Casey Neistat. Back when he was doing his daily vlog thing a lot of it was really interesting, covering him and his wife trying to make shit happen in the city as he was running and riding his powered skateboard around Manhattan. At some point his audience started drifting younger, way way younger, and I don’t know if it was him or me but I just kind of lost interest. It didn’t feel new anymore.

That might be me to be honest. I actually don’t watch YouTube that much at all anymore, unless I’m looking for something specific. Their recommendation algorithm is garbage and it is so obviously going for raw time suck engagement that it leaves me with a bunch of unfulfilling clickbait / ragebait where I could watch it for an hour and then just want my hour back so I end up not returning. The whole platform used to be more full of interesting genuinely entertaining and educational videos, now it just feels like a giant time sink. And every other video is now some paid sponsorship or plug where the creator is basically just whoring out their own influence. Case in point, look up reviews of laser engravers. Every single one that I could find, especially of a couple major brands, the creator got the laser hardware for free. Some of them are just advertisements that reuse the manufacturer’s own stock footage, and some seem more like real reviews, but for one or two brands I literally could not find one video where the creator wasn’t sponsored by the laser manufacturer.

There is no one so ignorant, as someone who is quite sure they know all they need to.

I would encourage you to study the writings of your enemies as well as your friends. I have found it most useful.

Have a good one!

privacy as a luxury good

Sounds like what Apple is trying to do…

Sadly wanting privacy is kind of a niche thing, not a large # of people buying iPhones to avoid surveillance. And most TV buyers DGAF… If a large # of them opted out of content recognition we’d still have dumb TVs on the market.

Unfortunately I think without some kind of regulation that makes personal info a liability / hot potato, it will still be treated as an asset to be collected:(

Well if the risk is that they are paying $300 an hour in unnecessary labor, that’s a risk that would put almost any restaurant under. Perhaps a better answer would be a commission-based system, just build a 20% commission into the price of the food rather than making it a mandatory tip or a line item on the receipt. Problem is that makes marketing harder because you have to explain why your food is 20% more expensive than the competition and try to get people to understand that their bill will actually be the same or less. It also doesn’t necessarily incentivize the employee to provide better service. And while I conceptually agree that should be the responsibility of the manager, in practice it’s difficult. I’m not sure what the solution is. I agree there needs to be one.

Please see my reply to ulkesh here

I think it’s telling that monetizing the operating system is the immediate place one jumps to with this, rather than earning more profit by selling more products which are better for the consumer.

Please don’t take what I said as a suggestion that what we have right now is great. Like anything, capitalism requires checks and balances. In my opinion the heyday of modern capitalism was the mid to late 1900s, because industry was operating at full efficiency but regulation also insured that the average person was able to benefit from that. All three factors of production, land labor and capital, all had a seat at the table.

We have moved a good distance away from that. Capital dominates the conversation, land has made some advances in the form of environmental protection, but labor still takes a distant back seat. And so you get ridiculous situations like a company gets hundreds of millions in tax breaks and subsidies while the CEO gets paid hundreds of millions and the guy who mops the floor is on food stamps. I don’t see this as good capitalism. Labor needs a bigger seat at the table. If a business cannot afford to survive without paying ALL their workers a living wage that allows upward mobility, that business does not deserve to survive. As I see it, that is part of the very base of capitalism.

That said, your suggestion that businesses don’t need a leader is a ridiculous socialist/communist fantasy that doesn’t actually work in reality. Take an established business like McDonald’s. From where you sit it probably looks like it doesn’t need a leader, it just keeps going on its own. But who decides how much the burgers cost? Who decides when to introduce new menu items? Who decides what the promotions will be? Who decides what market segments will they focus on? Who decides whether their next new product will be a salad or a triple cheeseburger? And if you’re going to say middle managers can make these decisions, who decides who those middle managers are?

For what it’s worth, I’m a big fan of employee owned corporations. That doesn’t always work in every segment, but I wish there were a lot more of them. But even an employee own corporation has a CEO, the CEO is just selected by the employees.

As for Elon, your suggestion that he has done nothing shows that you are uninformed. The reason he is not listed as an original founder of Tesla is because of the handful of people who founded it, one already had a business registered and it was cheaper for everybody to buy into that than pay to have it dissolved and pay again to register a new business. I have actually been following them very closely more or less since they started, so I know this better than most. In the early days Tesla was headed by a guy named Martin Eberhard and Elon was just an investor. Eberhard insisted on a design with a two-speed gearbox. This is extremely difficult in an electric car because of the high amounts of torque and extremely high RPMs involved. They went through a couple different versions of this, trying to get one that would last the life of a car, and burned a year or so trying to make it work. If you dig through the archives, you’ll find several news articles of journalists who got to drive the original Roadster, but it was locked in second gear because the shifting didn’t work. Eventually, Elon realized this wasn’t going to work so him and the other investors pushed Eberhard out. There was no love lost, Eberhard fought back, eventually they came to a settlement and Elon became CEO. Please understand I’m not saying this because I like Elon, I’m saying it because I was literally reading the blogs of both sides as it happened. The two-speed gearbox went right in the trash, they went to the one speed reduction gear Tesla uses today, and upsized the motor to give better acceleration. Elon was right about that decision, and he was the one who made that decision, all EVs today use that design.

