Left: Ok, we'll adopt your overwhelmingly popular idea that is foundational to legitimacy *and* gives us the opportunity to address any concerns we might have about Accessibility while also giving us an opportunity to look at the benefits of enhancing voter communications, auditability, and security... BUT, and this is important, only if you 81% admit you are not only wrong but also stupid. Deal?
Normies: Ok, Mr. Left, we'll admit you are the best after you pass the Voter ID legislation.
Since its a Voting Modernization act, among the goals of a good ID system is also unique identifiers (whether sequential or hash, I'll leave to the info sec guys) that can quickly be compared across precincts, statewide and maybe even nationally.
We'll want to modernize/digitalize the voting tabulation systems as well... plus even with Motor Voter Free ID, we have to deal with State Level systems that are, um, clunky... here's an article from 2018 spelling out the errors in Motor Voter in California.
But that's the point... modernization looks at all the aspects of voting to make it better: Access, Security, and Inviolability for Legitimacy.
Mail-in ballots should also come under scrutiny as something that might have been path-dependent upgrade in 1990, but might or might not be optimal given updates to tech and the guiding principles of the Modernization Act (whatever we decide those to be).
The point isn't to validate one system or another that might (or might not) benefit a party, but to address Legitimacy issues that are creeping into the system.
Heh, literally no. And I'd posit that all of your 'arguments' on these topics are trying to position existential death to the other team *before* you will take the tiniest incremental victory. You're going to lose with that strategy.
Evidence... you keep using that word:
"An overwhelming majority (81%) of respondents also said they support voters being required to show ID in order to vote, including 62% of Democrats, even as critics contend voter ID laws suppress turnout and unfairly discriminate against groups like low-income, elderly and minority voters."
One of the things I've learned in Sales over the years is that you win on the story you build not on the reasons not to buy the other guy. Because if the other guy is any good, he's building a story for why you should buy him and not how bad the other guys are.
You've shot past the mark and are making the typical "left's big problem" mistake.
Voting Modernization is about all those things... you literally fall into a reactive trap by talking about fraud... the point of Voter ID and Voting Security is about legitimacy. If your Modernization plan doesn't also address Security and Inviolability, then you're whistling pass the graveyard.
Plus, you have blindspots about Mail-in voting... blindspots that I humorously pointed out in the previous election where I invoked my Patriarchal Privilege to 'help' my wife and children vote for the American Solidarity party (that's two "r's" and two "l's"). In the olden days I could only 'enourage' them... but the voting booth provided protection for *them* from well intentioned *me*. But with Mail-in votes... well, that's just not an issue now, is it?
I don't have any particular problem with Voting-by-Mail per se, but saying there's can't be any concerns about the Inviolability of the vote (holding askance security for the moment) when I've basically pointed out that (soft) coercion is inevitable basically displays a certain form of 'privilege' in itself. ​
Which is to say my primary criticism of the Left is that you *aren't* advocating for a broadbased Voting Modernization program, but reasoning backwards from outcome preferences and/or reacting to the other side's attempts to reason backwards from outcome preferences.
I'm onboard with Voting Modernization... which I hope includes RCV and other aspects... but the Modernization plan has to address Access, Security, and Inviolability for Legitimacy.
I was trying to find the recent twitter exchange where Liberals (not in good standing) like Chait and Yglesias were opining that the Democratic framing of Voting Access as constantly at odds with Voting Legitimacy was an own-goal that was hindering efforts at a better system on both fronts.
That's where I'm at... if we're going to modernize Voting, we have to modernize Voting security. I've also commented that making Voting 'easier' vis-a-vis mail-in and (eventually) internet... also has downsides to voter intimidation and vote stealing that in-person Voting actually provides better protections for.
Which is to say, much of the voting talk I hear from the left isn't designed to modernize and protect voting but outcome based reasoning that eschews plans that should address and neutralize legitimate concerns from the right.
The point of which is to make the illegitimate concerns from the right moot.
Casting these issues a 'voting restrictions' is a category error that most Americans don't support and the polling is consistent on that. There's a path forward for modernization, and I concede Republican efforts to subvert that... which is why the path forward has to be modernization, security and inviolability...
Dang, not sure what I'm seeing, but if that's actual unaltered footage... that's a decent sized squad. I counted 13 plus three vehicles just through that tiny break.
I have no idea what motivates Haitian politics; so no speculation on that front. It seems that the succession to the VP has not been impinged... so unless it's the VP leading it, doesn't appear to be a coup.
