Let's pretend for one moment that he does die before the election, just for the funsies. What happens then? Will the nomination revert to option number 2, aka Bernie Sanders? Or will his running mate automatically replace him just the way Vice-President is supposted to step in after the Big Man in the White House chokes on a piece of matzo? Does he even have a running mate yet?
US Joe Biden News Megathread - The Other Biden Derangement Syndrome Thread (with a side order of Fauci Derangement Syndrome)
- Thread starter Borscht
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2019
flu disappeared because of the masks,not because "covid = flu"
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2016
@barleyrugsoap, do you work in Big Tech or live in California? Because as someone who grew up in the valley and worked in the industry until as recently as 5 years ago, your characterization of the people who run those companies and the mindset dominant among those big enough to pay for political lobbying is about as attached to reality as your average Vice journalist's understanding of the rural working class.
These are mostly dudes who got their start during the fallout of the Dotcom era and were the dreaded "tech bro libertarians" until their companies started being publicly traded, at which point they started parroting woke politics alongside the rest of Corporate America. Not every tech company is run by the inmates the way Twitter is. Both Google and Facebook are generally trying to deal with these censorious demands from their middle management/peons, not the executives.
And even among middle management the ideology isn't particularly widespread. Look at Netflix, just now. The entirety of the media sold people on the notion that there was huge internal unrest and demands from within the company to censor Chappelle. Thousands of employees, we were told, demanded they take action against his violent transphobia, but when push came to shove not even a couple dozen actual employees walked out. And upper management is ignoring them completely. Maybe the ideological true believers haven't taken over to the degree you were told.
These are mostly dudes who got their start during the fallout of the Dotcom era and were the dreaded "tech bro libertarians" until their companies started being publicly traded, at which point they started parroting woke politics alongside the rest of Corporate America. Not every tech company is run by the inmates the way Twitter is. Both Google and Facebook are generally trying to deal with these censorious demands from their middle management/peons, not the executives.
And even among middle management the ideology isn't particularly widespread. Look at Netflix, just now. The entirety of the media sold people on the notion that there was huge internal unrest and demands from within the company to censor Chappelle. Thousands of employees, we were told, demanded they take action against his violent transphobia, but when push came to shove not even a couple dozen actual employees walked out. And upper management is ignoring them completely. Maybe the ideological true believers haven't taken over to the degree you were told.
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2019
I think part of the problem is seeing big tech as a single mass entity, when it's clearly not. Quite apart from the split between legacy service providers like microsoft and IBM, and the advertisement/data mills like google and facebook, you have the split between ideologues, who want to fundamentally change mankind, and mercenaries who do whatever they can purely for their own gain.
Examples:
Apple won't go full progressive/communist/whatever, because they don't want to cede control over their captive market to third parties, to the point that they've made it increasingly difficult to comply with law enforcement requests for data in certain areas.
Microsoft might, but microsoft is schizophrenic for legacy reasons. Gates was a true believer, but he's long gone and facing scandals. Nadela is an unimaginative hack, with little in the way of innovative vision, which means he's not going to be thinking up social schemes in his spare time. The company is split between the OS, games, office, and cloud divisions and is highly segregated within those divisions as well, so an idea might gain heavy traction in one but won't spread to others very easily. Schizophrenic.
Google/Alphabet probably will, because they gain more control in a highly regulated world and are more ideologically driven internally. They've collectively seen that they can manipulate people by controlling data flow and have more of the ideological bent to use that to bring about a utopian new order.
Twitter definitely will, because they don't survive otherwise. Jack is a hippy idiot.
Facebook is like Apple, but without the consumer hardware expense; they want a fiefdom free of interference from outsiders.
IBM relies on shrinking legacy markets and government contracts, so they'll do whatever daddy government says to do, plus their entire structure has been subverted by progressives who have spent the last decade purging anyone who could fight back (and incidentally anyone over the age of 40, which put them in hot water in the UK because of age discrimination laws).
Amazon is another one that's a bit schizophrenic. It wants wage cages, which means creating the conditions necessary to do that. It could swing to statist absolutism or to a sort of libertarian tech dystopia and have the same outcome. What is possibly telling is that Bezos divorced his wife and stepped down from day-to-day operations. She was a big voice for social projects and progressive ideas within the company. Now she's outside of it, while the one conduit that she could have used to continue to slide her ideas into the company - "I'm sure Jeff will agree with me" - is no longer all that influential.
thyme's up
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2020
I didn't say Covid = flu. Flu "disappeared" because illnesses were reported as Covid or Covid related. If masks made the flu disappear, why didn't we wear them before 2020? Why do we have to have flu shots? People are still masked up and now the flu is back. How does that make any sense?
