31337

This works well too, and with many different models: https://github.com/guardrails-ai/guardrails

go watch the movie Civil War.

I want my 2 hours back.

Isn't one of the arguments for raising minimum wage that higher incomes will result in more consumption and social program contribution?

It decreases inhibition as well. IIRC, that's one reason it's hypothesised lead exposure contributed to the crime waves, and why blood lead levels are correlated to incarceration.

Yeah, I used to occasionally use tianeptine to self-medicate on days when I was really depressed (hard to get out of bed depressed). Worked well for that, because regular anti-depressants take about a month to start really working, and tianeptine took about 30 minutes, IIRC. I never found tianeptive very "enjoyable" or intoxicating though. I used to use MXE for a similar purpose; and also recreationally sometimes.

This was hard for me to follow. I think it's targeted toward people steeped in "peak oil" discourse.

His first assumption seems to be that economic growth is primarily caused by fossil fuel consumption (which probably is largely the case for the last couple hundred years or so).

He postulates, based on data trends, we are nearing worldwide "peak oil demand," which will cause worldwide economic stagnation for the foreseeable future. This thinking is kinda of the reverse of how I normally think of it (economic growth drives oil demand), but I suppose it's valid if fossil fuels are consistently too expensive to extract more of (lowering demand).

My takeaway: without growth, capitalism becomes a zero-sum game and cannot function "properly," so this peak-oil-demand will result in world-wide economic collapse or probably something slower (a crumbling?).

However, his analysis states as a fact that renewables aren't as "productive" as fossil fuels, so won't be able to cause future growth, or at least growth at the same pace as the last couple hundred years. I'm not sure I agree with that because I've seen charts that show the levelized cost of renewable electricity production to actually be significantly lower than that of fossil fuels.

Allred came across weak, because he has the same position as Ted Cruz/Republicans on some of their worst policies (immigration and Israel), but he has to slightly "moderate" them a little to avoid turning-off base Democratic voters. This is a problem with the Democratic party as a whole, and it's a losing strategy. Voters who strongly support Israel and being "tough on immigration" will be more swayed by the person that full-throatedly supports these position, and voters that disagree with these policies won't be swayed by inconsequential concessions to them.

I have. My bank did a chargeback like they would if it was a credit card. I was told it would've been a lot harder to get my money back if my PIN was used. But, I've only seen that option available for in-person purchaees.

For some of the ultra-wealthy (Theil, Altman, Andreessen, Eric Schmidt, OpenAI board, etc), a type of accelerationism seems to be in-vogue (e/acc publicly, and probably accelerationist thoughts like The Dark Enlightenment privately). I think some ultra-wealthy are just trying to hedge their bets (Zuckerberg, and news corporations come to mind), because if Trump does win he'll definitely try to use his power to harm companies he doesn't like. I think others, such as Musk, want to be Russian-style oligarchs. I guess all this is kinda related; accelerate into some sort of collapse or chaos, use their positions to maneuver into greater power and become oligarchs or create corporate-city-states, or whatever stupid shit they believe in.

I think finance workers are about as split between the parties as the rest of the population; probably more socially liberal. Small bussiness owners are some of the most ignorant and authoritarian people I've encountered.

Every manufacturer is pretty bad on this front: https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacynotincluded/articles/its-official-cars-are-the-worst-product-category-we-have-ever-reviewed-for-privacy/

Best bet is probably buying an older used car. I've heard of some people disconnecting their antennas; not sure how hard that is.

I'm not one of the withhold-voting, or vote 3rd party people, but I think it's probably driven by deep moral disgust of both parties preventing people from being able to willingly vote for Hitler 1 over Hitler 2. As an extreme example (which probably is the case for some Americans, but not "significant electorally"), if I was a Palestinian-American, and had many family members killed by weapons supplied under Biden's orders, I probably wouldn't be able to bring myself to vote for his number-2, even if I thought it was the lesser-evil. People have different levels of emotional empathy, and different principles and philosophies. Refusing to participate in an unjust system is a valid stance.