The DEA stuff is an interesting twist... I doubt it's the DEA but no idea on who or why they'd use it as a prop.
Hence, not a flex. But I will leave room for simple personal gain depending on how much Howard was willing to fork over. Has that been reported?
But yes, the precariousness of 'winning' in the History and Philosophy of Ideas space leads to fairly predictable game theory outcomes at the individual level.
I'm not exactly on team 1619... but it strikes me as not quite the flex people are suggesting.
That is, if this were, say, a break-out Aquinas scholar revising history and moral philosophy in the public sphere, then taking tenure at UNC (or similar) is arguably the bigger step forward than securing a seat at Catholic U (also) in DC.
Catholic U/Howard upgrading and doubling down on their Niche is good for those institutions... but if the goal is breaking out and revising... then go with UNC.
"The charges are believed to involve fringe benefits given to employees, including Weisselberg, sources said."
Capone had Tax Evasion; but the coppers finally nabbed Trump on fringies... well, not Trump, but you know.
I have to believe there's more, because it does kinda beggar the imagination to think that a prosecutor combing through all of Trump's financial dealings (is this the DA who also got the tax returns?) coming up with Fringe Benefit violations is...?
I mean, my estimation of Trump would go up a notch if he could have a DA crawl up his corporate ass and all they could do was arrest the CFO on excess compensation charges.
Exactly... fascinating stuff to noodle through. Tolkien seemed to be leaning towards corruption, but the way he puts it is that he 'thinks' that's how it must have been... but until he writes and rewrites it to see what emerges he's not entirely sure.
Sub-Creation in the books, plus how he himself viewed his work as Sub-Creation is probably the stuff of which dissertations are made.
I assume you are referring to rule-sets like ICE or D&D or WoW? Sure, those are downstream derivatives from Tolkien's work.
But in terms of the "Fall of the Orcs" and in what theological way does their fall inform what we mean by evil? Then, those (fun) derivatives aren't in the same world. Whether that's a lack of understanding or indifference to Tolkien's project doesn't matter for what they are doing... but they aren't doing Tolkien.
Heck, WoW's Orcs have the Green Jesus meme... which is fine for WoW; but those Orcs aren't Tolkien Orcs.
Heh... 100% sure we're going to see an Orc rehabilitation arc.
Which would be an interesting theological question depending on settling the 'Orc' question that Tolkien himself never settled... which is, we're not really sure if Orcs are more like the original Dwarfs or corrupted elves (or something else).
But I go back to my original point that I don't think a stable of Hollywood writers could work that out... so we'll just get an oppression parable that attempts to map on to present day politics.
I'm fairly tangential to the meat and potatoes of this discussion...
But I can say I'm grateful to all the people in the 90's and 00's who were correct in the theory that they *could* code their own Data Warehouse, but overlooked the fact that they couldn't maintain the Data Warehouse once they built it.
And a shout out to all the folks in the 10's who were correct that you *could* code your own Data Science projects, but overlooked the fact that you can't scale your Data Science projects to keep up with Business Requirements.
... on the topic of Systems Integrators (or companies acting as them)... will the component producers even allow them access to the code to test? I could see where they should, but I could also see where the component producers would tell them to pound sand. The 'moat' around fuel injectors is the cost/machinery of building them... the moat around code is cut/paste.
Heck, Elwe and Melian licherally gazed into one anothers eyes for a few centuries. Maybe it's a better story if every other decade he cops a quick feel?
Both... if you're spending that much money on the thing... you sure as hell aren't going to risk it on writers understanding how Tolkien's world works and delivering on that.
On “Wednesday Writs: Voting Rights in Brnovich v Democratic National Committee”
Left: Ok, we'll adopt your overwhelmingly popular idea that is foundational to legitimacy *and* gives us the opportunity to address any concerns we might have about Accessibility while also giving us an opportunity to look at the benefits of enhancing voter communications, auditability, and security... BUT, and this is important, only if you 81% admit you are not only wrong but also stupid. Deal?
Normies: Ok, Mr. Left, we'll admit you are the best after you pass the Voter ID legislation.
https://youtu.be/9JfXrJJPDUE?t=145
"
Imagine there are three types of voters...
"
Sure, that's the spirit.
Since its a Voting Modernization act, among the goals of a good ID system is also unique identifiers (whether sequential or hash, I'll leave to the info sec guys) that can quickly be compared across precincts, statewide and maybe even nationally.
