Heart disease is grossly overrepresented because the default cause of death is “cardiac arrest”. This is because that the definition of death is heart stoppage in most states. So if a doc doesn’t know the actual cause, that’s what they write down.
At the time the US had a president that routinely used race-baiting as a divisive political technique. He admired Vladimir Putin and defended Russian actions, so the Russian people weren’t a subject of his attacks.
That's a weird way to defend censorship of lab leak theory. Whatever floats your boat I guess.
> At the time the US had a president that routinely used race-baiting as a divisive political technique
What exactly did the US President, at that time, say specifically that exacerbated attacks on Asians, after breakout of COVID, and more importantly could be used as a justification for Worldwide censorship of lab leak theory? Don't forget that the lab leak theory was being suppressed on behest of the US Government by Big Tech and that suppression of information was not limited to just the US but entire World. As far as I remember, Trump was only the President of USA. He wasn't the President of the World. So you can't blame Trump if Big Tech is doing a Worldwide censorship of lab leak theory. I don't buy that argument at all.
I’m not defending anything about a lab leak. I’m addressing the previous poster’s question about why there were attacks on Asian Americans and not Russian ones.
The lab leak theory and weaponization theories were never squelched. The right wing in this country fantasizes that their viewpoints are marginalized while having their most extreme viewpoints broadcast on the top watched news programs in history. The idea that the lab theories were squelched was floated by those very same programs as part of their promotional formula.
Did you watch the hearing? He specifically said that licensing wouldn’t be for the smaller places and didn’t want to impede their progress. The pitfalls of consolidation and regulatory capture also came up.
>>He specifically said that licensing wouldn’t be for the smaller places
This is not a rebuttle to regulatory capture. it is in fact built into the model
These "small companies" are feeder systems for the large company, it is a place for companies to raise to the level where they would come under the burden of regulations, and prevented from growing larger there by making them very easy to acquire by the large company.
The small company has to sell or raise massive amounts of capital to just piss away on compliance cost. Most will just sell
The genie is out of the bottle. The barriers to entry are too low, and the research can be done in parts of the word that don't give $0.02 what the US Congress thinks about it.
I find it interesting that some people feel that moving away from cities and towards a more natural lifestyle means moving to a farm or ranch.
As Steven Pinker notes in his brilliant “Enlightenment Now”, there is nothing natural about a farm. It is basically a factory that subjugates the local ecology to produce monoculture crops so delicate that you have to domesticate humans to take care of them. If you want to live in nature and get away from command and control culture, you may want to skip the farm or livestock ranch and experience nature more directly as forests, meadows etc.
I don't think anyone can claim with a straight face that farm/ranch living is not significantly closer to nature or not significantly more natural than living in a big city.
Is it hunter/gather subsistence living in a quasit hut or out of a cave no, but I think that would be realistically too far a leap for people in the tech community.
This is an economics problem and this teacher should work with their Econ department to change the rules for course auditing and increase reputational costs to disincentive this behavior.
A few options: 1) Make auditing those classes more expensive by limiting the total number of courses a student can audit, or capping the number of students that can audit those courses. 2) Make auditing a remote-only class option. 3) Give lectures on how to spot this behavior which will make the perpetrators obvious and undesirable. 4)Have a no-dating policy between students within the same class under penalty of failure. 5) Couple course participation with a mandatory internship at a STEM company (something a serious student would want but a time-suck for a fake student).
The economics department might enjoy testing these policy changes and could get some papers out of them.
(I wish I could have posted on the original site but I need some sort of karma to do that)
It is difficult to suggest solutions without knowing exactly what the course is, but designing a class project to develop a solution for an analogous problem might be a solution.
Assign the students a project to filter out students with ulterior motives from a theoretical class. The engineers will then be forced to produce a solution for the problem of their own creation while subtly alerting other students that not everyone enrolled in the course is there for the same reason.
This is a fantastic suggestion. Probably not going to be applied by this professor but I love the symmetry of 'playing games' back and forth. Sounds fun honestly, as either side.
Here’s a bigger thought. Imagine a world where serial killers get caught a lot earlier before killing scores of people. The government is not the only enemy.
We were about to be a two Tesla house this year and now there is 0% chance we’ll be that after the latest shenanigans. Although my car is well made, I’m a little embarrassed to drive it around now.
We’re a 3 Tesla household. I have no regrets. Telsa is made up of tens of thousands of workers. Elon is one person. The org will outlive him.
If I made my purchasing decisions according to the personal failings of the corporate executive teams of all of consumer and durable goods, I might as well live in a tent in the woods.
