber" seems to be the rationale for people throwing their money at them, but...
What If They... Just Don't Care?
What if... people in the political press know exactly what they are doing and if they are doing something wrong - even by their supposed standards, not mine - they just don't care?
Then all the measured criticism in the world means nothing and calling them assholes on twitter is the best we can do.
Then all the measured criticism in the world means nothing and calling them assholes on twitter is the best we can do.
Friday, May 10, 2019
Much Disrespect For Their Times Colleagues
Chicago Tribune:
In case you missed it, Rahm Emanuel penned a commentary for Thursday’s New York Times hailing his police reform efforts. With no disrespect for our Times colleagues: Had the mayor submitted his piece to the Tribune for publication, we would have performed heavier editing.
Getting A Bit Older Every Day
Us olds got on facebook because it was, for a moment, a kind of wacky weird new way to get in touch with people you hadn't seen in a million years and stay in touch with current ones. It's not necessary for the first bit and is now very bad at the second bit. I have no idea why any person under the age of 25 would look at facebook, which still has a worse UI than this sucky blog, and think "I gotta do that."
Obviously facebook the company owns other things and has other ways of getting its tentacles into your life, but facebook dot com is so bad.
Obviously facebook the company owns other things and has other ways of getting its tentacles into your life, but facebook dot com is so bad.
We Don't Need No
I don't know what to do with a country of these people.
Back in December, Washington state Trump supporter Joshua Greene donated a small amount of money to the crowdfunding effort to build a wall along the southern U.S. border. He wasn’t alone. The GoFundMe page to build the wall, to which he’d donated, was a sensation on the right in late 2018 and raised more than $20 million.
Organized by triple-amputee veteran Brian Kolfage, the campaign eventually morphed into a nonprofit called We Build the Wall, which promised to build portions of the wall on private land using the money it raised.
The Scary Noisy City
I went to the fancy opera the other night, which I walk to or take the bus to because I am a true elitist, and after the end of the show an older-than-me man (I can't say just "older" anymore because, well...) joked to his wife, "my car was parked in a parking lot just half a block away before the show, though I'm not sure if it'll still be there." He was kidding in that he wasn't really worried about his car, but it was that suburban Philadelphian "I am visiting a war zone, wish me luck!" kidding-on-the-square haha the city is so frightening kind of kidding.
Philly home prices haven't exactly gone up to Seattle levels, but, you know, they aren't cheap anymore. Do they think people really are scared to leave their homes?
Philly home prices haven't exactly gone up to Seattle levels, but, you know, they aren't cheap anymore. Do they think people really are scared to leave their homes?
People Without Shame
I was about to write that people who don't care what sternly written editorials in our major newspapers say about them are a problem in our system which has depended on that extra check a bit. But, really, there haven't even been that many sternly worded editorials? While I'm not thinking of Trump specifically - I mean everyone around him - how many editorial boards *didn't* call on Clinton to resign?
Thursday, May 09, 2019
The War On Christmas
Gotta start early this year, troops. Gonna win this time.
Joke aside, I always marvel at how unreligious most self-professed US Christians are. I don't mean in a "who is a good Christian" sense. And I also get that you can be a cultural Christian in the same way as you can be a cultural Jew or cultural Muslim etc. You don't have to be a believer for the various rituals and traditions to be a part of your life and family life.
I mean that if I professed to be a believer in this how-to-avoid-eternal-damnation self help book, I'd probably crack it open now and again.
Joke aside, I always marvel at how unreligious most self-professed US Christians are. I don't mean in a "who is a good Christian" sense. And I also get that you can be a cultural Christian in the same way as you can be a cultural Jew or cultural Muslim etc. You don't have to be a believer for the various rituals and traditions to be a part of your life and family life.
I mean that if I professed to be a believer in this how-to-avoid-eternal-damnation self help book, I'd probably crack it open now and again.
Rigged
Dem primaries aren't "rigged" precisely, but there is a payoff in not just appealing to "voters" in some broad sense, but in getting the support of various influential people who, through their influence, try to help you get support! That's sort of a normal part of politics which is not new and which we all understand. Get the local leaders, the union leaders, the various community leaders, the issue leaders, etc. Gather those endorsements. I think a trickier bit is that "influential people" now also includes various people who are paid to opine on TV, not precisely in an objective sense, but in a not being totally explicit about their sympathies sense. Especially with the revolving door aspect...from teevee to the White House and back again.
