Robert Garritty

Here to learn and to be told I'm wrong. I think I'm in the right place.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@Michael_Druggan @tenobrus ~18 months from the original ChatGPT to 4o.

~18 more months to GPT-5.1 and Opus 4.5.

The second one feels like a much bigger leap. We are accelerating.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@robcowell @bryan_johnson Those are easier than standard pushups, where your chest should just about reach the floor every rep.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@Alkalimeter @mnmcsofgp @tracewoodgrains Deafness is an outlier in that a number of deaf people genuinely view deafness as not a disability. There aren’t too many other examples like that. E.g. I haven’t heard of blind people arguing against sight restoration. Maybe obesity?

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@KeithNHumphreys @OrinKerr Might need to make the cutoff 40. Carbon copies were definitely still a thing in the 90s.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@sreekotay @sudox7 It’s a bad example for teaching recursing, though. It confuses people who see the horrible inefficiency, and it teaches bad habits to people who don’t.

Tree algorithms are a more natural fit.

Or maybe factorial if you want a really simple one.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@WordsMustFlow @mnmcsofgp @tracewoodgrains Same logic would condemn people for choosing not to have sex. You can view an embryo/fetus as a life. I get that, but arguing purely based on potential gets to weird places.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@mnmcsofgp @tracewoodgrains It's quite simple. If you don't view a fetus as a person, you don't have issues with terminating a pregnancy. But if you don't terminate, then a baby is born. It's totally consistent to be against gene editing that future baby.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@goofirnoth @yourdesignagent @DRBoguslaw @herosnvrdie69 There was a lot of ink spent on detailing Fifield's Republican bonafides. Fifield herself feels this was serious pro-Platner spin: https://t.co/vTwJzwStIb

[Lyndsey Fifield @lyndseyfifield]

I bucked all advice from my friends (and resisted my conservative bias) and decided to fully trust the Times journalists.

As they left my home they asked that I not talk to any other outlets and I insisted then and repeatedly over the following weeks that I would keep my word and only share this story with them.

But then the weeks dragged on. They kept coming back to us saying the editors needed more. I needed to go on the record (okay). We need more screenshots (okay). I met every bench mark they set, eager to provide more sources or evidence as needed.

After the story went up I began to ask them … wait, where are the stories from the other women? Where are their accusations of sexual assault? Why am I the focus? Why are there 11 paragraphs dedicated to detailing my work history (more than has been published about Graham’s by far)?

Why does it say “nobody could corroborate” when I offered them sources that COULD corroborate?

Why did they include an out of context quote from a friend joking “do not call Graham” after I called off my wedding? (Because she knew I would never).

Where were the screenshots they’d said they would use? Or the mention that I’d supported local democrats and that most of my family (and husband) are liberal?

The editors said it was too much, they explained.

The Times also failed to include any mention that I DID confide in multiple friends through the years that Graham had been abusive — long before he was running for office. Those friends confirm they told the Times so.

It dawned on me that this really was a set up all along. The journalists I trusted who convinced me to share a story I never wanted to tell methodically delayed and twisted this into a gift to the Platner campaign. Violating the trust of his victims. Shattering the trust I placed in them with the most vulnerable story of my life.

And at the end of my call with them I reluctantly accepted their insistence that this was still a powerful story and that I had done a brave thing. And I thanked them for all the hard work they had put into it.

Still fawning after all these years.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@tracewoodgrains @mnmcsofgp I’m pro choice and also pro allowing gene editing. But gene editing does make me a little nervous, and I wouldn’t judge someone for taking a principled stand against it.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@yourdesignagent @DRBoguslaw @herosnvrdie69 I supported him before, and I still support him. But this was more than bad dating experiences. He was (somewhat) physically abusive. In what world would that not be news about a candidate?

If anything, the focus on Fifeld’s background helped soften the blow.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@bendreyfuss All great players. But that story about Wilt vs Magic at the UCLA gym is a hint about how Wilt would have fared in other eras.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@mattyglesias @AzizSunderji Depends on the slope of the demand curve. If demand for Greenwich Village housing is highly elastic, then adding more housing units might barely move the needle on affordability.

But I agree a denser Greenwich Village is less desirable, so prices would actually drop.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@TheStalwart And the second group will be less and less necessary as the agents improve. In theory, you always need a human, but you won’t need a technically skilled human. So maybe the agents just work for the CEO directly.

Not sure if/when the CEO gets replaced. But engineers all will be.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@TheStalwart The majority of currently employed coders work at legacy companies that haven’t adapted yet. A small minority are employed precisely because they are skilled at using agents. We don’t know the equilibrium employment level of the second group yet, but the first group will go away.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@Schoolboy_Hew @JamesSurowiecki You don’t pass the spot. Your rear stays level with the spot, maybe even a little behind, the whole time.

And then when you pull out, you don’t need an extra car length to enter the flow of traffic.

You’re never too old to learn newer better ways of doing things.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@Schoolboy_Hew @JamesSurowiecki The guy’s already blocking your way and is pointing opposite the spot when he switches to reverse. Maybe you didn’t know what he was doing, but you’re stopped because he’s blocking your way. And ideally he indicated properly beforehand.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@BeastsInJars @ASFleischman That was my first thought, too. But it’s also possible that they just don’t want to punish a dairy for bad luck when selling raw milk. There’s a big pro raw milk movement in the Republican Party, including the Secretary of Health. The message might just be drink at your own risk.

[Robert Garritty @GarrittyOf]

@Schoolboy_Hew @JamesSurowiecki You mean if you’re driving? If you back into a spot properly, a car doesn’t have the opportunity to block the spot like that.