Used Tesla pricing going down is great, makes EV mobility affordable for the less well off. If you associate with someone who judges you for your vehicle purchase, find better people!
Buying a Tesla has a direct impact on Musk’s wealth and ability to lobby and spread his values, which are diametrically opposed to mine. I’ll spend my money elsewhere.
When you buy a Tesla, I doubt Elon gets a check in your name for some percentage of the purchase price. Tesla is a company with many investors, Elon being one of them sure but conversely I’m sure there are a number people you like/support that also have a vested interested in Tesla’s success.
"Support [company] because maybe some of your friends invested in it" is a really lame argument that could be applied to virtually any company. Support Exxon because the firm that manages your grandmother's pension might be invested in Exxon... please. All this argument leads to is uncritical cheer-leading of everything.
B. The parents smart phone contains cobalt from the Congo.
C. That the parent isn't doing anything to minimise their purchase of new phones by using them longer, only buying second hand etc.
And that's all assuming that this is indeed a value they hold.
And even with all that, there's plenty of stuff wrong with the world. For a multi thousand dollar purchase I'd spend more time thing about the ethical implications than something that is smaller. We all have to pick and choose our battles, I don't think you can damn anyone for not being happy about the system but still engaging with it.
yes agreed why not choose the most egregious then if you are taking a moral stance. Children digging out cobalt with their bare hands for your EV should outrank whatever stupid stuff elon is doing. no?
Right but if there's a choice of 2 EVs without Congolese cobalt, you can choose the one that isn't Tesla.
But anyway, humans aren't perfectly rational beings. Elon being a nob on twitter is more immediate to many people than abstract children in the Congo. I'm not saying that's morally correct, but it's how people work.
Could you explain what point you are trying to make? All of your posts in this thread seem to assume the person you are responding to said the opposite of what they actually said.
Above the poster said they would not buy a Tesla and you implied they would be supporting child miners by doing so? Where the article you linked associates Tesla with child labour in cobalt mining.
Here the poster said ending child labour was a 'win' and "how are child miners 'winners'" - aren't you in agreement that ending child labour is a 'win'?
Apologies for not being clear. I was being fairly serious --- if we could actually prevent predatory mining practices that would actually be a huge win, and it would also be great if cell phones (and specifically smart phones) were no long ubiquitous.
But by the same reasoning your individual vote is also immaterial. Since you clearly wouldn't waste your time voting, how do you move the needle on laws and regulation?
> If I made my purchasing decisions according to the personal failings of the corporate executive teams of all of consumer and durable goods, I might as well live in a tent in the woods.
Elon Musk's involvement with the companies he is associated with is not the usual involvement that an executive team would have. His personal brand is intermingled with the products he sells and cars are a way of signaling social status whether we like it or not. There are certainly people for whom buying a new Tesla would decrease their social capital which could have negative impacts in other areas of their life (relevant to HN, social capital converts to actual capital in many cases by opening up business opportunities).
We're in a grace period right now when it comes to driving a Tesla, where people who already owned one can't really be blamed for supporting Musk, but the day has already arrived when buying a new one will signal poor taste and lack of social acumen to much of the white collar class.
Vulgarity is relative so if your crowd isn't this crowd, fine. But you can't blame people for wanting to avoid putting stigma on themselves when there are other EVs on the market nearly as good as Teslas which don't have the same toxicity.
> Saying something like that in real life would get you laughed at.
All you've told me here is that the people you personally associate would laugh at the idea that Tesla is a toxic brand. The world is not made up of a single social group with a single set of norms. In the groups I associate with, and no we are not blue haired SJWs I am married with a family in the suburbs and work a boring corporate job, Tesla is toxic.
Some things I try to keep in mind as much as possible:
- We are all operating from different frames of reference.
- Social networks are fundamental to our survival: people will go to great lengths to stay in the good graces of their families, friends and associates.
- "Society" is a huge tapestry of interlocking social networks, each with its own internal logic and reward systems.
- The logic and reward systems of the most powerful networks tend to leak into all the others over time to some degree.
Oh no, signaling poor taste. The travesty. Let others live their life according to the whims of “the white collar class.” I’m going to enjoy what I enjoy, and I’d like to associate with like minded folks.
I said that if you don't associate with the crowds I'm talking about it doesn't matter.
Ironically pretending that we don't play social signaling games and critiquing others for playing them is itself a sort of social signaling game. These games can't be avoided because they are a fundamental part of human interaction, so much so that when we aren't good at playing those games for whatever reason we are unable to function properly in society and are pathologized as a result.
A car specifically might not be important to you as a signaller but if you do want to associate with like minded folks you are going to seek to emulate and fit in with those groups. That's kind of how society and humans work.