I'm not saying this is corrupt, just that it is a thing which is fair to observe and point out. People are making career bets.
I'm not saying this is corrupt, just that it is a thing which is fair to observe and point out. People are making career bets.
My Perogatives
The White House is playing games with the White House press passes - basically making them all at the whim of Smokey Eye (DAMN YOU MICHELLE WOLF!!!!!!!!!!!!) instead of them being "permanent" - and I've seen comments like "this is how fascism starts" and while it's dumb and bad... no. Even if it's perfectly understandable that the press defends its own turf, the White House has been shitting on the press for years and there has been much less solidarity on this front than even cynical me expected. This isn't a "first they came for Dana Milbank..." kind of thing because they came for a lot of other people before Dana and not enough of you did anything about it.
Wednesday, May 08, 2019
And It's On
Echidne's yearly fundraiser, that is. Read the post on how to decipher gender studies, then chip in a few shekels to help keep the the Snake's blog afloat!
Please Impeach Yourself, Mr. President
Submit yourself to the Marshall of the Supreme Court, confess all your crimes, and report to the Phantom Zone.
“The point is that every single day, whether it’s obstruction, obstruction, obstruction — obstruction of having people come to the table with facts, ignoring subpoenas . . . every single day, the president is making a case — he’s becoming self-impeachable, in terms of some of the things that he is doing,” Pelosi said at a Washington Post Live event.
Tuesday, May 07, 2019
With Some Power Comes Some Responsibility
I know the House Democrats don't have infinite power, but they have some, and they idea that they shouldn't do aggressive oversight because, well, voters might not like it and after all there's an election in (checks calendar) 16 months, is absurd.
Above my pay grade to know if the best strategy is to start impeachment hearings yesterday, or to haul Jared in and put him in the stocks, or (I'll even allow) do aggressive oversight and hearings and investigation that avoid direct legal confrontations with Trump until the time is right.
But even during the Bush years they took the time to come up with arcane legal arguments every time they didn't want pesky Democrats getting in their bizness - gotta admit "Fourthbranch" was pretty clever! - and the Trummpkins are just responding to requests and subpoenas with the Ancient Common Law argument of "LOL no" with both "LOL" and "no" spelled incorrectly.
Gotta make some effort to not further enshrine that congressional oversight of Republican presidents by a Democratic Congress is merely a courtesy, because we're creeping pretty close to the idea that letting Democrats in office at all is merely a courtesy. Everybody knows the Supreme Court is about to enshrine the notakebacks precedent that "Democrat laws are unconstitutional" as it is.
Above my pay grade to know if the best strategy is to start impeachment hearings yesterday, or to haul Jared in and put him in the stocks, or (I'll even allow) do aggressive oversight and hearings and investigation that avoid direct legal confrontations with Trump until the time is right.
But even during the Bush years they took the time to come up with arcane legal arguments every time they didn't want pesky Democrats getting in their bizness - gotta admit "Fourthbranch" was pretty clever! - and the Trummpkins are just responding to requests and subpoenas with the Ancient Common Law argument of "LOL no" with both "LOL" and "no" spelled incorrectly.
Gotta make some effort to not further enshrine that congressional oversight of Republican presidents by a Democratic Congress is merely a courtesy, because we're creeping pretty close to the idea that letting Democrats in office at all is merely a courtesy. Everybody knows the Supreme Court is about to enshrine the notakebacks precedent that "Democrat laws are unconstitutional" as it is.
Today's Long Read
Pareene.
A BIT OF SYMBOLIC GENERATIONAL WARFARE has always suffused American politics, with various cliques of self-appointed “adults in the room” dismissing challengers to the status quo as immature, idealistic, or juvenile. But when it comes to figuring out what This Whole Trump Thing really means, actual juveniles are reading at several grade levels above the sophisticated adults. While editors send reporters to do anthropological fieldwork in the Rust Belt, and Democratic senators from red states fret over precisely how many unqualified ideologues they must confirm for lifetime seats on the judiciary in order to win re-election, teenagers have had the whole deal figured out from the beginning. They present their findings regularly, if you know where to look.
