mike10010100's recent activity

  1. Comment on 'OK boomer': New Zealand MP shuts down climate change heckler with viral quip in ~news

    mike10010100
    Link
    That is absolutely the appropriate reaction to someone snidely laughing at you simply because of your relatively young age.

    That is absolutely the appropriate reaction to someone snidely laughing at you simply because of your relatively young age.

    3 votes
  2. Comment on If Universal Basic Income would be introduced, how would you stop prices from rising uncontrollably? in ~finance

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    But no matter what, more money is more than less money. Therefore, being able to cover the cost of living doesn't really factor into whether or not "more money" or "less money" is a deciding...

    But if they had another source of income, maybe they'd choose the other way?

    But no matter what, more money is more than less money. Therefore, being able to cover the cost of living doesn't really factor into whether or not "more money" or "less money" is a deciding factor.

    someone wants to be a teacher but decides to go into programming because that pays better

    Then their motivation is due to more money and not necessarily "what will pay the bills".

    Having flexibility means people could spread out more to second and third tier cities

    They could do that now. They could live in areas with lower cost of living, but lower wage jobs, but people generally don't. And it's not because they need to cover their cost of living bills. The fact is that under capitalism, people like more money more than they like less money.

    So the question is: is the overwhelming desire to simply pay the bills? Because if so, people should be fleeing the city en masse regardless of their income levels. Or, perhaps, is it that people think that the benefits of having more money and living in city centers with more commerce, generally outweighs the greater percentage of cost of living?

  3. Comment on If Universal Basic Income would be introduced, how would you stop prices from rising uncontrollably? in ~finance

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    Does that landlord have infinite properties to rent? If so, doesn't that kind of make him a monopoly? If not, then how does that prevent natural market cost increase simply due to scarcity? But...

    The landlord who doesn't raise his rents is going to rent out all of his properties before the other landlords who do raise their rent.

    Does that landlord have infinite properties to rent? If so, doesn't that kind of make him a monopoly? If not, then how does that prevent natural market cost increase simply due to scarcity?

    I'd make the case that it doesn't matter, though, because those places are already expensive as hell and UBI isn't going to change much for the people who can afford that in the first place.

    But those places are where both desirable and undesirable jobs are. Which means that gentrification will only be magnified by the fact that slightly outlying areas will now be flooded with people who can "afford" to live in the area where desirable and undesirable jobs exist.

    Because, let's face it, those "undesirable" jobs still need to be filled.

  4. Comment on If Universal Basic Income would be introduced, how would you stop prices from rising uncontrollably? in ~finance

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but generally people move to or from a place because of their job. By saying that it would make things easier or more feasible to live someone else, you're also saying...

    But it would make moving away, or not moving there in the first place, more attractive, too.

    Correct me if I'm wrong, but generally people move to or from a place because of their job. By saying that it would make things easier or more feasible to live someone else, you're also saying that somehow they'd find a desirable job elsewhere.

    In addition, you seem to be assuming that people work at "desirable" jobs in "desirable" cities because they "need" those jobs. "Needing" jobs usually means that someone moves for that job. If, as you say here, someone no longer "needs" certain jobs and has the freedom to move elsewhere, then it becomes a question of "wanting" certain jobs. In which case, they will generally congregate in those "desirable" cities. Which, as we've already agreed, will drive up the costs of living in said cities.

    Jobs don't just pop up places because housing is suddenly affordable. And giving people the money to move doesn't mean they necessarily will, especially if they like their existing job.

    What would give people far more freedom is if we invest heavily in public housing, or, even more radically, significantly reduce the housing market as a whole.

    Summary: when people need jobs, they move for said job. If they don't need jobs, they'll live wherever they can. In either example, the costs of living are driven up by giving them the money to cover said cost of living.

  5. Comment on How will Tildes users be able to visualize trust? in ~tildes

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    In addition, I personally comment under the exact same username across every social media network I join. I am easily Googleable, and don't hide behind my username. Does that give me a level of...

    In addition, I personally comment under the exact same username across every social media network I join. I am easily Googleable, and don't hide behind my username. Does that give me a level of "trust" if I am willing to verify my IRL identity? Or does that not matter when faced with potentially more anonymous users who might not care as much about their online identity and could simply "gang up" on others?

    3 votes
  6. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    Oh hey, neat, right out of the gate someone has labeled me an Apple hater, as I type this on my Macbook Air... On the contrary, I've provided a decent amount of evidence in other threads that...

