Corvos
15d ago
Not quite the same thing, but Yes Minister always used to joke that the Foreign Secretary and the PM get all their news from the television - official channels don’t put the information through for hours.
Thatcher, though now somewhat overrated on the right, won multiple elections and completely upended the political consensus. She succeeded at destroying the dead hand of the trade unions--an incredibly popular policy that Labour had promised and failed to implement--and was one of very few post-war politicians to have genuine convictions and enough political nous to push them through.
The people who hated Thatcher really hated her, but she was clearly beyond the vast majority of her peers. And I've met many, many working class people who loved and voted for her because she rescued them from the grasping hands of the people who pretended to speak for them. Any parallels to the modern day are left as an exercise to the reader.
Personally, I think this was a nice read. It's very rare to see real positivity in politics, even though today represents a somewhat unexpected victory for the man that many on this site were hoping would win.
Corvos
15d ago
She seems to hate public speaking and only does it when she absolutely has to. I’m not surprised she doesn’t want to do it on the most stressful night of her life, though I think it’s churlish.
Corvos
15d ago
I don’t think they ‘let’ the GOP do it. The reason that trans had so much traction was because people pattern matched it to legalising homosexuality and gay marriage.
The utter terror of having your life destroyed five years later for opposing ‘trans rights’ compelled public people on both the left and right sides to become viral vectors for the ideology. I think people have forgotten how much trans was pushed by conservatives, especially in the UK but in the US too.
In short, the form of the campaign ensured that it would take centre stage regardless of what anyone rationally thought about it as an election winner.
(The pattern matching between ‘trans rights’ and ‘gay rights’ then forced interested parties to double down because if it became possible one day to criticise trans stuff without being destroyed, the same might be true of LGBT issues more broadly. The taboo would be broken. Whether that’s actually the case I don’t know.)
Corvos
15d ago
Yes to both you and @SteveKirk, but this kind of cancellation takes a lot more work than “see thing I don’t like, press retweet”. It’s much harder for it to go viral because the R number is so much lower.
more excuses to send endless whatsapp voice messages
Not the world I want either, I’m a very text-focused person. But I think it’s now clear that you can have too much legibility in a system.
Corvos
15d ago
Rishi Sunak's Tories got beaten by Kier Starmer's Labour, and would have if they were running a re-animated Maggie Thatcher, Tony Blair converted to the Tories or an Angelic Winston Churchill descended from Heaven (ok well maybe not the last one!) Because the economy was shot and the Tories were in charge at the time.
I don’t think this is true at all. Rishi Sunak lost because he was a useless man in a suit who talked tough while doing very little and firing everyone who tried to follow through on the rhetoric. He alienated centrists who split to Labour and right-wingers who split to Reform.
We’re talking about a man who thought that resurrecting David Cameron from corrupt ignominy and extending compulsory maths were political triumphs.
Kier Starmer was and remains an incredibly weak candidate: a proven liar who literally couldn’t open his mouth on policy without either scandalising his party or the nation.
Even dragged down by a decade of mismanagement, almost anyone could have followed the Johnson strategy of pushing for change, getting foiled, and using that to push for a bigger mandate. To put it frankly, Sunak didn’t have the guts and he spent two years fiddling, losing not only his chance to accomplish anything but his ability to credibly promise to do something next time round.
Corvos
15d ago
Harris. Pace @SSCReader’s comment I think that the power of the media to set the facts that everyone but the very-obsessive cares about is very high, and similarly their ability to set the emotional tone. I don’t believe they can get people to believe just anything, but I do think they can get a bad candidate elected against an unpopular candidate in the face of the fundamentals.
Likewise the blue apparatus around making sure their supports vote is much more powerful than the red one, and I would expect that to get them another few points.
Corvos
15d ago
That’s one reason why, surely? It’s much harder to get cancelled or persecuted for something you said if it’s obscured and kept behind the loyalty test of listening to 4 hours of podcast.
Easy search for everybody turned out to be a disaster, unfortunately. So interesting people retreated to hidden sanctuaries (discord, chats) and less amenable modalities (voice, video).
Corvos
16d ago
Certainly I’ve found that diagnosing problems in Azure-based CI is an absolute nightmare because you can’t just go in and fiddle with stuff. You have reupload your pipeline, wait the obligatory 40 minutes for it to rebuild in a pristine docker, then hope that the print statements you added are enough to diagnose the problem, which they never are.
That said, it was still better than our previous non-cloud CI because it didn’t fail if you had more PRs than PCs or if you got shunted onto the one server that was slow and made all your perfectly functional tests time out. So I can’t condemn it wholeheartedly.
