quaestor

studying the fall of rome for actionable takeaways aka monitoring too many situations

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@guilhermefclfr em busca de um refúgio, eles fogem da primeira casa de Deus: a Terra.
e encontram o verdadeiro vazio no espaço.

será que finalmente estamos vendo o grande filtro se aproximando?

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

i want to believe this is it, but elon has been working way too hard on hedging against this bet (wisely so).

mars and interplanetary civilization are needed because solving humanity dumbness seems impossible.

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

After DOGE, Elon came to a conclusion most people missed.

He tried to reform the state from the inside. He failed. And he said it plainly: the government can't fix its own deficit. Nobody in power actually wants to cut. The machine protects itself.

So he drew the only logical conclusion. If the state can't be reformed, there are only two ways this ends.

Either global bankruptcy. Debt keeps compounding, interest payments eat the budget, and the system collapses under its own weight.

Or robots. AI and robotics grow the economy so fast that the debt becomes manageable, and abundance makes the old fights over scarcity irrelevant.

Here's the part almost nobody sees.

For two centuries, capitalism has had a marketing problem. Its gains are real but slow and invisible. 2% growth a year doesn't feel like anything. Your life gets better over 30 years and you never connect it to the system that did it. Meanwhile, the left's promises feel immediate and concrete: a check, a subsidy, a benefit. That's why the left wins on promises even when it can't deliver them. Capitalism produces the wealth, socialism takes the credit.

Robots break that asymmetry.

When productivity doubles in a few years instead of a few decades, people will see it. Things get cheaper, services get better, opportunities appear, in real time. For the first time in history, people will connect capitalism and their rising standard of living directly, almost instantly. The causal chain becomes visible.

And that changes everything politically.

So there are two scenarios.

Scenario one: we stay in the current inertia. No breakthrough, or a breakthrough we regulate to death. The debt wins. Living standards stagnate, then fall. A frustrated electorate turns to whoever promises the most, and that pushes toward a hard collectivist left. But collectivism fails, as it always does. And when it fails, the most organized, most disciplined collectivist force left standing isn't the old left. It's radical Islamism. Bankruptcy, then communism, then something worse.

Scenario two: robots win. Abundance arrives, and it arrives visibly. The link between free enterprise and prosperity becomes obvious to everyone. And this is the key point: it becomes obvious to everyone, including the minorities the left was counting on. Because their long-term incentive is the same as everyone else's. A kid in the suburbs gains infinitely more from a booming, abundant West than from a bankrupt state handing out promises it can't keep. Abundance is the most powerful integration machine ever built.

That's the Western renaissance.

The West doesn't need to win the culture war by arguing. It needs to win it by delivering. And for the first time, it has the technology to deliver fast enough for people to notice.

The race isn't left vs right anymore. It's robots vs bankruptcy.

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

most republicans still believe in democracy. that's the issue.

they forgot everything democrats have been doing to change their own party into the radicalized system. USAID is just a good representation of that.

to fight the establishment, you need to be able to be a monster. you gotta leave the democracy theater because the enemy is already playing another game.

[Curtis Yarvin @curtis_yarvin]

https://t.co/04SEeYeLgS

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@CuriosidadesBRL @chorumedogremio

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@BrianAtlas same faith that she showed when reading a "poem" about a Christian's murder and threatening another one?

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@ttnsupersayajin @DiaDe_Cruzeiro pode subir sem tirar ele. o cara é melhor reserva na zaga e lateral que qualquer outro. fora que tem salário baixo, se identifica com o clube e ainda joga em mais de uma posição.

JJ deve sair até o meio do ano, tem que reforçar o elenco mantendo quem é bom de bola.

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

não demora 20 min para encerrar a urna, demora 1-2min.

as impressões ocorrem após o encerramento que é contabilizado no campo. uma vez que se inicia a impressão, é impossível reabrir a urna, mas o protocolo completo pra remoção das mídias, etc, demora ~15min.

a análise do OP está certa do ponto de vista de que não se deveria demorar mto mais do que alguns poucos minutos, mas é possível que se atrase até 17:05

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@Felippe_Hermes vc deveria fazer um standup nichado só reunindo esses comentários por aqui. sempre tiram uma risada do meu lado

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@oi_mike_ é mais ou menos o que acontece fora do BR. quem favorece a narrativa de que o estado deveria ter mais controle sobre a economia e de que o capitalismo é ruim, ganha cargo, benefícios de carreira e não é perseguido, mesmo sendo completamente anti-ético:

[Phil Magness @PhilWMagness]

I've been pointing out since the early 2010s that Thomas Piketty, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman have a bad habit of biasing their data construction to fit their politics.

