Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Not to my half of the conversation.

$50k per month is a lot of money, objectively, to most Americans.

So fucking what? Lots of people earn $50K a month to do lots of things, and it isn't newsworthy. The fact that he's Joe Biden's son doesn't make it newsworthy either.

AND, the FBI is investigating Hunter.

So fucking what? Maybe Hunter Biden has been lying about his assets to get loans, but that wouldn't be not newsworthy either.

Let me ask you this: If Chelsea Clinton, or a Trump or Obama kid, were discovered to be doing what Hunter did, and the FBI decided to start investigating it (as it did starting in 2019), would that have been a newsworthy story?

Clinton or Obama kids no, because they were private citizens, and also minors. For the Trump kids, depends on which ones, because some of them became involved in the government and Trump's business in a way that makes what they do newsworthy, depending on what the allegations are.

2. That Trump tried to push the story does not render it non-newsworthy.

...

The definition of newsworthy is objective, not what you or I think.

There is no "objective definition of newsworthy" on this or any other planet. We are having a conversation about what the term means, which is why my opinion is material. You say that the word means nothing -- anything people want to hear is, ipso facto, newsworthy. That is not how any journalist sees their job, although the free market keeps pushing them that way. I wasn't the first person to put out that by your definition, porn is newsworthy, which no one thinks. It's not "newsworthy" because it's not "worth" -- in the sense of having intrinsic value -- being in the "news" -- which is not everything that happens in the world, but a subset of the things that we all think people should know about.

The whole origin of this story should make any sane person think the whole thing is bogus. After other Trump/Giuliani efforts to smear Joe Biden by fabricating dirt on his son, a laptop purportedly abandoned by Hunter Biden in a repair shop for a long time falls into Rudy Giuliani's hands and then is given to the New York Post, which runs credulous stories about what's on it. Really? Really? Do you remember what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine? Under these circumstances, no one should think for a second that anything found on that computer is authentic, although surely much of it is.

If someone lies to you, do you trust them the next time?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

It's worth noting, he had already been on some pretty significant boards, including Amtrak, had been CEO of a couple significant investment funds, a senior officer in MBNA, and had some other pretty good experience in things that drive a pretty high compensation as a norm. And he's got a Yale Law Degree.

Sure, his father's and brother's political connections helped every step of the way, but he had the kind of resume, built over many years, that fetches that kind of coin.

Yes, I would love to do something about income inequality in America, but I bet I could identify a dozen boards that would compensate him that well or better in the time it takes to quaff a beer down.

You clearly haven’t spent much time in Wilmington.

That moron‘s cushy life was bought and paid for by Chuck Cawley.

I’ve nothing against nepotism and networks (it’s paid most of my bills thru life), but come on… He’s been notorious in Wilmington since HS.

“Senator (and Son) from MBNA.”

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The only thing I’m ideologically opposed to is non-transparent moderation. But I’m not in favor of doing anything about it. Twitter can do whatever it likes and it can moderate anything, for any reason it likes. If people don’t like it, they can go elsewhere.

BUT, if Twitter wants to make indefensibly poor decisions, it can take shit for it. And it should not be trusted. And if a crazy billionaire sees bias and decides to buy it because of its bad decisions, and turn it into something that robs those mobs - right and left - who use Twitter to call for squelching of info and views they don’t like, well... Good. The market has spoken.

That's fine. All moderation tends not to be transparent, for reasons that are clear to anyone who pays attention. You're ideologically opposed to moderation. I'm often not a fan of it either, but not because I think Twitter is run by the woke. I'm not a fan because it's inconsistent, capricious, easily gamed, and difficult to correct. I think that social media companies have a social responsibility to do it right, and can't be bothered, and I think the people who are working at them and enabling stuff like COVID disinformation and ethnic cleansing of the Rohynga ought to take a long look in the mirror. I have a much bigger problem with Facebook and Google (esp. Youtube) on this score than Twitter, because both of them algorithmically promote harmful crap to make themselves money. Twitter might like to do this more, but has the wrong basic model for it. The thing I like most about Twitter is that I can decide whom to follow, and when they start messing with that basic architecture, that pisses me off, as a user.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Yeah, if I played in the market I'd short that sucker.

I suspect their car business will be beaten to a pulp, since it's just put out mediocre overpriced product, but the battery business could be a survivor. If they're smart, they'll keep that and sell off the vanity business.

How does that not become a commodity business? Do they have essential patents to make good batteries?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Not to my half of the conversation.



So fucking what? Lots of people earn $50K a month to do lots of things, and it isn't newsworthy. The fact that he's Joe Biden's son doesn't make it newsworthy either.



So fucking what? Maybe Hunter Biden has been lying about his assets to get loans, but that wouldn't be not newsworthy either.