    Apple haters tend to have a terrible understanding of the role hype plays in the brand's popularity.

    Oh hey, neat, right out of the gate someone has labeled me an Apple hater, as I type this on my Macbook Air...

    There is very little evidence to suggest Apple is reaping some sort of Giffen Good effect.

    On the contrary, I've provided a decent amount of evidence in other threads that there is a significant status symbol associated with Apple products.

    But here's some more!

    https://www.deccanchronicle.com/technology/mobiles-and-tabs/090718/iphone-ipad-are-status-symbols-research.html

    On the contrary, there's a decent amount of evidence that Apple is reaping the rewards of people seeing them as a status symbol, even among common memes.

  7. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    The plural of anecdote is not data, but let's go with this. They chose them because the choice was obvious. This is a nonanswer. So basically, the sample size is "people who stan Apple and those...

    Most of my friends

    The plural of anecdote is not data, but let's go with this.

    because the choice was obvious

    They chose them because the choice was obvious. This is a nonanswer.

    and they'd work the best with their iPhone—even the non-techy ones know that. On Twitter, it's clear why people use them too (Gruber, Ritchie, Snell, etc)—and the sample size they have exposure to is far larger than yours or mine.

    So basically, the sample size is "people who stan Apple and those who follow them religiously".

    Yeah, sorry, that's not polling dude. You know this, but you're using these claims, again, without citation or data, as if that provides some level of certainty.

    The fact is that the highest stated reason for why people didn't want to buy AirPods is because they were too expensive. You cannot then turn around and pretend like the high price is not indicative of a certain amount of status symbol.

    Even Gruber doesn't disagree.

    So right now, it seems like you are not only misrepresenting people's views on whether or not AirPods are considered status symbols, but are actively ignoring the data that suggests that they are.

    https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/5/23/18635755/airpod-apple-earbud-memes-rich-people-explained

    The fact is that Apple could have invented these bluetooth headphones and left the headphone jack in for those who couldn't afford the objectively more expensive bluetooth option. But they didn't. Instead, they came out with accessories that "solved" the issue while bumping up the total price of the phone by almost 1/4 in order for it to remain a portable music device by Apple.

    No; I brought it out into the open and rephrased it to what they—and many here—actually meant.

    To be frank, it looks like you took their words and twisted them into a personal insult, when in fact, what they were talking about was, in that instance, the fact that you didn't buy a set of bluetooth headphones until Apple removed your option not to buy bluetooth headphones.

    Which, as far as I can tell, is fact.

    You're accusing people of buying AirPods for "status": that fits in with the defnition of the commonly thrown around term of "sheep".

    No, "sheep" would be "I bought them because Apple told me to buy them". Buying them because they are widely considered a status symbol is a distinct step above "sheep". But it's a statement that you have outright rejected, simply because it seems you believe it applies to yourself.

    This is just a personal attack and gaslighting. You're not conducting this argument in good faith at all, so I'm done with you.

    On the contrary, you yourself linked to a thread almost a year ago where someone said to you that they didn't see people shutting down conversation, they just saw people disagreeing with you and you getting upset and claiming people were shutting down conversation.

    Is it possible perhaps that you're taking Apple topics a little too personally, and have been doing so for quite some time?

    4 votes
  8. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    It seems like they could though?

    I didn't say they weren't measurable or describable, I said they don't fit on a specifications sheet.

    It seems like they could though?

    2 votes
  9. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    No, just that subjective experiences can often be generated from hype/marketing alone. Grey Goose is a great example of this. Sold like shit until they increased the price dramatically, then sold...

    There is no way you actually sincerely believe that there is no such thing as subjective experience.

    No, just that subjective experiences can often be generated from hype/marketing alone.

    Grey Goose is a great example of this. Sold like shit until they increased the price dramatically, then sold like hotcakes.

    2 votes
  10. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    Based on what review? All the ones I've read indicate they're really good?

    The surface buds are infamously bad

    Based on what review? All the ones I've read indicate they're really good?

  11. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    I mean, when was the last time you surveyed AirPods owners about why they use the product? You're here throwing out reason after reason for why they choose to buy them without evidence, but the...

    You'd have to have an extremely cynical take on the world if you think a large portion of the market is purchasing AirPods purely for "status", when was the last time you surveyed AirPods owners about why they use the product?

    I mean, when was the last time you surveyed AirPods owners about why they use the product?

