A grift requires suckers. You can’t buy low and sell high with insider info unless someone else is buying high and selling low (it’s more complicated, I know, don’t get pedantic).

The only people whose voices matter when it comes to investigating this are the very wealthy. Right now the very wealthy are in on the grift. The suckers are regular people managing their nest egg.

When regular retail investors finally figure this out en masse, realize they can’t beat the insiders, and start just letting their shit ride in index trackers and other passively managed funds focused on long term growth and asset protection, the insiders will need new suckers and the circle of those in on the grift will have to shrink.

When the wealthy start seeing losses due to their fund managers being out of the loop, then we’ll finally start seeing some real investigations.

How long will that take? I don’t know but don’t hold your breath.

Holy shit, it’s real‽ I saw this in another comm and thought it was a fake shitpost.

Yeah, we’re always going to need plastics, metallurgical coal, and some LNG but if we’re not extracting it anywhere near the current volume to meet energy needs would we meet the world’s helium needs, and if not I wonder what we would do with all the LNG as a byproduct of helium extraction?

I didn’t realize the world’s supply of helium was almost totally a byproduct of LNG extraction. If we manage to completely abandon fossil fuels are there other sources that we don’t exploit now because it’s not economical? Would we still need to extract LNG to get helium? What would we do with the useless LNG?

I’m not sure if this is available everywhere, but in California you can put up a bond in lieu of insurance with the DMV, either with your own money or with a surety bond company.

So you can do it, they just require proof in the form of the bond that the money is available when needed. They won’t just take your word for it. They might take the word of a company with a $1.3 trillion market cap, which is probably a bad idea. You get hit with one of these fuckers and instead of the admittedly shitty but known process of dealing with an insurance company, now you have to deal with a huge company that doesn’t want to admit their dumb camera only system is at fault.

What is there to breach? You’re already exposing your your real identity when you post under your real name with this new requirement. As long as the methods for verifying your identity aren’t something scammers can exploit there is nothing to expose. If, for example, you could use your photo ID with everything but your pic and name covered, and maybe also birth year for age checks, all it does is remove the ability for people to be cunts with impunity.

I’d have to give it some more thought, but I’m not against this right away. The Internet has become a vile place. Maybe if you wouldn’t say something in public for everyone to hear, you shouldn’t post it either.

We’ve all heard “it takes money to make money.” But rich people know it’s better to use other people’s money.

I have a question about this I haven’t been able to answer.

Is the problem the “flushness” or the lack of mechanical linkage to the door latch?

I’ve been in several Teslas, every model but the Cybertruck, and you push on the fat part and the skinny part comes up, which you pull to open. But as I understand it, that just activates an electrical servo or something that unlatches and partially opens the door, and that’s the problem because without power pulling the handle does nothing.

I had a Jaguar F-Type R (I think Range Rovers have the same handles) and it had flush handles that you could set to pop open when you approached, or you could hit a little button on the forward end to pop open the rear end or, like the Tesla, you could push on the forward end to manually raise the rear end and when you pulled on the handle you were mechanically unlatching and opening the door, unlike the Tesla. You could disconnect the battery and still open the door, which as I understand it, you cannot do with a Tesla. Would this be ok?

If it seems far fetched that every news organization keeps talking about flushness when that’s not the problem, I’m willing to entertain it because that’s what happens every time my area of expertise ends up in international news. Whenever my profession, or a related one, is in the news they almost always get it at least a little wrong, and sometimes ridiculously wrong. And they say the same wrong things across all news sources all over the world. I, and others in my group of professions, can see why this happens. They get some basic information but lack context so they interpret it wrong and what comes out is complete nonsense, or at least a little misleading.

20-30 years ago they were awesome. Used to be around the speed and price of five guys but way better. They’ve been on a steady decline for a long time now. All of them near me have been shut down for a while, I’m kind of surprised they’re still around in any significant numbers.

Fucking paywall

Archive Link

HOAs maybe? Mine would lose their shit if people started having these things “visible over the porch wall.”

Edit: Article says it’s for regulations about putting power back into the grid.

Yes, those tankies are twisted, bring unable to support communism without making excuses for a brutal dictator.

So surely you must appreciate someone capable of criticizing that brutal dictator without smearing communism in the process, right?

Why would you see a conversation abouta brutal dictator and jump in to talk about how he was a communist? Don’t you think it might be people like you that encourage tankies to reflexively disagree with any criticism of Stalin?

If you can’t have a conversation about Stalin’s crimes without someone erroneously bringing communism into it maybe that’s why frustrated communists often defend the indefensible.

Well, have a nice day then. I genuinely hope you find something you do care about today.

And yet, here this person is, not incorrectly using Stalin to say communism is bad. He is criticizing Stalin on his merits, or lack thereof, and not using one person to disparage communism.

You are one tying Stalin’s crimes to communism.

Then why bring communism into a critique of a dictator concerning his methods of control?

Just because you didn’t do the persuading doesn’t mean that no one did. Somehow they got together and decided to kick the fuckers out.

If you think I’m creating a false dichotomy, please enlighten me how.

I’m saying either everyone gets an equal say or…

No matter what you put after the “or”, you’re creating a hierarchy with a class that gets to impose their will until stopped with force. As an anarchist, you should understand that.

No one is asking you to trust it, just to choose it.

Strip away all the labels and theory and you’re left with two basic choices. One where the method of change is persuasion, and one where the method of change is bloody revolution, over and over and over without end.

As much as it might rankle you, and me, to accept having to convince a majority to allow us to live our lives as we damn well please, if I was given the opportunity to appoint a dictator, or dictatorial class, that would remake society exactly as I wanted, I wouldn’t do it. Because who would succeed them, and once you have given that power to a class of people, deposing them is a lot harder, and bloodier, than persuading a few percent of your neighbors.

It sounds like you would reject a system where one unelected, unaccountable person or class of people ruling through force could decide on a whim to take away the rights of LGBT+ people, or any other minority, and instead prefer a system where all people have an equal voice.

How would you determine what the individuals collectively decide?

But he wasn’t criticizing communism, or advocating for capitalism. He was criticizing a dictator and saying he prefers democracy.

Unless you think communism can’t exist outside of a brutal dictatorship.