We'll want to modernize/digitalize the voting tabulation systems as well... plus even with Motor Voter Free ID, we have to deal with State Level systems that are, um, clunky... here's an article from 2018 spelling out the errors in Motor Voter in California.
But that's the point... modernization looks at all the aspects of voting to make it better: Access, Security, and Inviolability for Legitimacy.
Mail-in ballots should also come under scrutiny as something that might have been path-dependent upgrade in 1990, but might or might not be optimal given updates to tech and the guiding principles of the Modernization Act (whatever we decide those to be).
The point isn't to validate one system or another that might (or might not) benefit a party, but to address Legitimacy issues that are creeping into the system.
"
I confessed no such thing... I think the Left is on a purity death spiral that will cause it's majority to collapse.
My position is that you are over-playing your hand by eschewing 81% popular proposals in favor of existential death for the other side.
"
If 81% back this for Legitimacy, then incorporate this into your Legitimacy plan and move on to other aspects.
Legitimacy *is* about feels... among other things.
Ignoring 81% percent is bad politics if your goal is to modernize and manage change.
"
Heh, literally no. And I'd posit that all of your 'arguments' on these topics are trying to position existential death to the other team *before* you will take the tiniest incremental victory. You're going to lose with that strategy.
"
Evidence... you keep using that word:
"An overwhelming majority (81%) of respondents also said they support voters being required to show ID in order to vote, including 62% of Democrats, even as critics contend voter ID laws suppress turnout and unfairly discriminate against groups like low-income, elderly and minority voters."
"
One of the things I've learned in Sales over the years is that you win on the story you build not on the reasons not to buy the other guy. Because if the other guy is any good, he's building a story for why you should buy him and not how bad the other guys are.
"
You've shot past the mark and are making the typical "left's big problem" mistake.
Voting Modernization is about all those things... you literally fall into a reactive trap by talking about fraud... the point of Voter ID and Voting Security is about legitimacy. If your Modernization plan doesn't also address Security and Inviolability, then you're whistling pass the graveyard.
Plus, you have blindspots about Mail-in voting... blindspots that I humorously pointed out in the previous election where I invoked my Patriarchal Privilege to 'help' my wife and children vote for the American Solidarity party (that's two "r's" and two "l's"). In the olden days I could only 'enourage' them... but the voting booth provided protection for *them* from well intentioned *me*. But with Mail-in votes... well, that's just not an issue now, is it?
I don't have any particular problem with Voting-by-Mail per se, but saying there's can't be any concerns about the Inviolability of the vote (holding askance security for the moment) when I've basically pointed out that (soft) coercion is inevitable basically displays a certain form of 'privilege' in itself. ​
Which is to say my primary criticism of the Left is that you *aren't* advocating for a broadbased Voting Modernization program, but reasoning backwards from outcome preferences and/or reacting to the other side's attempts to reason backwards from outcome preferences.
I'm onboard with Voting Modernization... which I hope includes RCV and other aspects... but the Modernization plan has to address Access, Security, and Inviolability for Legitimacy.
"
I was trying to find the recent twitter exchange where Liberals (not in good standing) like Chait and Yglesias were opining that the Democratic framing of Voting Access as constantly at odds with Voting Legitimacy was an own-goal that was hindering efforts at a better system on both fronts.
That's where I'm at... if we're going to modernize Voting, we have to modernize Voting security. I've also commented that making Voting 'easier' vis-a-vis mail-in and (eventually) internet... also has downsides to voter intimidation and vote stealing that in-person Voting actually provides better protections for.
Which is to say, much of the voting talk I hear from the left isn't designed to modernize and protect voting but outcome based reasoning that eschews plans that should address and neutralize legitimate concerns from the right.
The point of which is to make the illegitimate concerns from the right moot.
Casting these issues a 'voting restrictions' is a category error that most Americans don't support and the polling is consistent on that. There's a path forward for modernization, and I concede Republican efforts to subvert that... which is why the path forward has to be modernization, security and inviolability...
On “Haitian President Jovenel Moise Assassinated”
Dang, not sure what I'm seeing, but if that's actual unaltered footage... that's a decent sized squad. I counted 13 plus three vehicles just through that tiny break.
I have no idea what motivates Haitian politics; so no speculation on that front. It seems that the succession to the VP has not been impinged... so unless it's the VP leading it, doesn't appear to be a coup.