    You're here throwing out reason after reason for why they choose to buy them without evidence, but the moment someone else comes in an suggests that it might be some other reason, you ask for a source? If you get to make assertions about people buying them for the ecosystem without evidence then I get to make assertions about people buying them as status symbols without evidence.

    You mean like here, on Tildes, where some have previously insulted purchasers of Apple products for seemingly making not making the under their own free will?

    Uhhh... you yourself brought up the sheep language? In response to someone saying "why didn't you buy wireless headphones before there was literally no other option from Apple?".

    It comes off as an extreme response to a reasonable question. Much like most of your statements here, or on any Apple topic, really. And to see that this has been the case for over a year now? Whew.

    1 vote
  12. Comment on OpenAI releases the largest version (1.5B parameters) of their GPT-2 language model, along with code and model weights in ~comp

    mike10010100
    Link
    Our partners at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies’ Center on Terrorism, Extremism, and Counterterrorism (CTEC) found that extremist groups can use GPT-2 for misuse, specifically by...

    Our partners at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies’ Center on Terrorism, Extremism, and Counterterrorism (CTEC) found that extremist groups can use GPT-2 for misuse, specifically by fine-tuning GPT-2 models on four ideological positions: white supremacy, Marxism, jihadist Islamism, and anarchism. CTEC demonstrated that it’s possible to create models that can generate synthetic propaganda for these ideologies. They also show that, despite having low detection accuracy on synthetic outputs, ML-based detection methods can give experts reasonable suspicion that an actor is generating synthetic text.

    Whew lad that's terrifying.

    1 vote
  13. Comment on Holy Shit, Contra Said a Thing! Well, Guess I Better Singlehandedly Solve BreadTube - Mo Black in ~talk

    mike10010100
    Link
    Whew lad: Or perhaps because Left Unity is the only way to defeat the monolithic block of the right? Maybe because the right loves to cause Left Disunity by amplifying the kind of infighting this...

    Whew lad:

    They’re probably so worried about culture because you have to be white to unironically believe in Left Unity.

    Or perhaps because Left Unity is the only way to defeat the monolithic block of the right? Maybe because the right loves to cause Left Disunity by amplifying the kind of infighting this article is about?

    But BreadTube is not a Leftist movement. It’s a market created by capitalism to sell Leftists stuff.

    Which stuff? More leftist content? Because most of these BreadTubers don't put ads in their content and fund almost entirely off of Patreon. So...what stuff are they selling? And afaik, unless there are ads on the videos, YouTube doesn't make money directly from said content.

    Then, he goes into social capital, which, IMO, stumbles directly into a discussion about whether such behavior is a product of capitalism, or if it is some deeper tendency in human behavior to want to follow strong leaders. In capitalism, this is indicated by people with lots of money, but in a society without such mechanisms to hoard wealth, cults of personality and amassing social capital would still occur.

    So it seems to come down to: is BreadTube primarily a de-radicalizing tool, or is it a discussion space for leftist discourse? Are those in it immune from criticism simply because it's a de-radicalization tool above all else?

    Or can we perhaps come together to realize that as long as our primary discussion spaces are anonymous and centralized, any misstep (and let's be clear here, these are missteps. Nobody is perfect, nobody can be expected to capitulate 100% of the time if they hold a view, and especially not if the primary means of contributing to the discussion is sending death threats to those who don't hold the "right view", and nobody can be expected to have all the right information all the time) can and will be amplified by those who are more interested in causing and continuing chaos than they are actually coming to a concerted point.

    And that's part of why this whole discussion kind of misses the point: the only reason we can criticize Natalie so heavily and so readily is because she puts out content that other people view and doesn't simply sit behind an anonymous username and post degrading shit about others. Is there a certain filter that causes certain personality types to get into YouTubing in the first place? Absolutely. Is that primarily driven by Capitalism? Unless we have a solution for preventing people from amassing social capital, which, IMO, is impossible, then we have to realize that this is a bigger issue than "It's Capitalism's Fault". This is brushing up on certain aspects of sociology and human behavior that might be fundamentally at odds with anonymous, large, public, online spaces.

    13 votes
  14. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    It's interesting that being a status symbol isn't anywhere in your analysis, considering that the "AirPods are for rich people" memes are so prevalent. Whew lad, "deluded sheep"...who here used...

    but the market is showing they do care about ecosystem integration & fit+finish

    It's interesting that being a status symbol isn't anywhere in your analysis, considering that the "AirPods are for rich people" memes are so prevalent.

