llamaimperative

12 ms·

31.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Share evidence of the non-textbook fraud then. Or is this belief just formed form whole cloth with literally no evidence, just vibes?
32.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
If both sides do it, then they should be able to publish better evidence than Stacey Abrams’ “ties” to Power Forward Communities. The fact that all the DOGE and DOGE-adjacent claims of fraud have been so shamefully weak has actually reduce
33.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
“Ties to Stacey Abrams”, by the way, is that she is an advisor to one of the five organizations that founded Power Forward Communities… I.e. that a community organizer was involved in a community organization…
34.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Have you ever ordered commercial merchandise? You tend to order a number far below infinite, and if your goods sell faster than you’re able to get a new order, it is “sold out.” And yeah, presumably they didn’t do a giant run for this, nor
35.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
It definitely does mitigate the risk (pretty substantially in my experience!)
36.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
I agree with your concerns but don't feel like we're at that tipping point to be honest, relative to the value of credit being generally easy to get for the legitimately creditworthy. > Already the US credit score makes people
37.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Not the Model S, which was the "early lead" that they squandered
38.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Those seem totally distinct? For example, credit card points are a zero sum game. Credit scores are not. Everyone could be creditworthy, but many are not, and it’s highly beneficial to the entire system to be able to identify which group
39.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
It’s excellent for its price point! Not so much for the $75-$120k Tesla price tag.
40.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Tesla would be dead in the water actually because its products are shit compared to what’s available today. They had a massive lead where a sub-Corolla quality build could sell for $60k+ because EV, and squandered it.
41.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
The question is whether it destroys the incentive to produce the work. That is the entire point of copyright and patent law. LLMs do indeed significantly reduce the incentive to produce original work.
42.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Excellent counterpoint!
43.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Meh, I just shared the fact that for the same scale of project outside of Burlington, anyone can literally 10x their budget for construction costs based solely on land price differences. Of course the counterpoint is: a single stalled pro
44.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
I didn’t say it’s the full picture. UVM’s internal politics are, in fact, accounted for in the price of land. Yes, for that particular plot of land , which they already owned, the land price is not what prevented construction. That partic
45.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
> Zillow list price for vacant land doesn't consider all the vacant lots held by people who aren't building for various reasons nor does it consider the surrounding suburbs etc. or the land uvm holds but doesn't develop (w
46.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
No, those are real numbers spot-checked from Zillow. I was on my phone and, ya know, it's an Internet argument, so they're definitely ballparked, but they are from real actual land sales inside Burlington and then a few miles outs
47.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
So 1) yes construction costs are a huge, huge factor (especially right now), but 2) land is about $1.5MM/ac in Burlington VT. A few miles outside of it, land is about $150,000/ac. Consider a 2 acre project: $3MM in land costs insi
48.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
I didn't say anything about "people living solely on UBI" Your claim is, I guess, that people supplementing wages with UBI will move to poorer locations, because they are less tied to their jobs, and then the poorest of the p
49.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
What location is this?
50.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
There's a big gulf between "eventually all marginal productivity increases are eaten by rising land rent" and "laws of supply and demand don't apply." You have no reason to believe people with new marginal inco
51.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
And before that software rent never went up?
52.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Taking the U and the B out of UBI? They should pick a different name.
53.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
All rents are set by the market's willingness and ability to pay. No matter whether you're the 40th percentile (a vacancy-sensitive landlord) on price or the 90th (a vacancy-insensitive landlord), the dollar value of the underlyi
54.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
This is correct, it does apply to all forms of wage increases. I wouldn't say "instantly," but yes that's why cities are perpetually expensive despite constantly increasing productivity. They are highly productive ergo t
55.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Well it's not quite arbitrary because it will induce supply in other goods and services. Rent in high COL areas is driven primarily by land rent (i.e. cost of land, regardless of whether that land is actually rented to the building on
56.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Very obviously correct^
57.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Are we talking about one person’s income going up, or knowably every single person’s income going up by a known amount? When minimum wage rises, yes rents rise. When high paying employers come to an area, yes rents rise. These are a lot mor
58.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
Okay then you tell me: why do rents go up at all?
59.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
It’s not “arbitrary.” It’s raising rents for the same reason rents are ever raised: people’s willingness/ability to pay has gone up. That can happen because of a new subway station, a hot new employer nearby, or simply because money ap
60.
by llamaimperative 2y ago
UBI won't fix much for a far more trivial and mechanistic reason: adding $1,000/mo to everyone's income merely gives landlords the ability to charge ($1,000*n bedrooms)/mo more in rent.

More ›