As for SpaceX, Elon basically started that from the ground up. As I recall the guy who designed the Merlin engine was his first hire. I personally know people who worked for SpaceX and worked directly with Elon. Everyone I’ve talked to says the same thing- Elon is kind of an asshole to his employees, he has absolutely no sense of work-life balance and he wants employees who are 120% committed to the cause and will work late nights and weekends without complaint, he is opinionated and stubborn but in the end he’s right more often than not, but however hard he pushes his people, he pushes himself even harder. Most people don’t last very long in that environment, they put in a handful of years and when their stock options vest they quit, or if they don’t have equity they work until they have a family and can’t put in 60 hour weeks anymore then they quit.

So you want to say Elon is an asshole, you want to say he treats his employees badly, you want to say he doesn’t create a positive environment at his company’s, I will probably agree with all of these things. But you say he doesn’t do anything of value, that is just uninformed.

It’s a very simple answer Apple has guaranteed that your data will stay on your device and stay secure. This is generally trusted because Apple has a track record of keeping user data secure on the device or encrypted in the cloud even in ways Apple cannot access. Point is, when Apple says they are going to do this in a way that respects privacy, and they outline the technical details of how it will work, people trust that because there’s a track record.

Microsoft has no such trust. They have a recent track record of being intrusive and using dark patterns to persuade users to give Microsoft their data, for example in Edge there have been new feature pop-ups that require data sharing with Microsoft and the two options are ‘got it’ and ‘settings’ so accepting requires one click and rejecting requires 4 going into the settings menu and changing a few things. Microsoft is also heavily pushing Copilot which is mostly cloud-based. Furthermore, Microsoft recently showed a system that would basically screenshot your computer at very regular intervals and store them in an insecure manner. Granted it was on the device, but the way they were going to be stored meant they could be stolen with two lines of code. And let’s not forget that Windows 11 cannot be set up without a Microsoft account, so to even use your computer you have to share your email address with Microsoft. In this and many other ways they just do not act like a company that respects privacy at all, they act like the typical big tech give us everything or we will make your life difficult type company that nobody trusts.

If you really think he did nothing at all, then you have absolutely no understanding of how business works or how Tesla works. It’s like saying the ship doesn’t need a captain because the captain doesn’t personally operate or clean a part of the ship.

You are right that it is greed. But that is the very point. That is how our economy works. That is how our government works too. The whole point of checks and balances in the US Constitution is that people are expected to be greedy. Rather than rely on a king to be altruistic, it is expected that people at every level will be greedy so their greed is balanced against the greed of others. Same thing is true with our economy, the whole point of capitalist economy is it harnesses the greed of everybody to move things forward. Investors provide capital because they are greedy and want a return on their investment. Their greed is harnessed and put to work, This benefits all by providing a rich market of investment capital for businesses to use. And because they are greedy, because those investors have partial ownership of the company, they affect its direction.

It’s not always perfect. Lately far too many business decisions are made based solely on next quarter results at the cost of long-term success, and that is driven by short-term investors. Boeing is a perfect example of that.

But to write the whole system off and say it’s all greed and it all sucks and it’s all stupid reflects a fundamental lack of understanding how the economy works.

If you want an economy without greed, the best you’re probably going to find is communism. That’s been tried, it doesn’t usually work so well because without a greed incentive pushing things forward, there isn’t incentive to innovate or to work at maximum efficiency.

And as for Elon’s windfall, I think it’s fair to say nobody needs $56 billion. I definitely support a much higher tax rate for the extreme upper income brackets. If you are making more than 50 or 100 million a year income above that should be taxed at a pretty high rate. I am extremely against the extreme income inequality that has happened in this country. When the CEO is making hundreds of millions and the guy mopping the floor relies on government assistance to afford food, something is seriously fucked up. But I think the solution to that is to bring up the lower guy, raise the minimum wage by a fairly significant amount. I think in most places minimum wage should be ¢15 or $20 an hour. And I also favor a prohibition that if any of the companies employees rely on government assistance the company loses all tax breaks and government benefits.

You’re acting like this was his standard salary. It wasn’t. His contact, approved by shareholders at the time, basically offered him a King’s ransom for an impossible miracle, defined with metrics like sales and stock price. Elon delivered the miracle. Love him or hate him, the conditions were met.

Of course they can’t. It’s gotten so bad they ship their TVs with antivirus on them. The only reason anyone uses their Android phones is they have the best hardware, most of their add-on software is just useless gimmicks people turn off. Tizen on watches was never going to work. Apple has a large enough ecosystem to attract app developers. Google has a large enough ecosystem to attract app developers. Samsung does not. Smartest thing they could do now is shut down their remaining software development. Ship the TVs with vanilla Google OS like LG, strip the bloatware off their phones, etc. They would lose face but their products would become way better.

Not disagreeing, just providing a counterpoint.

