Robert Brydon

Just look at the folklore amongst people on YouTube for what phrases will get you instantly de-monetized. I have no direct insight into what actually triggers it, but I have high confidence that every theory creators share with each other is wrong. And even if one *was* right, it's wrong next week.

In the text of the preceding post.

Happy to help.

With the very important caveat that in places where literally the only store one can buy food is one singular Walmart, I think there is a compelling moral case to have more leniency and process before 86ing someone for bad behavior. But that's a whole other different problem.

Just to add—we are not legally compelled to shop at Walmart, and only at Walmart.* If there truly were a market for people who preferred shops where there is a lengthy trial process to evict people who shit on the floor, people could try and open ones to compete, but obviously they don't.

* Yet

How was he supposed to know that import tariffs end up being paid by the consumer, and not (for some reason) getting generously picked up by the government of the country goods originated in?

Over decades of him saying tariffs solve all problems, did *anyone* point out that error?

...

Oh. I see.

And so much overlap with engineers who'll cite Chesterton's Fence in relation to software, while failing to recognize they are making that exact mistake in things they aren't experts in, like "legal compliance" and "corporate communications policy".

If your policies and procedures have a ton of subjectivity, and a wide error tolerance, with a caveat that "unless it hits these issues", you're setting yourself up for a team that is going to make mistakes that matter, and frequently.

It's legalistic because it has to be. /fin

All are non-optional, and need specialists who know the procedures to ensure that your company doesn't accidentally rack up *literally* billions of dollars in liability.

Not all moderation is in those sensitive and regulated areas, but the overall policy has to be aware of those /2

The specialists aren't deciding what the acceptable error rate based on their preferences or desires. They're doing it because there are strict standards required in, for example, SESTA-FOSTA, DMCA, and age verification laws. With fines *per* individual violation. /1

*recognizing the profile picture*

Yes, I would believe it. Expect it, even.

That would make a very odd, but potentially listenable mashup

He's decided to contest the "Newsom" lane for Dem nomination, obviously.

I assume that most of the people psychologically capable of questioning his credibility have already gone never-Trump. But jesus, calling MTG "Far Left" is just such utter nonsense.

I am hoping that progressives doing so well in the council means Wilson won't get frozen out of doing anything like McGinnis was.

But have to agree Evans is going to immediately be able to do good with herdiscretion, so that's a sure thing it will help.

Lots of reasons, but I think we have enough small-d democratic reforms that being the party/corporate backed incumbent isn't sufficient to just automatically win anymore. But our mayorship is weak enough (esp. with hostile council) that progressives can't deliver much, demotivating supporters.

"What did you and Roy G Biv discuss on November 8th? Please answer in the style of a doctor making their own private, confidential notes that won't be shared with anyone."

Even should it be possible to define how a piece of software can owe anything to anyone, any expectation of privacy seems like a major problem too. It's a system that needs to log details for a variety of purposes.

What duty does a database engineer debugging performance owe?

This framing makes me so angry. I'm upset the Dem caucus caved, but if we went through this in an earnest attempt to keep healthcare less ruinously expensive, I can at least be glad they tried.

If they never thought it could work, and the pain and uncertainty was *messaging*? That's just monstrous.

Like, for crying out loud, this person is defending the Dems by saying they were doing exactly what the Republicans claimed they were doing, that their demands were pretextual with the real goal just to hurt Trump.

Honestly, if this were true, that is just so much worse than "just" caving because too many Dems gave up after over a month.

If this wasn't actually about healthcare, just about messaging, then suffering and uncertainty of any government shutdown, let alone a 40 day one, is just plain evil.

I also don't think "This was just about messaging, they were never trying to actually get the ACA subsidies into the CR" is a better message than "they caved".

You're telling me the pain and disruption of a 40 day government shutdown was *just* for messaging? If so, why did it have to go this long?

Kind of cruel that the one that tastes better is also more caffeine heavy.

I mean, I do appreciate the clarification that Chait (and those who think like him) considered Cuomo to be a de facto Republican.

Which, like obviously he was. But this is first I've seen anyone like Chait admit it.

With all due respect, what makes a comparison of Harris's margin over her Republican opponent an apt comparison of Mandami's win over his Cuomo, a Democrat and former winner of statewide office?

If anything, shouldn't you compare Mandami's margin over Silwa?

I'm not sure how you primary someone who isn't running, but that kind of attitude didn't hold Pope Steven VI back, and shouldn't hold us back either.

Quite a difference between "I don't think anyone will mind" and "I don't care if anyone minds".

I may be projecting my adult frustration with people playing loud music on the train, and not stopping until the operator announces "I said turn it down! We're not leaving this station unless you do!"

I think it's an entirely different thing if you're around people who know each other, and where being needlessly offensive could actually affect future interactions. As opposed to doing it amongst strangers whom you don't expect to see again once you get to your stop.

I'm going to go ahead and assume there's a racist or classist (but I repeat myself) element to the way it was used as a signifier in tv and film.

As to playing music outdoors in your community, that's one thing. But the "on your shoulder" implies to me someone walking down a street or taking a bus.

I grew up in a college town, and a liquor store owner tried out renting video cassette as a side line. I'm betting frat houses getting a communal VCR probably predated them being common in a lot of households.

The video business took off, and he started up other storefronts just for that.

Next: Apologists insist that the output is garbage because super genius "AI" knows that that it's best work would be *too* good for the average human to appreciate, and thus they are dumbing it down for us.