Making Peak Travel Time Worse
The first dumb paper I wrote for a grad school class was related to this (it was a dumb class paper so I was not INNOVATING in this area).
People who hate spending money to widen highways love to talk about "induced demand" which is how those improvements just bring more cars onto the highway as people switch to highway travel.
But it's actually worse than that. People don't just switch to highway travel from other roads and modes, they switch their travel times. And because congestion is an externality they do it in particularly infuriating - for everybody else - ways. You get more cars on the road all day, and you especially get more cars at rush hour. So, yes, widening highways can, actually, make your rush hour commute worse.
Immediately after it opened, a report commissioned by Metro found that, while the number of hours per day when peak traffic conditions existed had declined, rush hour commute times on the freeway were up compared to 2009—prior to the start of construction.
People who hate spending money to widen highways love to talk about "induced demand" which is how those improvements just bring more cars onto the highway as people switch to highway travel.
But it's actually worse than that. People don't just switch to highway travel from other roads and modes, they switch their travel times. And because congestion is an externality they do it in particularly infuriating - for everybody else - ways. You get more cars on the road all day, and you especially get more cars at rush hour. So, yes, widening highways can, actually, make your rush hour commute worse.
When You Spend A Lot Of Time On A Post, Decide It's Dumb, Then Trash It
Think about how dumb all the posts you don't see are!
Monday, May 06, 2019
Did They Game This Out
I'd like to think the Dems thought of "what if they won't release Trump's tax returns" and got further than "oh well, we tried."
Foul Sports
I didn't watch the big horse race and have no knowledge about horse racing and do not know if I agree with My President that what happened was a very politically incorrect travesty (likely not, but he gets it right occasionally!), but as for other sports I am slightly more familiar with:
I do not like games where too much of the game revolves around fouls and penalties and whatever they are called in your favorite sport. The game of football has long had too much to do with whether penalties are called, and (I am certainly not the first person to observe) that every touchdown now seems to depend on some rule requiring an instant replay to decipher (I forget, why, precisely, I am not that big of a fan), has taken the excitement out of the important moments.
They are much less important in soccer, which makes all the "flopping" (OWWW REF HE HURT ME SO BAD I FELL AND AM CRYING ok gonna get up now) that much more unforgivable. It barely matters most of the time and they do it anyway!
Basketball is half a contest about putting the ball in the hoop and half a contest of convincing a ref that the other guy touched you when he wasn't supposed to. "Drawing a foul" should not be a key game strategy.
I don't watch enough hockey to know anything.
Baseball seems ok. Can always quibble about the institution of instant replays, but at least they do seem to make correct calls more likely instead of just conforming to a different arbitrary judgment, as is often the case in football.
I am not a big sports fan so real sports fans can tell me I am wrong.
I do not like games where too much of the game revolves around fouls and penalties and whatever they are called in your favorite sport. The game of football has long had too much to do with whether penalties are called, and (I am certainly not the first person to observe) that every touchdown now seems to depend on some rule requiring an instant replay to decipher (I forget, why, precisely, I am not that big of a fan), has taken the excitement out of the important moments.
They are much less important in soccer, which makes all the "flopping" (OWWW REF HE HURT ME SO BAD I FELL AND AM CRYING ok gonna get up now) that much more unforgivable. It barely matters most of the time and they do it anyway!
Basketball is half a contest about putting the ball in the hoop and half a contest of convincing a ref that the other guy touched you when he wasn't supposed to. "Drawing a foul" should not be a key game strategy.
I don't watch enough hockey to know anything.
Baseball seems ok. Can always quibble about the institution of instant replays, but at least they do seem to make correct calls more likely instead of just conforming to a different arbitrary judgment, as is often the case in football.
I am not a big sports fan so real sports fans can tell me I am wrong.
A Future I Can Get Behind
I was looking for something randomly and came across the hilarious picture which sits on top of the linked article. The article - which I didn't even read except the headline - is about self-driving cars, but notice something about those glorious highways.
There. Are. No. Cars.
Beautiful! Now tear them down.
Minimizing the number of cars in renderings of all kinds of roads and other construction projects (this is just concept art as far as I can tell) is pretty standard, but I was impressed by zero!
There. Are. No. Cars.
Beautiful! Now tear them down.
Minimizing the number of cars in renderings of all kinds of roads and other construction projects (this is just concept art as far as I can tell) is pretty standard, but I was impressed by zero!
