jboog

13 ms·

61.
by jboog 6y ago
That's not the problem though. The issues is "drug decriminalization" people treating addictions like it's not a real problem for many people. Many of these folks want it to get to a point where you can quite easily buy
62.
by jboog 6y ago
When you're a high-functioning alcohol like we're talking you get to the point you can down a 12 pack of beer in a night and feel relatively fine the next morning. Maybe a slight headache or mild hangover but nothing like the bend
63.
by jboog 6y ago
Jesus, I thought I drank too much but it's still hard to believe 10% of Americans drink the equivalent of 10 drinks EVERY DAY. On my worst weeks when I think "i need to cut back" I might average ~3 drinks a day, maybe 5 on a
64.
by jboog 6y ago
These are the incoherent ramblings of someone that just took their freshman philosophy seminar...
65.
by jboog 6y ago
"You're cherry picking a single point in time that happens to work with one stock" SO you mean EXACTLY what you're doing with BTC? I swear the BTC cult rivals the Qanon crazies in cognitive dissonance.
66.
by jboog 6y ago
This is an asinine argument. The risk profile of Crypto vs an index fund is exponentially worse. What you should care about is what asset provides you the best return with the lowest risk. At any time in history you can look back at the pas
67.
by jboog 6y ago
They've been wildly successful over the last several years and are dominating the competition in online subscriptions so I think the advice they've been acting on recently is working just fine. https://www.nytimes.com&#
68.
by jboog 6y ago
I get that ending the subscription is annoying and I wish they hadn't done it but claiming they have a "fragile" business model is just wrong. They are WILDLY successful. Their operating profit jumped 28% last year and litera
69.
by jboog 6y ago
I've been hearing for almost a decade how Bitcoin was going to change the world and help humanity and yet...nothing. Other than some speculators and early adopters getting rich. I've yet to hear of anything "world-changing&qu
70.
by jboog 6y ago
This situation is literally outlined in the article and GME decided against doing that. The article really isn't very long, I suggest reading it!
71.
by jboog 6y ago
Believing that hardcore pornographers "objectify women" makes you "puritanical" now? OP's criticism was quite civil and reasonable compared to some anti-pornography people I've seen before. And it's absolu
72.
by jboog 6y ago
IF you read the article you'd see It's illegal to sell stock when you have substantial financial information that isn't available to the public yet--which they did.
73.
by jboog 6y ago
Because certainly no one would ever lie or exaggerate on the internet!
74.
by jboog 6y ago
That's because it is usually perfectly legal to lie about someone in the US and just call it "hyperbole" or something. Our libel laws are incredibly permissive in the US. See Elon Musk calling a guy a "pedo" repeate
75.
by jboog 6y ago
So he committed libel twice to accuse the law firm of fraud it never committed? Not the brightest bulb this guy.
76.
by jboog 6y ago
Seems perfectly reasonable to go after someone for libel for literally committing libel. The guy shamelessly lied and called the law firm a "scam".
77.
by jboog 6y ago
I mean the author posted several peer reviewed empirical studies to back up his claims but you've got an anecdote from your personal experience which I guess we should all trust to be the real truth?
78.
by jboog 6y ago
The author never made the claim that 100% of YIMBYs everywhere support affordable housing so I'm not sure why you're posting this anecdote.
79.
by jboog 6y ago
If you raped two women, encouraged people to steal Chinese intel, and then worked with Russian intelligence to spread propaganda, yes, indeed you would be a bad dude.
80.
by jboog 6y ago
This is a straight-up lie. The accusations were never retracted. The women have maintained their allegations ever since. and Not even going to respond to your whataboutism here, just lazy argumentation.
81.
by jboog 6y ago
"protestor" who was storming the capitol to overturn the election while elected officials were sheltering in the building.
82.
by jboog 6y ago
He literally called violent insurrectionist "special" people and said he loved them!
83.
by jboog 6y ago
Literally none of this is in any way comparable to storming the nation's capitol building to overthrow the results of an election.
84.
by jboog 6y ago
Ah yes, because other than those two tweets Trump has never incited any mayhem before. Certainly hasn't been shrieking that the election was stolen and that if Democrats control the government it's the end of democracy. Literal ap
85.
by jboog 6y ago
Assange literally encouraged people to infiltrate US intelligence agencies and "leak" classified intel. Let's not even get into his work laundering Russian hacked docs to damage the US, and then repeatedly lying about it. He
86.
by jboog 6y ago
Pressuring state lawmakers to throw out the outcome of an election because you lost is the "constitutional process" now? Filing frivolous lawsuits based on not one shred of evidence other than "too many Dems voted!" is t
87.
by jboog 6y ago
Who thought Harvey was a Feminist OR liberal icon? This is post-hoc revisionist history by people with political motivations. He was a small fry Dem donor compared to the real money. No idea at all where "feminist" comes from, see
88.
by jboog 6y ago
Can't trust doctors because one time a doctor made a mistake! Flawless logic!
89.
by jboog 6y ago
What person who isn't already a literature/history nerd cares about London's public house scene in the mid-18th century? Not saying it isn't interesting. But journalism needs to be provocative to have a "hook"
90.
by jboog 6y ago
It's not "clickbait" I would have never dared to open this link or read the blog or know ANYTHING about this book without the provocative title. I had seen this article elsewhere so knew what this HN link was because of it. W

More ›