Clinton or Obama kids no, because they were private citizens, and also minors. For the Trump kids, depends on which ones, because some of them became involved in the government and Trump's business in a way that makes what they do newsworthy, depending on what the allegations are.



There is no "objective definition of newsworthy" on this or any other planet. We are having a conversation about what the term means, which is why my opinion is material. You say that the word means nothing -- anything people want to hear is, ipso facto, newsworthy. That is not how any journalist sees their job, although the free market keeps pushing them that way. I wasn't the first person to put out that by your definition, porn is newsworthy, which no one thinks. It's not "newsworthy" because it's not "worth" -- in the sense of having intrinsic value -- being in the "news" -- which is not everything that happens in the world, but a subset of the things that we all think people should know about.

The whole origin of this story should make any sane person think the whole thing is bogus. After other Trump/Giuliani efforts to smear Joe Biden by fabricating dirt on his son, a laptop purportedly abandoned by Hunter Biden in a repair shop for a long time falls into Rudy Giuliani's hands and then is given to the New York Post, which runs credulous stories about what's on it. Really? Really? Do you remember what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine? Under these circumstances, no one should think for a second that anything found on that computer is authentic, although surely much of it is.

If someone lies to you, do you trust them the next time?

Just concede the point. This is the most convoluted Rube Goldberg explanation you’ve ever assembled to support a really dumb position.

But you’ll go down swinging. I’ll give you that. You’ll invent a thousand nonsense standards for “newsworthy” and claim the story is bogus (despite the Times and Post now admitting it isn’t) before you’ll concede the obvious that any sane person would’ve 10 posts ago.

It must be exhausting having never been wrong.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

That's fine. All moderation tends not to be transparent, for reasons that are clear to anyone who pays attention. You're ideologically opposed to moderation. I'm often not a fan of it either, but not because I think Twitter is run by the woke. I'm not a fan because it's inconsistent, capricious, easily gamed, and difficult to correct. I think that social media companies have a social responsibility to do it right, and can't be bothered, and I think the people who are working at them and enabling stuff like COVID disinformation and ethnic cleansing of the Rohynga ought to take a long look in the mirror. I have a much bigger problem with Facebook and Google (esp. Youtube) on this score than Twitter, because both of them algorithmically promote harmful crap to make themselves money. Twitter might like to do this more, but has the wrong basic model for it. The thing I like most about Twitter is that I can decide whom to follow, and when they start messing with that basic architecture, that pisses me off, as a user.

I agree it’s inconsistent and capricious. But I’ll add that I think it is also ripe for abuse.

It’s a perfect excuse for Musk to say “I didn’t do the CCP’s bidding. The algorithm did it.”

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

How does that not become a commodity business? Do they have essential patents to make good batteries?

I haven't done a deep dive, but my understanding is they do have some proprietary technology and that their solar batteries are real quality stuff.

But again, not any real expertise here, just someone who has been shopping for batteries.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Just concede the point. This is the most convoluted Rube Goldberg explanation you’ve ever assembled to support a really dumb position.

But you’ll go down swinging. I’ll give you that. You’ll invent a thousand nonsense standards for “newsworthy” and claim the story is bogus (despite the Times and Post now admitting it isn’t) before you’ll concede the obvious that any sane person would’ve 10 posts ago.

I don't think what Hunter Biden does with his life is news, as a general proposition. I think the same is true for Chelsea Clinton and Barron Trump. If they make a lot of money -- not news. If they beat their spouses -- not news. (If they want to do puff pieces in People or Us, whatever, but that's not news either, even if lots of people want to read it.) If, OTOH, Hunter Biden uses his access to do something corrupt -- that would be news. But that hasn't happened. As close as you can come is, some Ukrainians gave him a bunch of money because they hoped he'd be helpful. Not news.

You aren't explaining why you think people should care about how much money Hunter Biden -- you're pointedly refusing to have that conversation, by playing semantics with the word "newsworthy." If you really think that word means what you're pretending it means, then you would say, yes, porn and Zillow listings are newsworthy. You decline to say that. So, you're playing semantics, just not very well.

It must be exhausting having never been wrong.

I only argue with you when you're wrong, so it's not that fatiguing tbh.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I agree it’s inconsistent and capricious. But I’ll add that I think it is also ripe for abuse.

It’s a perfect excuse for Musk to say “I didn’t do the CCP’s bidding. The algorithm did it.”

No one in those companies wants to be involved in content moderation. No one involved is happy, ever, and for the companies it's a cost center, not a source of revenue. No one wants to know enough about it to have any idea how to abuse it. The people who get stuck with that job are not people with fancy degrees or lots of stock options.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I haven't done a deep dive, but my understanding is they do have some proprietary technology and that their solar batteries are real quality stuff.