Ex-Airplane Manufacturer
Concern for safety is so poor, and presumably affects everything in the company, that it's not too hard to contemplate the possibility, if not current reality, of being down one major commercial airplane manufacturer that can be trusted to make airplanes that won't fall out of the sky. And that would means there was only one left.
I'm making a general point about the fragility of these kinds of things if we put too much power in private hands without appropriate regulation and safeguards. The world won't collapse tomorrow if we couldn't make anymore airplanes for awhile, but it would be a bit of an issue.
As for the specifics, a bunch of people (not sure who! just sure there are a bunch) should be in jail and no one thinks they will go because the planes weren't operating from countries "we" think matter. I'm not sure anyone thinks they would go to the slammer if planes operating from domestic carriers fell out of the sky, either.
Boeing Co. knew months before a deadly 737 Max crash that a cockpit alert wasn’t working the way the company had told buyers of the single-aisle jetliner.
I'm making a general point about the fragility of these kinds of things if we put too much power in private hands without appropriate regulation and safeguards. The world won't collapse tomorrow if we couldn't make anymore airplanes for awhile, but it would be a bit of an issue.
As for the specifics, a bunch of people (not sure who! just sure there are a bunch) should be in jail and no one thinks they will go because the planes weren't operating from countries "we" think matter. I'm not sure anyone thinks they would go to the slammer if planes operating from domestic carriers fell out of the sky, either.
Fascism
Imagine pretending to take this stuff seriously.
You can't really imagine the liberal mirror image of these people (I'm gonna leave aside the Farrakhan issue, but no he isn't a liberal), but imagine if a bunch of libturds got banned by Facebook and started whining about fascism? No one, including other libturds, would take them seriously. Sure they might criticize Facebook for sucking, but that's it. Also imagine President Obama making a statement and anybody in the press doing anything other than laughing at him.
Sure there are legitimate issues about the importance of social media and what it means to hand over such power to private entities, but these are, you know, the kinds of issues libturds bring up regularly, and not because a bunch of D-list internet weirdos got banned for being a bit too, well, fascistic.
TUCKER CARLSON (HOST): Who knew fascism could be so chirpy. Groups that do things that are dangerous. What exactly does that mean? Dangerous like hurting other people? Or dangerous as in saying things that Mark Zuckerberg doesn't like or considers bad for business? Well yesterday we found out. Facebook released its latest enemies list. Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos, Paul Joseph Watson, Louis Farrakhan, Laura Loomer - all of them were designated dangerous individuals and banned from Facebook and from its subsidiary Instagram.
You can't really imagine the liberal mirror image of these people (I'm gonna leave aside the Farrakhan issue, but no he isn't a liberal), but imagine if a bunch of libturds got banned by Facebook and started whining about fascism? No one, including other libturds, would take them seriously. Sure they might criticize Facebook for sucking, but that's it. Also imagine President Obama making a statement and anybody in the press doing anything other than laughing at him.
Sure there are legitimate issues about the importance of social media and what it means to hand over such power to private entities, but these are, you know, the kinds of issues libturds bring up regularly, and not because a bunch of D-list internet weirdos got banned for being a bit too, well, fascistic.
Anybody Else?
Sometimes our elite press tells on itself too much.
One doesn't have to have Tom Friedman's "anything called free trade is good" view to get that in the short term, at least, a few proles might have some job problems, also, too.
Trump’s Trade War Threat Poses Problems for China and Investors
One doesn't have to have Tom Friedman's "anything called free trade is good" view to get that in the short term, at least, a few proles might have some job problems, also, too.
Sunday, May 05, 2019
Sunday Afternoon
We have a big dumb race here every year and I ran it and now I am in pain.
I did not win.
I did not win.
Saturday, May 04, 2019
Edge Cases
One annoying thing about the self-driving car conversation is even relatively smart people (ones who agree with me about stuff) are always evoking the concept of "edge cases." The idea is that there's a level of normal driving which is a solvable problem, and then there are finite number of weird situations, like recognizing that a deer is going to jump out in front of you, or the lines on the road suddenly disappear or are wrongly striped, or you hit a construction zone, or the stop sign is posted upside down, and once you just teach your computer about this finite number of situations, you're all set.
