@LiberallyLiving@jessesingal You mean things like Flock cameras? Doesn't seem weird to me. Sometimes cameras are good for transparency, like when everyone has one and can film bad stuff happening. If only cops have lots of cameras, that's a surveillance state.
@zswaff@DKThomp That was more the case a year ago, but when I talk to AI about personal problems nowadays it does a very good job of balancing defense-lowering "your feelings are valid" with "seriously, you need to touch grass", the way a therapist would. These findings surprise me, actually.
@RhythmDoc01@mdervin@mattyglesias Like, the lying about the magnitude of the problem is so so much bigger than the problem itself. This is not a "they're both wrong" situation.
@RhythmDoc01@mdervin@mattyglesias It happens very very rarely, the rate is too low to matter, and is not an actual problem. Proposals that presuppose it is a problem would be based on faulty premises. Seems like the Dems have earned your trust and you should not trust the GOP at all.
@jbarro@mattyglesias I dunno, seems like 4 supreme court justices would happily soft-repeal the 19th (by saying it only applies to people who were alive when it passed, or something), whereas none would go along with police abolition, but maybe I'm wrong.
@jakehmccoy Ok, actually what I think is: GDP is not a great measure for everything, but the alternatives are worse. But I am open to being persuaded that it's really really terrible by (again) some accurate real-world examples of its terribleness.
@jakehmccoy Phil provided evidence that the example is really bad (worse than "a pint isn't a box"). I don't really know what I think about consumption/value, but an accurate real-world example would certainly help to convince me!
@jakehmccoy I don't really see where you're pulling "nasty" from. You're both being snide in a kind of roundabout academic way, which is fine -- it's a lot better than most of twitter! But the inflated umbrage you're taking at his mild jabs is funny.
@jakehmccoy@PhilWMagness This is so weird. Vance is clearly talking about real strawberries in those passages. What would have to change about that passage to make it sound to you like it's about real strawberries?
@jakehmccoy@PhilWMagness Did you provide an argument in some other tweet? Because the argument in that tweet is "Vance is right and his critique is sensible" which is not an argument.
@IonaItalia Yes: people think that negativity builds up and needs a "vent", but really it's more like a muscle. Voicing your negative emotions all the time exercises the muscle, making it stronger, making it a bigger part of your brain and personality.
@behaviorben@katrosenfield But like, FP doesn't report from a variety of angles. No one at the FP is analyzing whether Musk & Trump killed millions of kids, which seems like a kind of important moral thing to figure out. If you get all news from FP-like sites, you will miss a lot of important things.
@RonDeSantis But someone born to American parents who move to China 2 weeks after birth will also not be "as American" as those born and raised here. With any rule, there will be unwanted cases. But most of the birthright babies will be raised here and will end up American if you let them.
@LizWolfeReason@JillFilipovic And Jill is right that the "we have a word" paragraph frames only-childhood as a different kind of loss than the kind she actually wants to convey. Being an only child is the same kind of lonely as being single, not being widowed. Bad writing.
@LizWolfeReason@JillFilipovic I think when a piece interviews people who only tell one story (parents who watched their kids' lives be improved by siblings, or people whose lives were improved by siblings), the implication is that yes, there is only one story there.
@teniscat@MZHemingway I disagree that the liberals make up reasons, but even if they did, there are clearly 3 conservatives on the court that *do* make stuff up.
@MZHemingway@EricBoehm87 I read about it, and asked some chatbots, and it still seems like the court just made explicit the past century's status quo. So it must have changed in some subtle way that only you can see, and it would add a lot of value to the discussion if you educated us.
@GuestusAurelius@besttrousers@KonstantinKisin I guess it would be coherent if he didn't confidently opine earlier that Elon was gonna be great. And if he offered any alternative framework by which to evaluate Elon. And anyway, it's actually okay (maybe even better) to opine non-confidently.