But again, not any real expertise here, just someone who has been shopping for batteries.

I see people around here with the batteries in the walls, in their houses. I would be super reluctant to make that investment, because I figure the technology is going to get better in the next few years, and then you have to rip the wall out again to replace them. If I'm worried about blackouts, I would get a gas-powered generator instead. But people buy them.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

How does that not become a commodity business? Do they have essential patents to make good batteries?

No. It is on the car biz to make it.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I see people around here with the batteries in the walls, in their houses. I would be super reluctant to make that investment, because I figure the technology is going to get better in the next few years, and then you have to rip the wall out again to replace them. If I'm worried about blackouts, I would get a gas-powered generator instead. But people buy them.

We need a solar system to cover the whole house, we have a gas powered generator. One of the prior habitants here worked at a solar company and had a kick ass system, which he took out before leaving. But the price point and incentives are such that it makes a lot of sense here to go solar, especially in an old house that uses a ton of electricity in a place where almost every storm results in a smattering of blackouts.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I see people around here with the batteries in the walls, in their houses. I would be super reluctant to make that investment, because I figure the technology is going to get better in the next few years, and then you have to rip the wall out again to replace them. If I'm worried about blackouts, I would get a gas-powered generator instead. But people buy them.

Tesla buys batteries. Most car companies do. Ford started a JV for it. There are/will be no blocking patents.
https://www.reuters.com/technology/p...nd%20elsewhere.

To reduce issues from the UAW most OEMs spun off most parts manufacturing.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I don't think what Hunter Biden does with his life is news, as a general proposition. I think the same is true for Chelsea Clinton and Barron Trump. If they make a lot of money -- not news. If they beat their spouses -- not news. (If they want to do puff pieces in People or Us, whatever, but that's not news either, even if lots of people want to read it.) If, OTOH, Hunter Biden uses his access to do something corrupt -- that would be news. But that hasn't happened.As close as you can come is, some Ukrainians gave him a bunch of money because they hoped he'd be helpful. Not news.

You aren't explaining why you think people should care about how much money Hunter Biden -- you're pointedly refusing to have that conversation, by playing semantics with the word "newsworthy." If you really think that word means what you're pretending it means, then you would say, yes, porn and Zillow listings are newsworthy. You decline to say that. So, you're playing semantics, just not very well.



I only argue with you when you're wrong, so it's not that fatiguing tbh.

It appears I know less about the story than there is, and you’re doubling down on the wrong hand:

“The probe began as early as 2018 and concerns multiple financial and business activities in foreign countries dating to when Hunter Biden's father was vice president. Investigators have examined whether Hunter Biden and some of his associates violated money laundering, tax and foreign lobbying laws, as well as firearm and other regulations, multiple sources previously told CNN.”

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/04/26/p...ion/index.html

“Hunter Biden told associates in recent months that he paid the federal taxes that had been the subject of Justice Department scrutiny. He told one associate that the tax liability was more than $1 million, and that he had to take out a loan to pay it off.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/u...stigation.html

One million in tax liabilities is a nice chunk of change.

Oh, and…

“Over the course of 14 months, the Chinese energy conglomerate and its executives paid $4.8 million to entities controlled by Hunter Biden and his uncle, according to government records, court documents and newly disclosed bank statements, as well as emails contained on a copy of a laptop hard drive that purportedly once belonged to Hunter Biden.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...-china-laptop/

None of this is newsworthy, of course. Which is why the NYTimes, WaPo, and CNN have not reported on it.

This is like a fight with your spouse, or a flat earth argument. There is no successful path.

Have a drink, drop this, and I will drop it too. I don’t want to do this. I actually prefer being proven wrong. On the “biased platform” discussion, I adjusted me views based on a sincere consideration of what you offered. But on this newsworthiness thing, your position is best abandoned and forgotten.

[Did you just call me Coltrane?]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Yeah, if I played in the market I'd short that sucker.

I suspect their car business will be beaten to a pulp, since it's just put out mediocre overpriced product, but the battery business could be a survivor. If they're smart, they'll keep that and sell off the vanity business.

People have been saying "short tesla" for years. It would not have worked out.

I have a Tesla (just a Model 3, and not the super fast one), and I think Elon is a fraud. I've concluded the following after 2.5 years:

* It is still a blast to drive. All the torque at once is still exhilarating;

* The claimed range is absolute BS. It's not even close;

* Obviously it's great right now given gas prices;

* The supercharging network is what, at least right now, distinguishes it from other electric cars;

* Because the software is constantly upgraded, it is a better car now than when I bought it;

* I hate touch screens in cars - give me knobs and dials. They are safer;

* It was a pretty good deal (under $40k);

* Having the ability to make your turn signal noise a fart sound still makes all of the kids laugh.