Sure, you do you. Plenty of people fly confederate flags, and they have every right to do so. Just as other people have every right to judge them. This is the way.
Sounds like some stuff bored 1800s European aristocrats would care about, busy living their now pointless performative lives while revolutions are brewing and the industrial revolution is about to put the petite bourgeoisie in control of everything.
I understand what you are implying. Elon Musk has aligned himself with what appears to be a power structure that aims to replace the current dominant social order. If a social revolution comes due to war, economic restructuring or some other black swan event and The Daily Wire becomes the new CNN and Saturday Night Live skits come straight from The Babylon Bee, yes, the crowd that sees Teslas as toxic will be marginalized.
We'll see if that comes to pass. I'm guessing it won't, but if it does I'll adjust accordingly to the new reality as will we all.
You're treating it like people who would judge you based on the car you drive make some kind of high-minded ethical choice, but they're in reality looking for a reason to get their peers to accept a smaller group of people that still includes them, because that makes them relatively speaking higher status. They can't just make things up because they couldn't coordinate around that, but with Elon acting like a lighthouse, they can invent a new norm and benefit from being the first to adopt it.
It's not a group that's like this, it's a widely distributed human behavior (I'm not quite cynical enough to call it a universal human behavior although some would.)
They're not a group in the sense of "an in(out)group." That would require some kind of identity. It's a behavioral tendency in the sense of having a short temper or being gregarious, rather than a belief system or a club.
If you’re going to make the “there’s no ethical consumption under capitalism” point, then why bother with an EV?
For the same price, you can get a nicer ICE.
That is why Elon’s actions are so weird. I agree with you that a chicken sandwich or paper towel executive can do whatever, but EVs are a status and signaling thing…
That is your opinion, which you’re of course entitled to. My Teslas are, to me, the best cars I could buy. That’s value. I’m looking forward to my Cybertruck as well.
Ok. And I think being able to fill up at a gas station in 5 minutes is one of the most critical features a car can have. Most drivers agree.
The point of EVs for the time being is minimizing inconveniences (charging) and maximizing intangible value (virtue signaling, being “the life of the party” with your built in cooler/outlets, having a futurist interior with a bad but polished infotainment panel, etc etc).
Elon is cratering one of those things rn and it does feel like a Howard Hughes moment. Hey maybe there’s something about launching satellites! Who knows!
Less effective than strikes on Russian infrastructure and military personnel. If collective oil price ceilings and similar economic sanctions make some feel better, proceed, it costs very little to do so. Most unfortunately, peace is arrived at through superior firepower.
Elon is a loud mouthed idiot, but the world is full of loud mouthed idiots.
What's lasting, however, is that reputation for making poorly built vehicles. Even today, people would rather buy Japanese, Korean, or German than to buy, say, a buick. All because the reputation for making poorly built vehicles was never shaken by some American auto makers. I think Tesla will suffer the same fate, because to date, they haven't even conceded that they may have an issue.
I believe the best answer here is a well-needed step back from CEO worship. Musk didn't build these cars, and yes, the CEO has an impact on things, but probably not as much as some people think. An interesting counterpoint to Musk's latest shenanigans: perhaps his companies were successful despite him?
> yes, the CEO has an impact on things, but probably not as much as some people think.
Considering the fact that he is the CEO of at least 3 huge companies, and that he has the same 24 hours/day as the rest of us, many of which he spends shitposting on Twitter, it’s clear CEO is at best a part time job (at least the way Musk does it).
The guy expects his workers to put in 80 hours a week at their jobs. At best completely foregoing sleep, he can do the same for 2 of his CEO roles, meaning that one is going completely neglected according to his own standards.
Hero vs. vilain real life storytelling is something we see too much of, and I'm always amazed that otherwise smart people partake in this without seeming to realize. Is it just me or hasn't everyone been taught that idolization (and it's reverse) is generally not good?
Musk played into the hero narrative for years, endeavoring to make people believe he was the literal savior of humanity. He's spent years encouraging people to have extreme characterizations of him. Neither a great hero nor a great villain is a nuanced character, and therefore one can easily become another when the context changes.
Blame is often less useful than people think. Is it the audience's fault for falling for it? Or is it Musk's fault for encouraging it? I'm not sure that it really matters. The lesson should be clear, though. CEOs can't save the world, and people who have been successful previously may still be foolish in the future.
He certainly did it, every time he said that SpaceX's purpose was literally, not figuratively, to save humanity. He was positioning himself and Tesla in the same sort of way; 'buy my EV to save the planet.'