The DEA stuff is an interesting twist... I doubt it's the DEA but no idea on who or why they'd use it as a prop.
On “Nikole Hannah-Jones Rejects UNC Chapel Hill, Joins Ta-Nehisi Coates At Howard”
Hence, not a flex. But I will leave room for simple personal gain depending on how much Howard was willing to fork over. Has that been reported?
But yes, the precariousness of 'winning' in the History and Philosophy of Ideas space leads to fairly predictable game theory outcomes at the individual level.
"
I'm not exactly on team 1619... but it strikes me as not quite the flex people are suggesting.
That is, if this were, say, a break-out Aquinas scholar revising history and moral philosophy in the public sphere, then taking tenure at UNC (or similar) is arguably the bigger step forward than securing a seat at Catholic U (also) in DC.
Catholic U/Howard upgrading and doubling down on their Niche is good for those institutions... but if the goal is breaking out and revising... then go with UNC.
On “An Economist’s Ode to Scotch”
BREAKING: Russia announces that only Whiskey brewed in Sevastopol region may be called Scotch.
"
If it's not distilled from a bog in Scotland, it's just Sparkling Whiskey.
"
I'll be over here on my bourbon fainting couch clutching my Pappy van Winkle and whispering soothing words.
On “Trump Organization CFO , Surrenders to Manhatten DA”
Early reporting and all that, but...
"The charges are believed to involve fringe benefits given to employees, including Weisselberg, sources said."
Capone had Tax Evasion; but the coppers finally nabbed Trump on fringies... well, not Trump, but you know.
I have to believe there's more, because it does kinda beggar the imagination to think that a prosecutor combing through all of Trump's financial dealings (is this the DA who also got the tax returns?) coming up with Fringe Benefit violations is...?
I mean, my estimation of Trump would go up a notch if he could have a DA crawl up his corporate ass and all they could do was arrest the CFO on excess compensation charges.
On “Hollywood: Time to Use Your Superpower for Good Again”
Exactly... fascinating stuff to noodle through. Tolkien seemed to be leaning towards corruption, but the way he puts it is that he 'thinks' that's how it must have been... but until he writes and rewrites it to see what emerges he's not entirely sure.
Sub-Creation in the books, plus how he himself viewed his work as Sub-Creation is probably the stuff of which dissertations are made.
"
I assume you are referring to rule-sets like ICE or D&D or WoW? Sure, those are downstream derivatives from Tolkien's work.
But in terms of the "Fall of the Orcs" and in what theological way does their fall inform what we mean by evil? Then, those (fun) derivatives aren't in the same world. Whether that's a lack of understanding or indifference to Tolkien's project doesn't matter for what they are doing... but they aren't doing Tolkien.
Heck, WoW's Orcs have the Green Jesus meme... which is fine for WoW; but those Orcs aren't Tolkien Orcs.
"
Hot Maia Summer.
"
Heh... 100% sure we're going to see an Orc rehabilitation arc.
Which would be an interesting theological question depending on settling the 'Orc' question that Tolkien himself never settled... which is, we're not really sure if Orcs are more like the original Dwarfs or corrupted elves (or something else).
But I go back to my original point that I don't think a stable of Hollywood writers could work that out... so we'll just get an oppression parable that attempts to map on to present day politics.
It won't be *real* CRT, but...
On “Tech Tuesday: Auto Code”
I'm fairly tangential to the meat and potatoes of this discussion...
But I can say I'm grateful to all the people in the 90's and 00's who were correct in the theory that they *could* code their own Data Warehouse, but overlooked the fact that they couldn't maintain the Data Warehouse once they built it.
And a shout out to all the folks in the 10's who were correct that you *could* code your own Data Science projects, but overlooked the fact that you can't scale your Data Science projects to keep up with Business Requirements.
... on the topic of Systems Integrators (or companies acting as them)... will the component producers even allow them access to the code to test? I could see where they should, but I could also see where the component producers would tell them to pound sand. The 'moat' around fuel injectors is the cost/machinery of building them... the moat around code is cut/paste.
On “Hollywood: Time to Use Your Superpower for Good Again”
Man... every single story is a love story.
Heck, Elwe and Melian licherally gazed into one anothers eyes for a few centuries. Maybe it's a better story if every other decade he cops a quick feel?
"
Numenor just before they sail West?
That's pretty much a tale of decadence.
"
Both... if you're spending that much money on the thing... you sure as hell aren't going to risk it on writers understanding how Tolkien's world works and delivering on that.