Whenever they make a suspect call in how to handle stats, it ends up showing that inequality is on the rise. They almost never go in the other direction. The errors are non-random and almost invariably reinforce their political claims about rising income and wealth concentration since 1980.

Piketty did this throughout his book Capital in the 21st Century.

Piketty and Saez did this throughout their famous 2003 paper on inequality in the US.

Piketty, Saez, and Zucman Saez and Zucman did this in their Distributional National Accounts paper that Auten and Splinter dissected.

Saez and Zucman did this in their 2019 book on tax incidence and inequality.

Saez and Zucman did this in their flurry of "studies" and white papers to support Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax proposal, California Prop 40, a new wealth tax in France, and dozens of other similar examples.

A new AI report (linked below) audited 138 papers by Saez and Zucman. It found thousands of errors, 194 of which were serious. A whopping 97% of the serious errors went in the same direction: they showed inequality rising faster or made it higher.

But there's a bigger scandal at play here. Despite these clear biases, Piketty, Saez, and Zucman have enjoyed a stream of praise and prestige within the economics profession. They get expedited and friendly reviews in top econ journals even though a more serious peer review should have caught many of these errors (the Quarterly Journal of Economics is a recurring offender in this regard). Journals regularly give them a pass after the errors in their old work come to light - they're never expected to correct any of it, and just keep on using it as if nothing changed. Their non-peer reviewed data claims are also treated as gospel by major media outlets such as the New York Times and the Washington Post. And they get showered with prizes - Saez and Zucman are both Clark Medal winners from the AEA, and Zucman got his prize in 2023 after evidence of major data shenanigans in his work came to light in 2019.

Until now, those of us who have been trying to correct the record have had to wade through the PSZ trio's cluttered, disorganized, and often non-transparent replication packages (almost all of which are convoluted piles of Excel spreadsheets) to find the problems. I did a line-by-line replication of Piketty and Saez's entire 2003 US income inequality series to use one example, and found it was riddled with errors - almost every single one of which biased their results in favor of their political story.

We had the means to catch this stuff as it was happening, but the economics profession failed to do its job. And it failed precisely because its elite ranks wanted to believe the Piketty-Saez-Zucman story for political reasons.

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

infelizmente, as federais foram parcialmente cooptadas e ensinariam essas cabeças de vento a pensar "corretamente".

o que eu tive de professor defendendo a política econômica da Dilma e ensinando Polanyi como se fosse a verdade absoluta, não está escrito.

É doutrinação de um monte de gente que não é cobrada ou premiada por estar certo, apenas precisa ser um bom papagaio de um partido.

[Covfefe Anon @CovfefeAnon]

The left is most correctly modeled as a state-takeover cult

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@LokiJulianus sadly for him, federal police in brazil issue a statement assuring that flavio bolsonaro is not a fugitive

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@minhainflacao a piada sobre qi de temperatura ambiente nunca fez tanto sentido a todo tempo.

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

cognitive dissonance hitting harder but people's minds keep fleeing like it's nothing. i envy that

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

funniest part is that most of the sjw that try and defend this whole mess have to close their replies.

it's not because of bots, it's not because of insults... it's just because their echo chamber is different than reading only a supportive thesis for their already stablished ideas.

[Marcelo P. Lima @MarceloLima]

If you want to understand what happened with the votes in the Brazilian election, this chat with Fable 5.1 explains it:

https://t.co/kZhSRYV185

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

and now, power was already imprinted in most minds.

the number of closeted haters of bolsonaro and/or lula fans that came out of their holes after the election results is not only rational, it's emotional imprinting

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

the number of women migrating from email jobs to government or public-sector will break the economy more than any other wave in the next 5-10 years

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

if people were obliged to read the process by kafka at schools (and understood it), we would have less idiots denying bureaucracy power

[quaestor @quaestormaxx]

@bowtiedbrazil did you see the reports about the probable formulas they have used to transfer votes and guarantee a majority?