convolver.bsky.social
What good is seeing-eye chocolate? What good is a computerized nose? What good’s Sanskrit read to a pony? Not much, I guess, not much at all.
6,906 posts
1,346 followers
1,297 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
I’m sure it’s not coincidental that Netanyahu was facing down Haredi anti-conscription riots and an existential coalition defection this week, for sure.
comment in response to
post
“They were playing one of the TRANSFORMER movies on the hotel channel and when we went to check on the Secretary around midnight he was surrounded by empty minibar liquor bottles and talking to the TV screen.”
comment in response to
post
The way that party factionalism has so rapidly torn down all the Constitutional guardrails against tyranny between the branches of government is genuinely frightening.
comment in response to
post
In my case, there's an academic with my name publishing works in my professional field, so every one of those emails is a handy prompt to read an article I'm generally interested in. (Actually citing those articles would require a bit of explanation, though!)
comment in response to
post
The best I can come up with is that regulatory capture goes both ways, and their people aren’t prepared to fight on a non-regulatory/non-legislative battlefield. Starting to think a lot of corporate lobbyists are actually just sharp-toothed pets raised in captivity.
comment in response to
post
Thing about the current right wing — and Trump’s Cabinet appointees almost uniformly demonstrate this — is that they don’t have an ideology, they have antisocial personality disorders that never got disciplined out of them.
comment in response to
post
I have zero knowledge of immigration law, but the last decade has led to me a kind of untutored belief that immigration judgeships should be Article III judicial officers. This kind of behavior is repugnant to the orderly process of law.
comment in response to
post
Yeah, my take is that if I’m half of a polarized electorate and my half has very tight agreement on issues, then I’ve got more room to maneuver than my opponent does to pick Off supporters, with the proviso that voters are not actually bags of policy preferences.
comment in response to
post
That’s the one! Chalking up another win for “ideology is downstream of identity.”
comment in response to
post
Yeah, you can have a really big tent if you’re only selecting on “hating somebody, anybody at all.”
comment in response to
post
The question bank they used is illuminating; my takeaway is that all this is pretty much standard Democratic party plank stuff, but a /lot/ of Republicans disagree with their own party’s positions to greater or lesser degrees.
comment in response to
post
My two takes on this:
1. We now have multiple Cabinet officials who have opened themselves up to criminal prosecution with this; and
2. It is my belief that the Presidential pardon power is inherently limited by the Take Care clause in the case of pardoning crimes relating to executive branch acts.
comment in response to
post
Attacks on rail systems began in late summer '44, alongside the strategic assault on the Ruhr industrial networks, so it's hard to argue that the US could have gotten to significant logistic disruption prior to that.
comment in response to
post
The US post-war bombing survey notes that bombing had limited effectiveness until 1944; the Schweinfurt attacks forced a total revision of US strategy, and it wasn't until spring '44, when the newly-introduced P-51 and P-47s had reduced down the Luftwaffe, that those kinds of attacks were possible.
comment in response to
post
IIRC the medium-run revenue on tariffs over the past decade or so has been about $10bn/month, so I think the graph is bad.
comment in response to
post
Somewhat interesting that screenwriter John Rogers (also on This Here App) studied physics as an undergrad and approached the brief as “make a goofy 1950s disaster movie with a ridiculous premise, but try to keep the science within not entirely implausible grounds.”
comment in response to
post
His May numbers were tanking, and I can’t believe the last few days are going to make things better:
comment in response to
post
Yeah, they were late to the cloud game but they’ve built out ≈50 (IIRC) DCs, and they’ve created (surprisingly to me, given my prejudices) a pretty robust solution. But it’s expensive for them given that they don’t (unlike AMZN, MSFT, or GOOG) have an existing need to build out large-scale compute.
comment in response to
post
Emblematic of the omnishambles clusterfuck that is this administration is that, even if Nehls' AFRIKANER Act (HR 2607) passes, USRAP was suspended by Trump back in January, so there's literally no refugee program in place to support them even if they were designated as a P-2.
comment in response to
post
Sounds like Robotaxi is going to be a perfectly cromulent option if your itinerary consists of endlessly circling between Terry Black's Barbecue and the Yeti store five blocks away.
comment in response to
post
Formerly WSJ op-ed page, then Jonah Goldberg’s Dispatch (most recently seen acquiring SCOTUSblog, RIP). Impeccable right-wing credentials.
comment in response to
post
AI-centric cloud buildout. Combination of playing catch-up on commercial cloud plus a huge AI bet.
comment in response to
post
That explains the terminal case of DoDspeak, then.
comment in response to
post
Turns out he’s actually Nemik!
comment in response to
post
Feels like they keep swapping out random gold things for every photo op.
comment in response to
post
An even worse iteration of replacing the Oval Office Swedish Ivy with a bunch of gold spray-painted Hobby Lobby tchotchkes.
comment in response to
post
Green carrying on the proud tradition of unhinged American cult members disappearing into the Guyanese jungle for obscure reasons.
comment in response to
post
These are people who fried their brains on Google Ads analytics and never recovered.
comment in response to
post
Prior restraint, sure, §1983 claim, absolutely, but what really strikes me is the just the shamelessness of this naked exercise of state power to protect DeSantis. Even if we granted their allegations, the agency has no right or power to make these demands, only the families have the tort claim.