jasmer

49 ms·

391.
by jasmer 4y ago
It's significant because it's a legit institutional entity and it will validate actions of other partners. Even if it's entirely an issue of 'market conditions' the albatross will be hung on Musk for the time being
392.
by jasmer 4y ago
What matters is solving the issue. People don't need to talk to 'other people' or 'cheerful whatever'. The issue is the issue. That's where the focus should be. Fix the issue and everything else is going to be
393.
by jasmer 4y ago
The moral issue is definitely a factor.
394.
by jasmer 4y ago
Great point. And I'll bet $100 that people wouldn't mind the office if it was literally across the street. We don't always 'hate the commute' but what if you could just pop in and out as needed? No waiting? Pick up
395.
by jasmer 4y ago
Gosh, no - strongly recommending not doing this. (The lying part) Lying is one of the worst things you can do, it usually speaks to an issue with integrity, a concern that comes before almost all of them even intelligence, education, aptitu
396.
by jasmer 4y ago
The headline 'couples meet xxx ...' is absolutely not 'clickbait' moreover, the notion that 'bar dating' and 'online dating' might have some similarities is reasonable, but beyond requirement to inclu
397.
by jasmer 4y ago
Or ask yourself how cynical your own line of inquisition is? Yes, church groups are probably going to be a bit more 'pro-marriage' than some others. I guess the 'anti-marriage' people? And? Everything in the press is pre
398.
by jasmer 4y ago
Any public media entity represents enormous power - and by definition will involve agencies of all kinds from all over. Foreign actors will absolutely leverage the situation to the maximum extent possible and this is a fact irrespective of
399.
by jasmer 4y ago
Yes, but, people care about 'stuff that works' 10x before they care about the tech press or supposed 'values' of some FSF moralisation. Mastodon is has a usability problem in the concept of Federation and many other thin
400.
by jasmer 4y ago
The very high bar for IPO (aka sarbanes-oxley, layers, bankers) is part of the 'model'. Aside from expenses, there is a kind of 'stock populism' - big stocks get a lot of noise, which is a form of demand gen for the stoc
401.
by jasmer 4y ago
That's a bit '-ish'. The bar is too high and there are huge numbers of really decent companies that need some kind of liquidity. We're just not set up for it. Maybe it's a matter of just bringing more attention to s
402.
by jasmer 4y ago
We need legislation because PM's pushed to profit by CEO's just cross the line far too often. It's hard to explain but when you see it, you understand. It's the game we create. We don't even need to point the finger
403.
by jasmer 4y ago
It has to be 'fair and obvious' to the reptilian brain. We are all busy. We don't have time to learn where all the buttons are, what leads to what. I see my elderly parents confused and bewildered. Now I see myself bewildered
404.
by jasmer 4y ago
Yes, this is fair.
405.
by jasmer 4y ago
Who the hell even thinks to do any of this? Why are people so stupid and petty? I mean, I'm thankful to live in a place where we are too boring to even think of these kinds of shenanigans. We have our own but they are not as bad.
406.
by jasmer 4y ago
Yes this is it. There are good reason for a lot of the 'codes' we have and it costs money to make sure things are cool. That said, I suggest as always there are 'bureaucracy' problems in our governments and processes tha
407.
by jasmer 4y ago
$520M is a pinch, I can assure you it will change their behaviour in some ways. I worked at a company where this happened, the legal polices that came afterwards were actually prohibitive. We couldn't shit without a lawyer. CEOs have b
408.
by jasmer 4y ago
Exactly. It's extremely intrusive to have some random fool listening in on my own household, when I may be unaware. People have no idea how technology works, even smart people. Default mic/camera etc. off - they can provided a nic
409.
by jasmer 4y ago
Huh? That's the easiest one of all - anything that is privacy invading should be off by default. Most of us are not super aware of what the hell is 'on and off' in this nutty world. It's exceedingly nuts to me that I wou
410.
by jasmer 4y ago
There's a bit of Putin invading Ukraine effect - Putin and frankly probably most Russians and frankly everyone else realizes it's a mistake. But it would be the end of him if were perceived to 'fail' on such a grand scal
411.
by jasmer 4y ago
He banned a number of MSM journalists who have nothing to do with ElonJet. There was an outcry, he immediately backpedalled and blamed it on some kind of 'internal problem'. It was a big deal, international entities spoke up and f
412.
by jasmer 4y ago
His story is slanted, but it's not fair to suggest he is 'cherry picking' - that's what the press does, they 'find the stuff that matters' and filters out the stuff that does not. It would be 'cherry picki
413.
by jasmer 4y ago
It's actually good that there is transparency and oversight but this is a study in journalism and populism more than anything. The media is under incredible pressure to make stories, particularly in the US. All of us have seen how MSNB
414.
by jasmer 4y ago
It's as old as time, but TikTok/Musicaly was the first modern entity to use that as an entry point. The app is a 'fun dance app' where kids would do meme-dances for each other. That's naturally adjacent to the &#x27
415.
by jasmer 4y ago
This is a false equivalence. If an innocent person held some information in their literal pocket, that they could very simply reveal to the world, at no cost to themselves, which proved their innocence of some crime unambiguously - but refu
416.
by jasmer 4y ago
Consider the prospect that those were just populist campaign lies. For gosh sakes "I'm going to release the JFK secrets" is the most tabloidy, QAnon thing one could say. I mean, it's perfect in terms of appeal to his cor
417.
by jasmer 4y ago
The fact that they continue to release more stuff over and over gives very legitimate credence to the notion they are hiding something. It seems clear they don't want us to know something. Now, it could be more or less political, or pe
418.
by jasmer 4y ago
Your are confusing 'legal ownership of assets' with control, influence and power. It's difficult because the former perspective is more formal than the later, but really, it's not at all. In 1900 if your home was burning
419.
by jasmer 4y ago
Exactly this. We know he's competent on some level, and a BS-er on some level given his bombastic announcements. But bombast about literally going to Mars are different than bombast about QAnon in terms of credibility and inspiration.
420.
by jasmer 4y ago
Or wait a further few years and spend $20. Or a couple years later for it to be 20 cents. Or a couple years later for them to give it to you for buying a bottle of Coke. In the interim, they will find ways to make money from us.

More ›