Isn’t this how we want the executive branch to handle programs they’re trying to cancel? Until Congress agrees, they should keep working on the mission with the funding that’s been appropriated. If they paused everything based on the budget request that would be worse.
Why would they need a carrier? Even if they had one, their task force would almost certainly lose if it got into an all-out fight with the USN. I think they would be banking on the US not wanting to start a war with them under such a flimsy casus belli.
Feast While You Can by Mikaella Clements and Onjuli Datta (an excellent sapphic horror romance).
What kind of logistics vessels are they missing? It looks like the PLAN has 11 replenishment oilers, which I would have expected to be enough to sustain an escort force.
Huh, that’s an interesting fact. Thanks for letting me know.
Actually 12 crewed NASA missions have returned to Earth like that in the last 6 years, plus 7 private ones.
The article he’s responding to has a pretty long list of awful things Hasan has said, it’s not just about antisemitism.
I mean isn’t that what Robert is saying? He’s not defending Hasan as being unproblematic, he’s saying we have to accept people with some bad views in the coalition because the enemy is so much worse.
What are you thinking would be different under full anarchism which allows the anarchist minority to defeat the majority that wants to recreate states, where past such struggles have mostly failed?
I feel like the empirical record of decentralized minorities fighting the establishment of states using the methods you mention is quite poor (hence the present situation where states control almost all of Earth).
so you end up in a guerrilla war against a larger and more organized opponent. Is your expectation that if anarchism was instituted most people would lose their preference for borders, but this wouldn’t happen in the global democracy case?
I can see that working if the people who support continuing anarchism significantly outnumber those who want democratic states, but if as today a large majority want states with borders it seems hard to maintain. It’s hard for a minority to restrain a majority by reputation pressures,
That makes sense, thanks. I guess my confusion is why anarchism wouldn’t have the same problem. Like if borders are really popular, and under anarchism there’s no structure prohibiting their existence, wouldn’t people just form new states with borders?
Couldn’t you just have a global democratic federation without internal border controls? Is your argument that because borders are popular, under democracy people would immediately vote to reimpose them, and thus you need a system where people can’t do that?
Are you confident enough that you’ve bought any oil futures?
Have you bought any oil futures based on that prediction?
In which case you could pretty quickly make a profit by buying oil now and then selling it in a matter of days or weeks.
Maybe I misunderstand Bret, but it seems like he’s saying that the markets think Trump will quickly resolve the war without major disruptions in oil supply, and when this turns out to be false the price of oil will go up substantially.
Have you tried profiting from this irrationality in the markets?
As usual:
The two possibilities that come to mind are nuclear war and climate change, and both of those could be extremely bad, but I think it’s very unlikely they would cause human extinction. Also at that point it would be pretty tenuous to say that the Internet was the cause.
I think that’s probably true to some extent, but a global rise in authoritarianism is significantly less bad than all humans dying.
I think that comparison has a fair amount of predictive power in the short term, but one important difference is that the internet doesn’t pose much risk of killing everyone.
Yeah, it was overall a great experience but by the end I was really invested in the arc of Emma Stone’s character as a person trying desperately to survive in awful circumstances she’s totally unprepared for, and I felt like the reveal undercut that for not much benefit.
This is a good explanation which goes into more detail about how prediction markets work and why you would expect them to be accurate, though it was written a few years ago and the parts about actual prediction market platforms are out of date.
www.astralcodexten.com/p/prediction...
in the sense that about X% of events they say have an X% chance of happening actually happen. There certainly are many stupid people betting on them, but if those people cause the market probability to become unreasonable, someone smarter will take their money by betting it back.
because if some other source was more accurate you could make money by always betting in the direction of that source’s predictions, and then the market would just follow that source. And in fact prediction markets are generally well-calibrated,
Prediction markets don’t have perfect information; if they did they wouldn’t need probabilities, they would just say what was going to happen and always be right. But what they can do (in theory) is be at least as accurate as any other source of predictions,