In any case, I have no hero worship to apologize for. Not with regard to Musk anyway.
I also planned to go from a leaf+tesla household to a double-tesla household, but likewise recently had a change of heart.
However, for me it's because I've been blown away with the versatility and dependability of the model Y so I see no reason to get a new car for the next decade.
Everything Elon has done on Twitter over the past couple months. My mom is in the same situation; she was considering a Tesla but now won't be caught dead in one.
Supporting the Russian invaders, calling for prosecution of Fauci (for what crime? And doubly ironic considering his tweets about how covid would be down to 0 cases by April 2020), tweets supporting Kanye, joking about sexually harassing his employees, spreading baseless conspiracy theories from disinfo sites like the Santa Monica Observer, etc
I'd like to think he's just being an edgelord to drive engagement on his platform, but considering he tweeted stupid stuff before he owned twitter (eg accusing his critics of being pedophiles), I have my doubts.
I don't think that follows at all. Twitter is quite unimportant to me: I don't tweet, and very rarely look at anyone else's tweets either. Yet I'm fairly aware of Musk's behavior during and since the takeover, and while I admit I already had a somewhat negative view of him thanks to some earlier episodes, the Twitter saga has well and truly poisoned his personal brand (in my view).
Wait until you find out Henry Ford’s politics. Or Volkswagon’s history. Although obviously it’s not as bad as a man promoting free speech and criticizing postmodernism.
Sure, plenty of other carmakers have committed vile sins. But the Musk Twitter nonsense is very current, which makes it harder to stomach than Henry Ford's anti-semitism over 100 years ago.
And let's not pretend Elon is sticking up for "free speech." He's censoring folks who don't agree with him. That isn't free speech, unless you subscribe to fascist definitions of "free speech."
> Users were banned for impersonation, which was against the rules prior to Elon.
Musk said he was going to only ban people for violating the law. It is not against the law to parody someone without identifying that you are a parody. Musk banning these accounts may be fine from your perspective, but not from an absolute free speech perspective.
> 2) Banning the jet tracker, while wrong, makes sense
Doesn’t make sense from the perspective of free speech absolutism. A lot of the bans pre-Musk made sense, like banning Trump for using the platform to foment insurrection. But Musk railed against those actions as examples of censorship, and promised not to operate that way. Instead, he is operating exactly that way. I don’t have a problem with that as it’s his platform, but he 100% went back on his promise as soon as he got control.
> Edit: I can’t reply to you because of dangs rate limit. Your articles are complete bullshit.
You’ve been rate limited for a reason. Please don’t try to get around the rate limit by editing your posts.
Surely there's no difference between people who have been dead for decades and someone who chooses every day to actively put himself in the spotlight by doing stuff ranging from stupid to awful.
Really sad fall from grace for Elon. Could've just kept working.
I mean, I think you’ll find that Henry Ford is dead.
In general, “past, extremely dead, person was awful; this excuses the current awful person” is _not_ a great argument. It also seems to be a fairly new invention; I’ve only really seen it in the last decade.
Not even going to address the free speech thing, except to say that you must be using a very 1984 “war is peace” sort of definition there…
He's running Twitter in a very erratic manner and demonstrating very poor judgement. It's completely reasonable not to trust someone like that with your family's safety.
He is banning people sometimes for policies he introduced after the fact, sometimes without policy violations at all. “Free speech” is just not a defendable position for his behavior, he does not subscribe or support free speech.
Except he banned a bunch of journalists discussing him using a policy he introduced after the fact, and in one case, without violation at all. His active actions, not pre-existing conditions, reveal his preference against free speech.
Who is banned from Twitter now that Musk banned? The lunatics that ran it for years banned people wantonly with vague reasons without any remedy for 5+ years in some cases.
Musk revealed files implicating the FBI, CIA and Pentagon but oh my God he voted Republican so he’s evil!
Is he promoting free speech? Last I heard he had deleted a load of journalists accounts, before that it was deleting parady accounts. What concrete thing has he done for free speech other than offer trump his account back?
Why would you do something that embarrasses you? You're obviously well enough off if you were planning on having two Tesla vehicles. Get rid of your Tesla and bring your self in congruence with your virtues.
Sad loss. One might wonder how much faster technology’s state of the art would have progressed if we had more people like Fred Brooks working in the field.
Haha, that's a great come back! Thanks for cheering me up. :D
I mentioned Fred Brook in a comment just earlier in the week. The Mythical Man Month is such an obviously and well known trap it's still surprising so many projects still fall into it.
Whilst his work is mostly seen as for software engineers, really it should be more well known by project and senior managers in general.