But this isn't really a finite problem. It's a "need a human brain problem" and for all of the talk of AI, there is no AI. The argument is that on balance you can make it safer than a human driver, or as safe, so isn't that good enough? Even if true, safety is the wrong measure. It has to be as useful a human driver. I'm pretty sure you can program these cars not to hit things reasonably well, but it's much harder to program them to just not get confused in a parking lot. I mean, I can't imagine a car managing to navigate its way into, say, a stadium parking lot at game time. Or out again. Again, the problem isn't safety. They can usually manage to avoid things or pull off to the side of the road and say "wtf, man, help me out of this shit." But that won't be very useful. Niche limited applications might work, but they won't be very useful either.
But this isn't really a finite problem. It's a "need a human brain problem" and for all of the talk of AI, there is no AI. The argument is that on balance you can make it safer than a human driver, or as safe, so isn't that good enough? Even if true, safety is the wrong measure. It has to be as useful a human driver. I'm pretty sure you can program these cars not to hit things reasonably well, but it's much harder to program them to just not get confused in a parking lot. I mean, I can't imagine a car managing to navigate its way into, say, a stadium parking lot at game time. Or out again. Again, the problem isn't safety. They can usually manage to avoid things or pull off to the side of the road and say "wtf, man, help me out of this shit." But that won't be very useful. Niche limited applications might work, but they won't be very useful either.
So What Are You Going To Do About It
For various reasons Trump is less concerned about constraints on his tantrums every day. The Dems don't have infinite power but they need to use what they have and "just hoping this all goes away soon" is not good enough and nor is hoping that Joe Scarborough gives a teary speech about democracy and suddenly all the Republicans come around.
Democrats could easily avoid this trap by initiating impeachment proceedings now, not just on the basis of this new reporting, but the conduct detailed in the Mueller report, and the more quotidian and routine ways Trump flouts his oath of office.
They have instead chosen to communicate to Trump that all of these improprieties are acceptable—and less than a month after the Mueller report became public, their paralysis has uncorked Trump’s authoritarian desires. On Wednesday, Barr revealed that he and Trump have discussed at least some of the criminal investigations Mueller spun off to other components of the Justice Department—investigations Barr has refused to recuse himself from. Barr has also conscripted the department’s inspector general into a “review” of the origins of the Russia investigation that Trump clearly expects will yield criminal charges, however frivolous. If Democrats are too helpless to help their own candidates, how are they to help people caught up in that investigation, or the victims of the criminal behavior Mueller referred out to other prosecutors? And the worst part is that Barr has been Trump’s attorney general for only two and a half months—which means they’re just getting started.
Just Another Normal Saturday Morning
I knew of right wing nutter Prison Paul years go when he was just an internet weirdo in the UK but hadn't made the jump here.
Now we get to write things like, "President Trump praises Prison Paul on Twitter" and this novel is getting ridiculous.
Now we get to write things like, "President Trump praises Prison Paul on Twitter" and this novel is getting ridiculous.
Friday, May 03, 2019
Maybe They Should Guess How Many Jelly Beans Are In The Big Jar
With all these candidates, how are we supposed to choose?
What What Now
Politicians is weird.
Mayor de Blasio is expected to announce he’s running for president next week, according to three sources with knowledge of the plans.
And Claire McCaskill Tweeted It Out
The job of Wittes is to make people think everything's ok until it's too late.
Why nominal liberals are always looking to these types for wisdom is... puzzling.
Why nominal liberals are always looking to these types for wisdom is... puzzling.
NAIRU
Economists have been obsessed for years with the unemployment/inflation tradeoff. Also the inequality/growth tradeoff. The former was basically as sophisticated as saying "um, I think if unemployment gets below....umm... 6%? maybe that would bad." The latter was as sophisticated as posing the question and then never answering it but still believing it. That maybe higher inequality could be *bad* for growth, just thinking out loud here, was never really seriously considered. Both of these things have been excuses for really horrible policies which have caused so much suffering.