Corvos
17d ago
Presumably they discuss and either compromise, trade favours, or go with the opinion of the most senior & respected person in the room. It's entirely possible to make a flat / informal hierarchy work, it's just hard to break it out of serious deadlocks or disagreements.
Shamus Young’s review of Arkham City broke that game for me unfortunately. Once he’s pointed out all the ways that the story doesn’t really make sense, it’s hard to un-see.
Corvos
18d ago
I will push back slightly against ‘never’. Comma.ai was pretty much a one-man self-driving solution and that was on part with the big boys for motorway driving. Likewise Palmer Luckey invented modern VR pretty much single handedly. But it’s rare and usually only happens within niches the mainstream hasn't noticed are viable.
from now on. I'm pushing straight to main
The last guy I knew who pushed straight to master was a CTO and he bricked his company’s product while it was in active use by really serious clients.
I get that you’re exaggerating for effect and I’ve definitely known some very irritating guru programmers who insist that your one-man proof of concept prototype be audited like it’s intel assembly code, but stuff like docker and CI and PR requirements are used because it makes good things happen and bad things not-happen at a vastly superior rate.
Likewise we had a very good programmer who implemented a bespoke deployment solution based on ansible and a bunch of other stuff, and even before he left it had started to contort into a horrifying mess of spaghetti that was steadily losing features as they became unsupportable. We eventually ended up with a custom Debian for all_dependencies.deb because one of the tools he’d used had stopped supporting versions properly.
And not just for you the original coder either. When I’m brought in on a project, the first step really shouldn’t be ‘reinstall your OS so it’s compatible with the libraries we use’.
The story is awful. Ignoring how grating most of the characters are, the anti capitalist message requires the company to be cartoonishly evil and the gameplay requires it to be absurdly generous at the same time.
Right from the start, they
They’re lucky their gameplay is so absolutely perfect.
Corvos
18d ago
I got one of the iRobot ones - expensive but very good. The auto-unloader worked for about four years without needing a replacement bag.
Corvos
18d ago
I am not American, but the primary thing that keeps me earning more money than I need is the lack of ability to put down and pick up high paying work.
If I took a break for a couple of years, or a 3 day week or something, I would be very pessimistic about being able to come back in at the same level.
Corvos
18d ago
I would guess that those jobs (butler, housekeeper etc.) need a lot of strictness and attention to detail, to produce the appearance that everything just sorts itself out. Like putting on makeup very carefully to look like you aren’t wearing makeup. It would make sense for them to be sticklers.
I think there are also social dynamics involved. If you’re working those kind of jobs, you can’t socialise with your employers because that’s not how it works, and your underlings don’t want to socialise with you because you’re their boss and a stickler. So it can be very isolating.
Corvos
23d ago
Fair point, I didn’t really mean it literally. I was just thinking of people like Einstein and Terence Tao and von Neumann and they mostly seemed to be just ordinary guys who were very successful in academia. Edison is a better case for doing his own thing.
The most interesting deviances are probably going to be where the paired trait is "two-sigma good luck" (what did they do with an uncommon opportunity they stumbled into) or "two-sigma bad luck" (what did they do to recover when the usual script failed them).
I think you’re right about this, the most interesting lives often occur when the standard script fails. See, eg. George Washington not getting his royal commission, or Dr. James Barry, a woman in the 1800s who escaped poverty when her family collapsed by pretending to be a man and becoming a very highly regarded physician. (Not trans, as far as anyone can tell, but she hid her gender until death. Rather sad but very impressive).
Corvos
24d ago
I’m pretty can still feel pain if I pinch myself while on Ibuprofen. Different receptors? I assumed it was low-strength but didn’t think too hard about what that meant.
I couldn't believe the audacity of employees wanting to use their employer's profit making organisation for their own political ends
Very few of the employees would have seen it like that. The thought process is roughly as follows:
A lot of the time in vocational jobs like newspapers, publishing, research etc., the boss feels like just another irritating stakeholder that you have to satisfy. At worst, a wrecker that you have to sabotage. I imagine that goes double for a legacy, non-founder company.
To put it another way, the LA Times isn’t their employer’s business. He’s just paying for it, often with other people’s money. The employees are the ones who build it and sustain it, so by rights it belongs to them. The owner is really just a sponsor.
That doesn’t mean you can get away with anything you like - the law and the board have the whip hand - but the idea that you owe fealty to whichever bozo bought the paper wouldn’t compute at all.
By all accounts, he’s seething that she stole the nomination from him. Couple that with the fact that she then lost an election against a candidate he’d already beaten once and I can’t imagine him being in the mood to give her anything.
Also I doubt anyone except for morons will push for it, it’s symbolically awful. The first female ‘president’ will be a loser, a charity case. Even Liz Truss did better.
1 in a 100 or so?
More options
Context Copy link