    That's not a 50% increase in "deluded sheep" buying a product, that's not a 50% increase in advertising to gain those sales, that's 50% more of the market genuinely saying "I want these"—because of the experience they provide.

    Whew lad, "deluded sheep"...who here used that kind of language? It's like someone personally insulted you when they discussed how people might be buying into something not because of the quality of a product but because of the status symbol it provides specifically surrounding its cost.

    1 vote
  15. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    Funny how this wasn't the go-to defense when Beats were the topic of discussion. This kind of "Apple knows best" attitude rivals the audiophile complaint above in the amount of snob, IMO.

    truly accurate and neutral headphones AREN'T what most consumers really want.

    Funny how this wasn't the go-to defense when Beats were the topic of discussion.

    If the average consumer could tell the difference and strongly preferred a clear, accurate sound, I guarantee Apple would have done it.

    This kind of "Apple knows best" attitude rivals the audiophile complaint above in the amount of snob, IMO.

    7 votes
  16. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    I mean they both play music, no? They're both noise-cancelling, expensive, bluetooth headphones. So comparing coffee to wine is kind of a misleading analogy here.

    Criticising the AirPods for not being up to the grade an audiophile would expect is the same thing as complaining to the staff of a mid-market coffee shop about why they don't sell $500 bottles of wine.

    I mean they both play music, no? They're both noise-cancelling, expensive, bluetooth headphones. So comparing coffee to wine is kind of a misleading analogy here.

  17. Comment on Steve Guttenberg: ”Apple AirPods Pro, it's $249, but sounds like a cheap, throwaway headphone“ in ~tech

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    The fact is that a ton of reviewers do use professional recording an measurement equipment. https://www.soundguys.com/sony-wh-1000xm3-wireless-bluetooth-headphones-review-19824/ This, for example,...

    The fact is that a ton of reviewers do use professional recording an measurement equipment.

    https://www.soundguys.com/sony-wh-1000xm3-wireless-bluetooth-headphones-review-19824/

    This, for example, includes professionally measured audio frequency response across all ranges and flowery language for those who aren't as well-versed in the subject.

    Here's the one for the AirPods Pro.

    https://www.soundguys.com/apple-airpods-pro-review-27106/

    But I completely agree, the fact that at a software level we cannot individually choose the frequency response range via some kind of EQ on all high-end audio equipment is crazy.

    The XM3 at least has a companion app that will let you do such EQ changes. I don't believe that the AirPods do at all.

    5 votes
  18. Comment on The math for Warren’s health-care plan adds up if you accept its ludicrous premise in ~finance

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    They generally invest far more money than the founders ever could. That's my point. If we're going by the amount of money put into a venture, the VCs come out on top every time. If you take...

    And VCs only invested some amount of money

    They generally invest far more money than the founders ever could. That's my point. If we're going by the amount of money put into a venture, the VCs come out on top every time.

    The founders invested their entire life into it. Just because you're not investing personal money (which many do) doesn't mean you're not taking massive risks.

    If you take millions in VC money because your hobby or private project might finally become a fully fledged product, you're significantly improving your life, not putting it at risk.

    And if you're a company like WeWork, you personally invest a small chunk of change in real estate, then use the VCs money to pay yourself rent, then walk away with millions while the entire company collapses around you! Totally risky! /s

    3 votes
  19. Comment on The math for Warren’s health-care plan adds up if you accept its ludicrous premise in ~finance

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    So why contribute such snark as a discussion starter if you're not ready to face the logic that laws must change over time in order to combat changing tactics by bad faith actors? If people just...

    So why contribute such snark as a discussion starter if you're not ready to face the logic that laws must change over time in order to combat changing tactics by bad faith actors?

    If people just did what they were supposed to do all the time, we wouldn't need laws.

    1 vote
  20. Comment on The math for Warren’s health-care plan adds up if you accept its ludicrous premise in ~finance

    mike10010100
    Link Parent
    The plural of anecdote is not data, dude. I'm asking for data. So you continue to keep your French citizenship because... On the contrary, it's on you to prove that this means the system is broken.

    The plural of anecdote is not data, dude. I'm asking for data.

    Thus, the companies I create are american, and I don't live in France

    So you continue to keep your French citizenship because...

    There's no reason to be proud of a low number of billionaires in a country. Not unless you can show that this is a sign of a healthy system rather than a symptom of a broken one.

    On the contrary, it's on you to prove that this means the system is broken.

    2 votes