Back on topic--Biden's an idiot hiding behind his fake sets and in his soon to be Delaware fortress. I wonder what's really going on behind the castle walls?
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2016
I have perspective on Big Tech and politics. This perspective comes not just from personal knowledge but also from talking to actual tech billionaires in VC and other areas, not just ordinary techbros and run-of-the-mill engineers.
First off: I don't believe anyone who says "Commiefornia is such a one-party state that no one at the top is anything but a leftist." This is so untrue I can't even wrap my head around it but I can only imagine maybe a person saying this just either hasn't lived in California before, or has lived in some very midwit parts of SoCal which are actually really like that.
At the VP and above level in tech companies, politics isn't all leftism, all the time. Not even close. There are Cato Institute libertarian types and paleoconservatives everywhere, people whose conservative "trad" outlook drives a huge amount of how they run their family life and how they donate to causes.
What you see almost none of is the newer strain of "god, guns, and gays" religiously-based conservatism. That's totally lacking. The conservatives you meet in Silicon Valley and SF are money conservatives, not social conservatives. Everything is down to economics.
So why, all that having been said, are they on the side of the left whenever it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion?
It's simple: their data tells them it's a good idea from an HR standpoint.
Employees who like each other too much are bad for business. You don't want a whole department of employees to think they've got so much in common that if you fire one, they'll all quit. You don't want people being comfortable enough with each other to discuss salaries. You don't want them to find out they all share complaints about management and working conditions.
How do you keep people in the same department, even the same exact position, from realizing they have more in common than they have different? Enter DEI. When Whole Foods used big data to evaluate what made stores less likely to unionize, right at the top of the list, there it was: diversity initiatives. We only know that because one of their employees leaked the information from a presentation where diversity was actually presented directly as a union-busting strategy.
If you think the guy next to you is either a white supremacist keeping you down, or a race-baiting quota-filler likely to slap you with a harassment suit if you make the wrong joke, you're not going to talk more than necessary or start a deep friendship that gives you the ability to have a united front when negotiating. The very concept of sharing salary information is a minefield if you're steeped in the identity politics narratives.
These programs work to keep employees suspicious and untrusting of one another. They also make everyone think that everyone believes in an idea that only a few people actually believe in. The rest are just saying what they think will keep the mob from turning on them.
This is also why the Democrats have zero pro-union, pro-worker stance left. These diversity strategies were constructed by business consultants to drive business outcomes, not to help workers, so when Democrats adopted these tactics, there was no way to hold pro-worker views in tandem.
First off: I don't believe anyone who says "Commiefornia is such a one-party state that no one at the top is anything but a leftist." This is so untrue I can't even wrap my head around it but I can only imagine maybe a person saying this just either hasn't lived in California before, or has lived in some very midwit parts of SoCal which are actually really like that.
At the VP and above level in tech companies, politics isn't all leftism, all the time. Not even close. There are Cato Institute libertarian types and paleoconservatives everywhere, people whose conservative "trad" outlook drives a huge amount of how they run their family life and how they donate to causes.
What you see almost none of is the newer strain of "god, guns, and gays" religiously-based conservatism. That's totally lacking. The conservatives you meet in Silicon Valley and SF are money conservatives, not social conservatives. Everything is down to economics.
So why, all that having been said, are they on the side of the left whenever it comes to diversity, equity, and inclusion?
It's simple: their data tells them it's a good idea from an HR standpoint.
Employees who like each other too much are bad for business. You don't want a whole department of employees to think they've got so much in common that if you fire one, they'll all quit. You don't want people being comfortable enough with each other to discuss salaries. You don't want them to find out they all share complaints about management and working conditions.
How do you keep people in the same department, even the same exact position, from realizing they have more in common than they have different? Enter DEI. When Whole Foods used big data to evaluate what made stores less likely to unionize, right at the top of the list, there it was: diversity initiatives. We only know that because one of their employees leaked the information from a presentation where diversity was actually presented directly as a union-busting strategy.
If you think the guy next to you is either a white supremacist keeping you down, or a race-baiting quota-filler likely to slap you with a harassment suit if you make the wrong joke, you're not going to talk more than necessary or start a deep friendship that gives you the ability to have a united front when negotiating. The very concept of sharing salary information is a minefield if you're steeped in the identity politics narratives.
These programs work to keep employees suspicious and untrusting of one another. They also make everyone think that everyone believes in an idea that only a few people actually believe in. The rest are just saying what they think will keep the mob from turning on them.