Thursday, May 02, 2019
Some Call Him The Space Cowboy
Dems we talked to believe the Trump-as-deplorable message could work better for Joe than it did for Hillary. The reasons vary, but some boil down to a simple judgment: It was the singer not the song. https://t.co/UpZEPVGmDM
— Henry J. Gomez (@HenryJGomez) May 3, 2019
There are two criticisms of the Clinton campaign (these are separate from press coverage of that campaign). One is that Clinton was, despite her backing of the entire D establishment, a bad candidate who could not overcome her reputation. The other was that Robby Mook ran a dumb campaign because Clinton hires morons. I think even most Bernie Bros side with the latter, mostly, even though Bernie Bros are not her biggest fans by definition. The criticism of the Dem establishment, that they themselves are making, is that they cannot choose the singer. This is weird. Our judgment was wrong last time we're gonna get it right this time!
The black guy from Kenya, whatever his flaws (he was black and Muslim and from Kenya and hung out with angry black communist preachers which dominated media coverage for months), ran good campaigns. Pretty sure it's the song and the dumbasses you hire.
There Are No Good Republicans
Most people don't pay much attention to politics - they have better hobbies like eating glass! - so I don't mean no people who pull the R lever, but nobody who is actively engaged in politics, even ones who just annoy you on facebook, are good. Any Nevertrumper who won't say "I will vote for the exhumed corpse of Karl Marx if he is the Democratic nominee and also in every other federal election" is just a grifter.
The Wack Pack
I think actual liberals are somewhat to blame, but it's quite amazing how many random weirdo conservatives have their every move documented. Candace Owens! Ben Shapiro! That Erick Guy!
I can't think of anything equivalent on the Left.
I can't think of anything equivalent on the Left.
Into Space!
I know I often sound like a bit of a Luddite - and fair enough - but the idea that we are going to colonize Mars is bugshit crazy. Maybe there should be manned trips there. A bit above my pay grade to know. But no we are not going to settle a new planet. It's a bit cold and lacks, well, most things we need to exist.
We can't even build a supertrain.
The United States’ eyes — and our unified commitment — should focus on opening the door, in our time, to the great migration of humankind to Mars. Books aplenty have been written about how to do this, and they have inspired government and non-government leaders to make lofty plans. But plans without a detailed architecture, and without that “next step” into the future, are just fantasy.
We can't even build a supertrain.
What To Do
I don't know, really. I am dumb. But "Trump is uniquely bad and also we, the House Democrats, are powerless" is not an especially winning message. "We'll fix it when we win the next election" is not a compelling message when...you just won an election.
At some point they're going to have to fight. They're gonna have to threaten someone with jail. Maybe they will lose that fight, but...
At some point they're going to have to fight. They're gonna have to threaten someone with jail. Maybe they will lose that fight, but...
Wednesday, May 01, 2019
Does Anybody Remember Laughter?
I am humorless now, apparently, but I just witnessed a discussion on the internet about who should play Barr on SNL and... no. Stop it.
Meritocracy
I admit I don't entirely understand these prosecutions, but every black kid in higher ed who had a peer or professor think he/she get in because of some sort of affirmative action lol.
LOS ANGELES — Federal prosecutors are pursuing a new set of parents in the college admissions fraud scandal, sending ripples of fear through elite circles in Southern California and stirring speculation about which well-heeled executive or celebrity might be the next to be charged.
We Are All Pundits Now
Pareene.
Watching Joe Biden, a man who was already too out-of-step with the party and the country to win the nomination 12 years ago, claim the “electability” mantle only strengthens that feeling. No one really wants President Biden. It’s just that the “better things aren’t possible” caucus accidentally managed to convince some large portion of the Democratic electorate that they must hold their noses and vote for actively worse things.
Expecting voters to behave like pundits—asking people to vote for what expensive consultants and Sunday show guests imagine people like them might want instead of what they actually want—would be perverse even if it worked. But unless and until the Democratic electorate can be given license to support what it supports, each failure of the “electability” paradigm will only be taken as proof of the need to retreat further into learned helplessness.
If you’re not that excited to vote for Joe Biden, I promise you, your neighbor isn’t, either.
Crimes Are Good
I get why the first round of people went to work for Trump. They figured they could control him. Dumbass president, needs some smart responsible people to take care of him. Not that all these people were smart, but they thought they were because they are people.
I don't think the first round were a bunch of dedicated public servants or anything, but maybe they didn't precisely go in it for the crimes. Now why are you there? There's no other reason.
I don't think the first round were a bunch of dedicated public servants or anything, but maybe they didn't precisely go in it for the crimes. Now why are you there? There's no other reason.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)