To expand a bit: Aaron was a tireless activist who was harassed to death by the DoJ for doing a tiny fraction of what the broligarchs get away with every day. Carmen M. Ortiz, who pushed the relentless attack against Aaron, is an unrepentant monster.

At first, I wondered why Comer would be opposing this sort of oligarchy-engineering. Maybe he’s just sniffing around to get his cut? But it could be Niemöller’s ghost finally rising to a level that reaches Comer.

And the CEO said:

• First they came for the artists, and I did not speak out because I have no heart.
• Then they came for the writers, and I did not speak out because I have no soul.
• Then they came for the actors, and I did not speak out because I have no emotions.
• Then they came for the software engineers, and I did not speak out because I have no mind.
• Then they came for the infosec people, and I did not speak out because I have no wisdom.
• Then they came for me. And the artists, writers, actors, software engineers, and infosec people laughed derisively at me. So I called James Comer.

The oligarchs might love this, but the third string C-suite execs that dine with Comer at the finest gas-station barbecue place in Paducah? The AIs have finally come for them.

they need to hustle else they get fired from their fourth job.

The problem is; wait another year and it’ll be, “get fired from their fifth job.” Alas; getting to that point, enough times, is what it takes. Once there is no time left, and no money left, and no food left, and the littles are too listless even to cry.

Get to that point a few times (eg: 1789, 1848, 1968), and you start choosing to stand in the tear gas early.

Rarely has so much been owed by so many to one comment.

How it happened…

• Trump: We’re not grifting enough.
• Miller: We’re grifting all the grift. Every scheme we know, in parallel.
• Big Balls: We’re not smart enough. AI SI is smarter. It can think of more.
• Trump: I already asked the Google.
• Big Balls: We need a fraud-specialized training dataset.
• Miller: Say we’ll pay them to tell us about fraud schemes.
• Trump: I’m not paying them.
• Miller: You never do. Just tell them you will.
• Trump: Are you - a very bald and very short man - criticizing me?
• Miller: No, sir. ‘mirin’.

The loudest economists use economic theory as a cudgel. You are right to find them infuriating. They assert certainty where economics does not, and cherry pick exceptions to hold up as rules. They are to economics as RFK Jr is to medicine.

The math of economics is more like the math of epidemiology or fluid dynamics than the math of mechanical linkages. It describes how things tend to interact within a system, but a given element or interaction is unpredictable. Even concrete sections, like price theory, have contradictions like the velvet rope effect. It describes probable outcomes in a chaotic system running on irrational humans.

Meteorology is still a math-based science that makes useful predictions, even though it cannot say with certainty whether a particular tropical depression will become a hurricane.

Try Thomas Piketty, or Emmanuel Saez. Or if you want someone older, try Jean Jaurès. Just because rich people love sociopath economists doesn’t mean there aren’t good ones out there.

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win, then they infiltrate you, then they exploit your userbase.

Perverts bought pervert glasses from pervert corp to perv on women without their knowledge or consent. Then they found out that pervert corp, which is famous for perving on its customers without their knowledge or consent, has been perving on the pervert glasses perverts, without their knowledge or consent. The perverts are both surprised and upset that they have become victims of perving while trying to perv.

I concur. I am not a young person. And yet, I have an idea of what “rule” means in the title of a shitpost, and I shouldn’t even know what “shitpost” means. I have never seen a formal definition for either of them. I don’t think “rule” (in that context) even has a rigid definition yet. The meaning isn’t just communicated by example; it is being invented by example.

I still feel like there has to be a really big turtle at the bottom who is not standing on another turtle. Words that mean things in themselves. But I’ve never been there.

Every time there is a vote on ICE, the exact minimum number of Democrats required to pass the issue vote in support. That is true even when they hold a majority. Your post makes it sound like that is a carefully orchestrated phantasm.

I want to present an alternative explanation.

I can’t, but I want to.

Being delicious food is a competitive advantage; just ask fruit. Domesticated farm animals in general are really nice. I grew up in a time and place of family farms, where animals were given a good life from people who cared, before becoming delicious food.

“The company says it may share user information in limited emergencies if it believes disclosure is necessary to prevent death or serious physical injury.”

Also keep in mind: Your chat logs are company assets. Even if today’s decision makers believe maintaining user trust is net profitable, that will not always be true. Some day, maybe when the pullback comes and the wolves are at the gates, or when they sell the company, or when a shareholder action asserts fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value, your chat logs will be sold and mined in the most lucrative way possible. The way that extracts the most value from you, the product.