Cushman

52 ms·

1. 451.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   Live your life however you want, but that sounds shitty to me.
2. 452.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   I just think there's another way to look at this situation. Have you seen The Incredibles? The scene towards the beginning when Mr. Incredible helps the little old lady cheat the insurance system? I think most bureaucrats want to be that pe
3. 453.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   > It sucks. It's a form of psychic bribery. That seems like a terribly cynical way to view the idea that, if you're nice to people, they will be nice to you.
4. 454.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   You joke, but "Record that awesome thing that just happened" is a button video games have been needing for a long, long time.
5. 455.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   I'd rather see HN move in the direction of Quora: High-quality questions that any notable technologist can answer.
6. 456.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   That's a pretty nice playbook, but it fails for the reason every attack against SR fails: It doesn't get you the vendors, and they're the only big fish there to catch. At best, you can spend time and money just treading water to keep them i
7. 457.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   Don't think spatial calibration, think eye chart: https://www.google.com/search?q=eye+chart
8. 458.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   And if there wasn't anything you could do to land yourself in court, wouldn't you start to wonder if there are any real laws at all?
9. 459.▲
   by Cushman 14y ago

   That's a little uncharitable. It's obvious that Senator Warren's real question is: Do the banks have any reason to feel as if they face a threat of real legal action if they break the rules? If not, that's surely something we can and should
10. 460.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    You might as well use the unambiguous form, though. (And what do you do with possessives, as in "CDs' sizes"?)
11. 461.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    To summarize: Having a sense for something that is invisible to everyone else can mean that many well-designed things are very poorly designed for you. Which actually sounds like your basic early adopter problem. Hypothetically, as more and
12. 462.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    I understand the logic of my parent's statement. To rephrase my question: We have a two-party system, and we do not have a national majority vote. Therefore, in absence of other evidence, I must assume there is a low upper bound to the impo
13. 463.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    If I were Tesla PR, I'd jump on this. Drop everything else about the article; just throw a big party in DC in the morning, and ferry people to Boston for a big party the same evening (with refreshments and entertainment available in Newark
14. 464.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    > The ad money I might have to spend in Nebraska to get a thousand eyeballs might get me closer to ten thousand eyeballs in California or New York. What market force are you imagining makes ad space cheaper in wealthier states?
15. 465.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    That's fair, they might see it on the news if nothing more important was going on that day. But that's still press coverage, not a stop , and it's likely to backfire when the ad comes on saying, "But how much does Mr. Smith really care a
16. 466.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    I'd argue that it's disingenuous to use MSAs rather than cities to talk about campaign stops. To use your example, the Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta Metropolitan Statistical Area has four counties with more than 700,000 people, and fifteen
17. 467.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    I'm confused how you can argue that a national majority vote leads to a 2-party system when we have a 2-party system and we don't have a national majority vote.
18. 468.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    So, disregarding the fact that an MSA includes an urban center and its non-urban surrounds... You're saying that a candidate is going to just pander to every voter in, say, the Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Metropolitan Statistical Area (#35, p
19. 469.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    In a national campaign, anywhere you don't advertise, you leave up for grabs by your competition. Currently, candidates can get away with leaving most undecided voters on the table, because the mechanics of the electoral college mean th
20. 470.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    Thanks for pointing that out: to quote the site again, "The Founding Fathers did not create or anticipate—much less favor—our current system of electing the President." Even more interesting, they note that the Constitutional Convention did
21. 471.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    Sorry, I'm legitimately confused about what you're saying. Who is corrupt here, and how does the popular vote give them more power?
22. 472.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    Why not 50? Further evidence of the way a nationwide presidential campaign would be run comes from the way that national advertisers conduct nationwide sales campaigns. National advertisers seek out customers in small, medium-sized, and la
23. 473.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    > I did read the site, I want to believe you, but it's hard to when it refutes the exact claim you're making : MYTH: Only the big cities, such as Los Angeles, would matter under a national popular vote. ... The populations of the 50 l
24. 474.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    Oh well, since I'm here anyway... http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/answers.php MYTH: Only the big states would matter under a national popular vote. ... If anyone is genuinely concerned about the possibility that a candidate coul
25. 475.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    The difference is that every state has one Senator (per cycle), and every state resident gets one vote for Senator that counts the same as everyone else's. Representation on a national level is disproportionate, but on a vote-to-vote level
26. 476.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    > If the question is "should they count the same" -- the answer is an unequivocal yes, and almost every person would agree. Voting reform requires that people put in power by bad systems willingly reform those systems which would see th
27. 477.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but look, just read the site. http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/answers.php MYTH: A national popular vote would undermine a partisan advantage in favor of the Republican Party in
28. 478.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    Please read the site. You are exactly wrong. http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/pages/answers.php MYTH: Candidates would "fly over" most of the country under a national popular vote. This criticism applies to the current system of electi
29. 479.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    Maybe, but that's completely tangential to the question of whether a vote for President should count the same across state lines.
30. 480.▲
    by Cushman 14y ago

    I think there are good arguments for abolishing the Senate and returning the House to proportionality, but at least everyone gets a vote for their Senator that counts. You can't use the disproportionality of the legislature to defend disenf