Per American jurisprudence, this is false. Incitement / true threats are very narrow.
Readit Newsexolymph commented on State Department Revokes Visas over Charlie Kirk Comments wsj.com/politics/state-de... · Posted by u/standardUser
exolymph commented on It's OpenAI's world, we're just living in it stratechery.com/2025/its-... · Posted by u/feross
You could literally eliminate homelessness, world hunger, and fully pay health care costs in that same timeframe with much less cash.
Homelessness and world hunger are not bottlenecked by money. There's a stronger case for healthcare, but that's also substantially a political issue.
I'm trying to pinpoint the canary in the financial coal mine here. There will be a time to pull out of the market and I really want to have an idea of when. I know, timing the market, but this isn't some small market correction we're talking about here.
this is a bit hackneyed but it's true: time in the market > timing the market
now obviously, if you do time the market perfectly, that's the best. but it is far far more likely to shoot yourself in the foot by trying
I’d like to piggyback on your comment to get your (and broader audiences) opinion on a situation I’m facing:
I’ve recently learned my 5 year old is exhibiting behavior problems in kindergarten. His teacher has put the notion in his mother’s head that he may have autism and has provided his mother a fast track referral to have him tested/diagnosed. I feel strongly that he does not have autism; aside from being disruptive in class he doesn’t have any other characteristics—-he is very verbal, social, doesn’t avoid eye contact or physical contact. I’ve spoken to his Sunday school teachers, daycare workers, etc and they were incredulous that he potentially has autism.
‘Well if he doesn’t have it what’s the harm in having him tested at a facility that specializes in pediatric autism? If you’re right they’ll easily determine he’s not autistic, right?’ Is the question I can imagine being asked at my reluctance to consent to the testing and diagnostics. Frankly, I’m suspicious of the (potential) conflict of incentives that a clinic specializing in pediatric autism may have; I positive diagnosis is only good for business in the way that a men’s clinic is incentivized to find every patient that walks through their door has low testosterone. Especially considering the subjectivity and ‘spectrum’ that falls under the blanket term ‘autism’.
On a scale from likely to incredibly unlikely, how rooted in reality would you characterize my concerns? Also what harm, if any would come from a false positive diagnosis? Would it outweigh the harm of a person being an undiagnosed, high functioning person with autism?
The school system needs an Official™ medical justification to grant your kid extra accommodations for whatever his behavioral issues are. They are less interested in whether he "actually" has autism than in a rubber stamp that gives them more options for managing him. Which might indeed be a good thing for your son! It's hard to say without being closer to the situation.
It’s wild that $goog is so undervalued (p/e 27) given Alphabet owns Waymo in addition to everything else, and yet Tesla is so overvalued (p/e 243!!!) despite zero Robotaxis in the near (or far) future and lackluster sales.
Goes to show empty promises and fraudulent showmanship sell better than actual working products that people use.
Stocks are narrative-driven, and sometimes this aspect swamps the "fundamentals." Keynesian beauty contests all the way down.
exolymph commented on The Washington Post Fired Me – But My Voice Will Not Be Silenced karenattiah.substack.com/... · Posted by u/frob
This response is very confused. Lack of interest in the field would result in fewer female applicants, but you're describing equal numbers of applicants. This situation where women are half as likely as men to be qualified is just sexism.
The idea that airlines are passing on qualified white candidates to hire unqualified black candidates to fill a diversity quota, because there aren't enough qualified black candidates to fill it honestly, is a white supremacist conspiracy theory. Real life DEI programs don't let them do that. To a white supremacist, any number of black pilots is "just a few too many" to have hired honestly, and so there must be some hypothetical white people being "stolen" from. See GP.
> Lack of interest in the field would result in fewer female applicants
Anyone in a hiring position would tell you, lack of intrinsic interest, or expertise, does not stop people from applying to an open position.
exolymph commented on The Washington Post Fired Me – But My Voice Will Not Be Silenced karenattiah.substack.com/... · Posted by u/frob
> His point is not that black people are less capable but that DEI policies [cause] looser standards
These ideas are equivalent. The belief that employers are lowering their standards in order to include more black people is based on the idea that any additional black person hired must necessarily be less competent than a hypothetical white person who could have been hired instead of them; that is, white supremacy. In Kirk's words: "You had to go steal a white person's slot to go be taken somewhat seriously."
They don't believe that there are black people who are qualified but weren't hired because of, for example, discrimination, because they don't believe "discrimination" exists per se, they just think of not hiring black people as logical meritocratic decision-making.
No they are not equivalent. This came up with James Damore too.
Let's say there's a pool of 20 candidates, 10 male and 10 female. Since more men than women have an abiding interest in engineering, let us posit that 40% of the men are top prospects for the job, and 20% of the women are equally high-quality workers. The company is trying to fill 6 roles and has an internal mandate to hire 50% women. To serve that mandate, 1 unqualified woman will be hired, at the expense of 1 of the qualified men.
You can apply the exact same logic w/r/t race. Yes, there are legacy-of-slavery reasons why fewer blacks than whites are qualified for any given technical credential, but those are upstream of hiring decisions, and are not the job of e.g. airlines to solve, especially not at the expense of lowering standards for a crucial position like pilot.
Anthropic principle: because it does. If it didn't feel like anything, it wouldn't. But it does, so it does.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle