pull down to refresh
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @oklar 1h \ on: Why Musk Is Wrong About the Fed Being ‘Absurdly Overstaffed’ news
I imagine (without reading) that this is partly poke at Musk.
He is a fallible human and could potentially be wrong, fair enough. I'm no fanboy, but actually, I much prefer him to much of his detractors.
Partly, just the usual excuse for a massively inefficient private institution that bleeds taxpayer money. Not even a US citizen but anyone can see The Federal Reserve has the easiest ride of all.
In 2020, Spector pled guilty to mediating bribes for Anastasia Alekseyeva
So, the former aide to former Prime Minister took 'lavish trips'. What does it mean to 'enable' or 'mediate' a bribe? Offer, facilitate, how exactly? I wonder, how does an employee for a medical company in Russia commit bribery or espionage?
The details are always so sketchy. Was his position high-level management, executive? What was the size of this company? Large enough to get a junior government minister embroiled in corruption or bribery charges? Hmmm, or was it that these types are charges are typically levied at political opposition, when in relaity most politicians are receiving luctrative offers.
Almost the definition of politics, and like a good game of chess, pawns are sacrificed first, I expect.
Jamie Dimon. Because inconsistancy.
I can give Peter Schiff some stopped clock credit.
ollama run dolphin-mistral >>> What has Jamie Dimon said about Bitcoin, historically? Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, has had mixed opinions on Bitcoin throughout history. Here are some notable statements: 1. September 2017: In a speech at a Delaware Economic Forum, he called Bitcoin "a fraud" and said that he would fire anyone trading it for the bank. However, he later clarified that the comment was not about the entire blockchain industry, but rather about bitcoin itself. 2. November 2017: At an investor conference in New York, Dimon described Bitcoin as "worse than tulip bulbs" and said that it will eventually blow up. He also called it a "scam." 3. June 2018: In a CNBC interview, Dimon expressed regret over his previous negative comments on bitcoin and admitted that the cryptocurrency is "real." However, he still maintained a cautious stance, stating that he didn't own any himself and that it was not something he would recommend to his clients. 4. September 2018: In an earnings call with JPMorgan investors, Dimon reiterated that he does not think bitcoin is "worth the paper it's printed on." He also stated that Bitcoin is not a substitute for fiat currency and serves no real purpose as a unit of account. 5. March 2019: During an appearance at the Economic Club of Washington, Dimon said that he had changed his mind about bitcoin and that it might one day become a legitimate part of financial system. He stated that if the price of Bitcoin goes to zero or negative, then "so be it." 6. June 2019: In an interview with CNBC, Dimon expressed concern over Facebook's Libra cryptocurrency project and its potential impact on monetary policy and the financial system. He suggested that regulators should closely scrutinize the project before allowing it to go forward. Overall, while Jamie Dimon has had a historically negative view of Bitcoin, his opinions seem to have evolved over time. While he still does not see it as a viable investment or unit of account, he has acknowledged its legitimacy and potential role in the financial system.
Ah, I think I was missing a piece of the puzzle of why it occurs, thanks.
I was thinking why is it not possible to do a PR/merge and get all the state departments to update their codebase without a shutdown.
So, it's feature specific to the presidential system, not a bug?
That was extremely well-written and interesting to read a first-hand account. My reaction to the news was not admiration of zealotry, but more like viewing colateral damage from afar. What struck me was at the end of the interaction between the perp and the writer was this ask to help him curate his social media account.
I read the Gurwinder piece about Tiktok after I read that and I had the feeling that social exclusion must be a factor in obsessive-compulsive behavior or fanaticism. I only know Nostr these days. Maybe this guy just needed to unplug? I'm pretty sure 2020 was damaging in ways that we still don't fully realize and have not completely recovered from.
Quite sad to read that many people reacted to the newswith emojis. Makes me feel I understand the theory about his obsession with NPCs, but from the bit about his thoughts on Japan, it's clear to anyone who's become adjusted to living in a different culture, not everyone does or should attempt it. It also made me wonder, would the reaction of a healthy society be a more measured one or an indignant one.
He looks a bit of douchbag but do you think he's capable of violence?
I hope there's some hard evidence.
I don't really understand the premise of these shutdowns.
Is this US tradition or a new thing?
The horror..
The horror!
