watwut

They cant as easily if it becomes part of index funds and such. Given high valuation, it can end up essentially mandatory part of those.

And if bubble pops only after, we get exactly situation VC want - they get reward while everyone else eats the losses they caused.

Yes, they are better colleagues. They do not get promotions, pay raise or any other recognition or reward from management. Even from colleagues who hold them in high regards, they do not get praise on meetings as much either.

However, people with ego end up being praised more, in front of bosses or others, because people want to be on their good side. And that makes them look better, they end up promoted and seen as higher performers.

> a Democratic cabinet would have to do many of the same geopolitical choices as Trump has done. , it's for example clear that US had to do something with Iran soon, because all of the economical sanctional options were squeezed to the max, there was no offramp for that country.

That is just not true. No, US did not had to start a war with Iran. There was zero reason for that, rationally. It was against all the recommendations. And especially, it did not had to waste its assets in such ridiculous way while gaining nothing. Fishman may agree with Trump or support Netanyahu or whatever, but US did not had to do it.

It also did not had to threaten Greenland. It did not had to ally itself with Putin. It did not had to try to destroy NATO. It did not had to start trade wars. It did not had to mock and insult foreign leaders. It did not had to support Orban or Bolsnaro. It did not had to murder fishermen on boats.

Going back in history, US did not had to tear down nuclear agreement with Iran either. Democratic president made it, Republican destroyed it. Claiming that Democrats would do the same choice is absurd.

LLM make communication worst.

> very capable chat-based UI that can automate a lot of tedious data entry

Because rewieving chat bots data entry is even more tedious then doing it yourself. And as long as they have to review it, it does not even matter that it makes only few mistakes.

The point of valuation is NOT to make sure investors waste as much money as necessary to turn insolvent company to solvent.

It is to figure out what ia its correct price. Otherwise the financial system turns into a scam.

They have stack ranked voting. Even if you are confused, your vote ends up counting correctly.

Also, this is nothing new, republicans did it too and non a peep of complaint.

You dont need extra manager to 5 cops force in a city with 700 people. You dont need 24/7 coverage of active duty cop either.

What is that supposed to mean in the context? Anyway:

> But rather a sign of decaying times (the fall of the USSR and the economic hardship).

Nope, people turned to crime, because it was available. You did not seen poor people turning to crime because of economic hardship, you have seen average people or people with money to turn to crime, because there was good crime opportunity.

To me, they seemed closer to normal people with normal relationships that yes, have some conflict too. Especially in a small group living together all the time where majority is not submissive, so will assert themselves here or there.

But like, Amos is a psycho.

> but wouldn't it be from the perspective of a warrior/honor culture

I do not think so. Odyssey is not gung ho adventure book.

> Isn't Voyager at least somewhat like the Odyssey?

Absolutely 100% not. They are completely different kind of fiction. Star Trek in general is not like Odyssey. Star Trek is very schematic, with fairly simple plot with moral outcome, good vs bad who will change into good, and predictable caricature like characters. It works, because it is kind of a canvass where you can project own fantasies and predict what the world will do.

Odyssey has less predictable structure, a lot of dining and talking, more grey, deception, politics. Also, they do not come back to commit a massacre by the end of Voyager.

> That's more Star Wars than Star Trek

Some TNG episodes may explore that, but I was rewatching it few months ago. It is not nuanced at all. Episodes have strong moral lesson, loud and clear, that hits you over the head. You really need to suppress a lot of disbelieve about "how world works" to buy into it. (Btw, Babylon 5 aged a lot better. It is pretty idealistic still, but less simplified.)

Afaik, that was the big thing that people living there commented on. And one of the big changes after fall of communism - eventually not everything depends on who you know and connections.

It is not equally bad in every system.

I mean, not roque LLM. But Musk, Thiel, Zuckenberg, Altman ...

Of course soviet system had crime and violence. And these products of soviet system super blew up right after it fell, ceasing opportunity no matter who or what they harmed.

> by the weakest who merely got good grades

Like who? Trump?

> The winners in our system are just the ones who get everyone else to kowtow

In soviet system, connections were literally everything. Not merit, not achievement, but who you know, who is your friends, who trades favors with you.

As we can see with Epstein files handling. And Trump rape allegations. And supreme court justice rape allegations.

And generally other wrongdoing by powerful.

> Spending many thousands of dollars to "embalm" a person and then thousands more on a big fancy wood casket.

Is that general western thing or rather "there is small western subculture that does it while the rest of the west does NOT do it"? The funeral I was involved in did not involved "thousands of dollars" equivalent of casket or embalming.

I have lately noticed a lot of claims about what "west" does that seem to be very specific to just parts of America.

It does matter who started it and responding meekly to being wronged just makes you a sucker. And conservative morality being what it is, suckers are going to be bullied for fun.

> Two wrongs don't make a right.

It is ok to respond to gerrymandering by gerrymandering. It is not kindergarten. The court said it is legal, GOP will continue to do it. If the other side does not engage, they will honorably loose all ability to influence politics.

One party is distinctively more war hungry then the other. Constantly pushing the overtone window toward more and more wars.

Both now have to gerrymander, because one party decided they gerrymander is way to go. And the other one ended up with no choice. Trying to both side this is particularly hypocritical, because one party just finally woke up and realized there is no way to be represented if they dont take countermeasures against past gerrymandering.

Court is already stacked by one party, the other one dropped the ball on that one. And its voters are paying for it. It must stack it back.

And when it comes to debt, the supposed fiscal responsibility party caused more of it.

Shakespeare is not similar to Start Trek. He has way more nuanced and realistic takes then Star Trek. Most TV shows have more nuance and psychological realism then Star Trek. Even Odyssey which is thousands years old has way more complex morality and takes then Star Trek. It does not have that super simplistic white white good against badly bad evil that will admit mistake and change into good person because Picard said a sentence.

> It's why we've been telling each other hero's journey stories since Homer.

Homer is nothing like Star Trek and its story is not a moralizing adventure.

Turns out, there is difference between an extremely simplistic fiction and actual real world reality. And turns out, quite a lot of people can distinguish between the two.

On the bad side, quite a lot of people cant.

> Hell, there's a whole industry based on arguing with insurance companies over billing that could potentially evaporate overnight[1].

It wont. Instead, insurance companies will deploy AI to defend. You will have same industry, with more convoluted rules and more tech.

The fate of companies who rushed into it before those technologies were ready was "a lot of wasted money".

What are you talking about? I liked them as people. Amos was comedic relief, a psycho, the rest of them are ... people with human personalities.

JD Vance is super easy to see example of a guy who openly disparages race of own wife and kids.

That does not make one non-white-nationalists. Politics does and that one is white nationalist one. Also, throwing Hitlers salute.

Having a kid with a Jew or sex with non white is not argument here.

They sell to Palantier. Supporting both the mass surveillance and Thiels fascist project.

Still same bullshit claim. These are requirements for academia to get money or other resources. No grants and no papers, no resources. And yes, resources are necessary.

What do you mean? Palantier is exactly what it always was. The only thing that changed is that they have open manifesto.

Using the words "born under apartheid" to describe someone from rich white familly that benefitted from apartheid and who became white nationalist ... is something.