Money isn’t worth anything until you spend it. Very easily to have an extra $200 in your pocket after all your expenses and savings targets have been hit, when you’re making that kind of money.

I don’t think it’s irresponsible to grab a bottle of wine with dinner or front the door fee for a trendy night club.

I also don’t think you need to drop $200 to have a good time. Street food and public theaters and dive bars are also options.

But if you’ve done that before and you want to try the Michelin star restaurant or do the scotch tasting menu or the omakasi with a cutie you just met?

In a country of 350M

No better alternative suggested

It’s called Vim

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to jerk off to.

This is very obviously aged-up. Cameron Diaz is 53 not 73.

Who Is With Trump?

Jensen Huang, Nvidia
Tim Cook, Apple
Elon Musk, Tesla/SpaceX
David Solomon, Goldman Sachs
Kelly Ortberg, Boeing
Brian Sikes, Cargill
Cristiano Amon, Qualcomm
Steven Schwarzman, Blackstone
Larry Fink, BlackRock
Jane Fraser, Citi
Jim Anderson, Coherent
Henry Lawrence Culp, GE Aerospace
Jacob Thaysen, Illumina
Michael Miebach, Mastercard
Dina Powell McCormick, Meta
Sanjay Mehrotra, Micron
Ryan McInerney, Visa
Chuck Robbins, Cisco (was invited but will not attend because of the company’s earnings this week, Cisco said Monday)

Maybe if Putin was running a Fortune 500 US-based mega-corp.

Cuba in Ten Years

Amazing what a country can do when its continued existence depend on residents doing it.

google was a perfect product.

No it wasn’t. It was the best in a bad batch of half-conceived search engines. And this was only true for a relative window of time in the '10s, when they hadn’t quite cornered the market on search and hadn’t fully optimized how to maximize their ad revenues.

Google was a massive conflux of investor capital that produced a better-than-average set of tools as loss-leaders to hook you into their Walled Garden. Once you were inside the Walled Garden, what you discovered was Microsoft 2: Electric Boogaloo.

I mean, there’s definitely a certain merit in helping to answer the question “Which service do I currently subscribe to that hosts the movies I want to watch?” I would go even further and suggest a digital tool that toggles subscriptions on/off based on the movie you want to watch tonight and its availability would be a helpful gadget.

But all of this is downwind of a digital service setup that is constantly shifting and hiding content behind different payment plans. And using the revenue from those plans to undermine public libraries, open source digital repositories, and a free globally accessible internet. That’s the really annoying bit.

The ads are optional

That’s always how it starts.

Is the man sitting in church and reading from the Bible wasting his time any more or less than the man sitting in a field and contemplating the stars? In the end, they both amount to the same thing.

People tend to develop biases when they are young and reinforce them when they get older.

If you cut across someone’s bias, they tend to see that as your attempt to trick them. And they fall back on a body of knowledge/experience that contradicts your efforts. If you encounter someone without bias, it is easy to seed a bias through presentation of slanted perspectives and cherry-picked information when you are their primary source of truth. But if your audience reflexively distrusts you, it is comparatively difficult to reshape their beliefs. You tend to have more luck playing on their distrust of you.

As an example, if you have someone who is racist and fearful of young, strong, black men, it is relatively difficult to tamp down that anxiety when around a person like this who they find intimidating. It is comically easy for a person that fits the description - but who is otherwise cheerful, passive, and pleasant - to intimidate the bigot with idle threats or make a fool of them by playing against their presumptions.

Pascals Wager was already stupid in the 17th century

The broad existential question was interesting. It’s part of a conversation about tail risks and cost-benefit calculations that you can apply to much more than just religion.

What I find more curious about Pascal’s Wager, from a theological perspective, is the logical consequence. Namely, that you’re obligated to find some kind of theological average between all known religious practices to maximize your own personal safety. And that theological average largely boils down to generic positive aphorisms -

• Do Unto Others
• Live Charitably
• Value Your Own Life And The Lives Of Others
• Reject Base Cravings
• Abhor Materialist Social Hierarchies
• Turn The Other Cheek
• Men Are More Important Than Women
• Slaughter A Live Animal To Appease Primal Forces
• Wash Your Asshole
• Remember That Old People Are Smarter Than You

Shit we should already know about and are inclined towards anyway. When you take a holistic view of religious studies, it peels away the pastiche and reveals the common truths of human existence. And Pascal’s Wager, as a thought experiment, helps navigate people to this point from an abstract logical framework.

What if, after you die, you find out you’re dead, and you’ve wasted your precious time all along?

I mean, what does it mean to “waste time” in this context? There’s a certain existential dread that comes with the mystery of death - really the mystery of consciousness generally speaking - and we all cope with it as best we can. I don’t think a ritualized means of managing one’s anxiety is time wasted. If your genuflections to a carving of a guy on a crucifix sooth your own anxieties of loss-of-self, more power to you.

But it does feel a bit like someone asking “What if you stepped on a crack and then it really did break your mother’s back?” I mean, that would be very scary and sad. I can’t see the correlation between these two things. I’m not going to painstakingly tip-toe down the sidewalk out of a concern I don’t take seriously.

Maybe if the Friekorps confined itself to shit posting on Facebook

Maybe it’s stress or anxiety idk.

Could just be that we’re in for six more weeks of winter.

Clearly that’s why you need someone into oral.

I think there’s a real serious argument that “conservative” can mask “woman” or “minority” to counterweight nativist bigotry. And you might see this in politicians like Jodi Ernst or Sarah Palin or Dianne Feinstein or Kamala Harris even, where tacking to conservative rhetoric offsets the presumption that you’re a bunch of bra burning far left feminists.

But the idea that you can’t run as a conservative Democrat and win high office? Really requires you to just gouge out your eyes before glancing at any historical text. God forbid you lay eyes on a biography of Hillary Clinton.

He’s the one claiming the progressives unseating neoliberals in primaries are funded by Republicans.

It’s the same line they used again the Green Party in the '00s, various DSA candidates in the '10s, and the Sanders movement in the '20s.

Anyone who isn’t under the thumb of neoliberal leadership is some combination of Russia spy, Republican plant, and double-secret Communist infiltrator.