This is also why the Democrats have zero pro-union, pro-worker stance left. These diversity strategies were constructed by business consultants to drive business outcomes, not to help workers, so when Democrats adopted these tactics, there was no way to hold pro-worker views in tandem.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2019
oh,my bad.
anyways,i think the real biden is undergoing experimental dementia treatment maybe? the fake one might also be undergoing some so they keep both in the fake whitehouse bunker so they can treat them without any logs of it actually happening. maybe the real biden is dead/comatose so that's why they use the fake biden. doesn't really matter cuz both are senile retards
my experience is hard to talk about without powerleveling but I am a native. it's pretty up close and personal and I'm definitely not talking about middle management. A lot of what I am saying is based in long, long experience with the interactions between big tech and local government.
the thing is, you don't live there anymore, right, and you don't work there anymore? for good reason. I left out of there awhile before you did and five years after I left I would have reacted the same way you are right now, like, come on it's not that bad it's not that crazy you're just being sensationalistic. It's also a really complicated place though and I don't want to say that you're wrong.... except check in with me in five years after working and living around not-Californians and see how you feel about it then.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2020
I wish we lived in the world the NPCs think we do. It sounds like a magical place where reason and sanity reign.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2020
100% correct. If I were some chink overlord, I'd be so fucking erect right now. Diamonds.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2020
Please friend, cease engagement with these types. You and I both know what they're here to do.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2014
I dont think is speculation, Facebook has been the most weird of the bunch, they know their name is cancer and europe is raping them to hell with lawsuits, Russia outright hate them and rape them every chance they can, the public perception of Facebook is so bad that they are willing to burn billions in rebranding because everything they touch it turns to shit like Oculus painfully got aware, Instagram is a joke, Whatsapp is being raped slowly but surely by Telegram even to the point that they had to announce that "they cant see your conversations, nope in the slightest" again and again in all ways know to man and people still told them to fuck off
Also if you want to see the high distrust notice how the media and everyone shut up very quickly about the facebook whistleblower when she asked for more regulations on the internet to the senate and everyone saw she was just a fake send by the company, did not help that facebook later call her to their HQ even after being supposedly "fired"
Definitely, Zucc doesnt give a shit, but Jack is a true believer, he think twitter is a tool that will change the world and he waste any pitiful gain in vanity projects that doesnt get anywhere (he has been shilling a open internet alternative that no one trust because is coming from him) while his main cashcow is stagnating without any new feature worth a damn
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2019
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2017
I've been in the non-tech parts of California for most of my life and my observation is that the general level of craziness is directly correlated with the distance from Highway 101. You can pick any road connected to it and drive 30 miles and land in a little podunk town full of mostly sane people who could give less of a shit about anything political other than Newsom's latest bullshit (currently in the <5k pop area I'm in it's the small generator ban that's really got people up in arms).
I still hold out all the rainbows ever for the eventual state split, but I doubt it'll ever happen.
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2021
Colossal capital flight and market crashes aside, this is quite literally a tax version of eating your seed corn. It pulls forward tax revenues by forcing earlier sales to realize the gains and pay taxes at the cost of longer-term tax revenues. Either that or a person spends cash out of pocket, which in turn reduces savings and available capital (to say nothing of the effects of that). Needless to say cryptocurrency in particular would be absolutely destroyed by this (which is no doubt intended).
I did some math using Apple's stock as a basis (although you could use any, really) the tax loss vs. the current system becomes worse with higher investment returns and lower inflation. This tax generates more revenues in circumstances of high inflation and low investment returns (i.e. stagflation)...seem familiar? I didn't even consider return volatility or the knock-on cost of substandard market returns on total tax revenues.
I assume the basis would be adjusted up for the taxed securities, which would conveniently also reduce future realized losses on the same investment. If not, you could pay taxes in excess of the actual value of the investment!
This is what happens when people who have never worked a real job in their entire lives are in charge of making policies. If they wanted to address income inequality effectively -RAISE INTEREST RATES and stop the free money spigot FFS.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2019
uhm,based?
SneedEyeMitch
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2021
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2018
Let's ignore the Creepy Joe part for a moment.
I know Presidents like to visit schools and such (W very famously learned about 9/11 during a school PR trip), but doesn't Joe right now have more pressing concerns at the moment?
Based video:
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2020
Maybe you might want to take a look at what IBM is doing in the quantum space.
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2020
I think he was just throwing scenarios around
Your taking people saying "your making up what you do for a living". Surprisely well
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2020
I dunno man, it seems like there's a very specific group of people who need a supply of child sex slaves shipped to their party islands and big tech and media to cover it up for them
- Status