Take your basic non super fancy restaurant, dinner for two with appetizers, entrees, desserts, a two rounds of drinks will probably be $100ish. And that table of two will be there for an hour. Assuming server gets 20% tip average, that’s $20 for the table. An average server will have four tables in their sections. That means if the restaurant is full, they are making $80 an hour in tips. They will get to keep 60% to 80% of that, the rest going in a tip pool that benefits kitchen staff, bussers, barbacks, etc. But they’ll still be making pretty good money.

Of course if the restaurant is empty or they only have one or two tables with people seated, they are making less.

The problem comes that if you get rid of this system, there’s a lot of financial risk for the restaurant owner. Currently they don’t have to pay the server or the staff very much, most of their compensation comes from tips, meaning there is less risk to them keeping the restaurant fully staffed if it’s not going to be busy. If you pay all these people are constant hourly, now there is risk on the restaurant owner in terms of staffing. Bring on too many staff when it’s quiet and they will lose a bundle. Don’t bring on enough staff when it’s busy and those people don’t have a financial incentive to bust their ass. It also becomes solely their job to ensure quality, because the server that spends half the time on their phone in the back room is making the same money as the server who is attentive to their tables. It also means less risk for hiring an inexperienced server, because if the server does a bad job they just won’t make good tips.

All that said, I agree something has to change. I think perhaps one answer would be a law requiring that each restaurant put 15% of gross receipts into a virtual tip pool. That way they aren’t paying through the nose to staff and empty restaurant, there would be a line item on the check like ‘automatic gratuity paid the staff $whatever on this check, further tipping is optional’.

There’s actually a really good explanation for this.

This is a mixing pump. It mixes ethanol into the fuel. Because the mixing happens before the part of the pump that measures how much is being dispensed, you need at least a few gallons to fully flush things out and get somewhere close to what you’re actually buying.

Nobody is going to come arrest you if you buy 2 gallons of gas. But the gas you get me not be the mix you wanted.

I’m strongly in favor of laws restricting how many 1-3 family homes a company can own. I think that limit should go up and down the chain of corporate ownership including parents and subsidiaries. There should be exceptions for things like worker housing, but single family homes should not be an investment opportunity for large corporations. All that does is drive up the prices and makes it harder for average people to own a home. There is no overall benefit to society.

Squatters should have civil rights. Rights to the property that belongs to somebody else which they are squatting in should not be among their rights. If you are squatting on a property and that property owner wants you gone, you should be removed immediately.

I would agree with something like this, but focusing on residential properties. I also think there should be limits to how many residential properties a single company can own. I don’t mean like apartment buildings, I mean like single-family or two / three family houses.

1 to 3 family homes are a resource that should be for the good of the American people. I’m not against somebody making money as part of that, but when the opportunity for investing starts pricing people out of the market then we need to have a hard think about whether the investing market is more important than the people or not. I don’t think it should be.

Where the hell are you getting that from? I didn’t say anything about immigrants.
This has nothing to do with race or nationality or citizenship. I am saying if you have no rights to a building, as in you don’t own the building and you don’t have a lease there, then barging in and locking the door behind you should not automatically grant you any sort of special treatment. You are an illegal intruder, and the police should go in and arrest you. I think that should apply in situations like this and it should apply in situations even if the owner of the building hasn’t been around in a month.

Where the hell are you getting any of that from what I said? I am saying that if you don’t own a building, and otherwise have no rights to that building, just because you barge in and lock the door doesn’t mean you should own the building or have any rights to that building whatsoever. The police should go in and arrest you.

Hopefully this starts to shed some light on the travesty that is ‘squatters rights’. Squatters shouldn’t have rights.

What you see in movies is bullshit. Any explosion creates a huge fireball and people go flying in every direction. Actual munitions aren’t like that. Especially munitions that have to be carried on light little drones. That includes most hand grenades and air-dropped bombs.

I’m concept, an explosion that creates that big fireball puts most of its energy into spreading burning fuel around to create that big fireball. It’s visually impressive, but not actually very destructive. In warfare you don’t care what it looks like, you want it to be destructive. And the best way to get bang for your buck so to speak with an explosive that has to be lightweight, is with shrapnel. An explosive wrapped in shrapnel is not visually impressive to watch, but it basically sends little bullets flying out in every direction and those bullets are what does the damage.

So consider it this way. If I walk up to the jamming device and shoot it with a pistol, it’s not going to be visually impressive. Nothing is going to fly apart and explode in a shower of sparks and flames. The jammer device might not even move at all, it just now has a hole in it. But it is in fact quite thoroughly destroyed because the bullet from my pistol destroyed all of its internal workings.

Same thing is true with the grenade. The hand grenade is designed to be light and effective, so a soldier can carry it without getting weighed down. Thus it is a small explosive wrapped in a lot of shrapnel. Soldier throws it at the enemy, enemy casualties come not from the explosion but from shrapnel wounds. Drop one of those grenades next to a piece of equipment that isn’t armored, and it may not even appear to move, but it has been quite thoroughly punctured by shrapnel and is thus destroyed.