Yeah I get that. I think there is merit there, but I think the effect such an article has is to promote the safety and nutritional value of brands that use meat-substitute, plant-based proteins, like beyond-meat (among many others.) It may well be that it is largely harmless. But I think the net effect of a 'double-debunking volley', is that consumers read it, and then ape into diets full of branded cardboard boxed foods, and it obscures the premise of whether or not such a diet is helpful. There's profit and market-share to win back, that's what I read.
I'm not sure that the study which it critisized was particulrly aimed at these products exclusively. More inclusively as ultra-processed foods take many shapes and forms.
No one is being lied to. Unless of course you consider the fact that everone is being lied to all the time, constantly.
Being subjected to consumer health advice is like sitting in the middle of a tennis court. You are served a lie from the media who have political leaning in one direction whose political donors represent every kind of industry that includes the largest conglomerates that trade. Then you are served another lie from their opponents through the debunking of studies, which is irrelevant in many ways, is taken out of context and become distorted through media op-eds, and again the debunking of the debunked studies bounces back.
Could we not all agree that the notion of attempting to forcibly throw bunk science down each other's throats is not very convincing nor helpful. Perhaps then we could get back to actually achnowledging the limitations of overly-specialized scientific analysis and instead either make our own minds up with our own objective realities, subjective needs and commonsense.
I think that one day 'left leaning' (I don't subscribe to left/right rhetoric) subjects of the political continua of Europe and the United Kingdom will finally awaken once again to the fact that they have been duped into making mountains out of molehills, and molehills out of mountains.
You only really awaken to the oneway street nature of socialism when you and the rest of your once pretty good nation is grabbing the end of the shitty stick, for want of a better phrase. That is, after all of your fans no longer have the power to blow because of the doubling down on false premises of war rhetoric and faux-environmentailsm.
I was offered a job helping students with learning difficulties. I thought about the interview afterwards in which they explained that my role would not really be much of an educational capacity, yet the emphasis was to do so in the most basic sense, like encouraging them to notice things and learn through discovery.
I imagine the task would be a similar problem. Technology viewed from the outside is either workable, or seemingly insurmountable for some of us, but techniology is nothing more than discovery and the application of controlling the technology.
I imagine with certain candidates if there was an understanding of how basic technology can enable independance and the value that brings, the spark can be ignited to follow through to operate and get familiar with the capabilities of a device.
If it was my task to do something like this, I suppose I might try a workshop demonstrating some simple assembly of networked devices. If that can be established and enjoyed, build up from there with media or value exchange. Education is so stale, I almost feel this would be the way to go in most scenarios.
I voted for AMD, mostly because it was my surprise that a ~400US it does so much. Was expected some issues with a smaller brand nuc from HK. Minisforum is the brand, would recommend. Maybe the M1 seems to do much better for specific tasks like querying a local LLM. But I have rarely used that.
I'd say for SB computer, rasPi/ARM chips are not bad. Maybe not as cheap as they used to be, and now that there are so many more powerful competitors at the same price. But I just admire the form factor. They still make decent mini servers, lite desktops.
Sorta confused when I listen to these reviews, they seem to launch into it from the angle of a gamer. Still feel I don't know what it is that makes Ryzen win over Intel.
I'm torn between AMD and M series for which seems to be better for my needs (audio DAW, video rendering, compiling software.)
Mostly I find M1 chip is efficient (guess now a 2021 M1 is pretty old) and has never struggled with the modest tasks I throw at it.
Have AMD 6900HX/680M on my daily driver, and I push that a bit more. Seems to use more power and is a bit louder when busy, but amazes me that it can do a lot for the price point.
If macs had upgradable disks and memory, I'd consider a new M series, but don't like that prospect.
In fairness I've not even tried anything more powerful than an N200 Intel, which is pretty good with low power consumption. Maybe someone else can pitch in how i3, i5, i7, i9 run. Didn't some Intel series have some issues?
I'm on the tail of x. I once knew a peer who said he hated the use of the generation+letter terms as a method to group, or to divide, something to that effect.
What do I hate? I don't know specifically what, but the unfettered life and halycon days growing up pre millenium seems to have now almost been completely erased by glass buildings, swiping and inflation.
Going full tangental, it'd be remiss to say I hate politics. But I do hate the erosion of trust that was fostered in community. The misplaced trust in media. The misguided assumption that we should not strive to retain the optionality to maintain privacy, integrity and sanctity of our personal lives and private affairs. That our data should ever be vaccumed up on default settings for the whims of monopolistic quango-cum commercial arms of government, as artifacts for machine learning and surveillance.
/rant