ForWhomTheBellTrolls

@firstadopter Public schools and fire departments would not exist if you insane anarcho capitalist types had your way get a fuckin grip and grow up from your 13 year old boy view of the world my god

Anthropic's misleading "fear mongering" about Mythos has now spectacularly backfired. The dog caught the fire truck. Now clueless, nontechnical government bureaucrats may control private companies' product releases and slow down U.S. innovation. My goodness. NYTimes: "The administration is discussing an executive order to create an A.I. working group .. Among the potential plans is a formal government review process for new A.I. models."

@wi_blues_cards @BKSportsTalk I am also of the belief that I don’t think people should hang the mission accomplished banner for a team that had a negative run differential for the season like 24 hours ago but I think that’s a minority opinion

@BKSportsTalk I don't think the rebuild will end until a pitching staff is built. Some of these successful players may age out of this rebuild if the pitching doesn't progress fast enough

Can I ask a quick question on this? Please don’t yell at me. If this continues, does Mo get credit for the “rebuild” given the fact that basically every young player currently on the roster was drafted &/or developed while he was in charge?

@LoveTheseMets @DrewDalton48 @MichaelSalfino Is he a jet or a met because then salfino will cup his balls and write entire articles about how good he is and waste all our time in the athletic reading through his slop

@DrewDalton48 @MichaelSalfino Good ballplayer

I illustrate why Statcast bat speed is a bad stat. nytimes.com/athletic/72407…

@jacklich10 @SamMonsonNFL People are gonna pretend some of these guys are decent but that’s irrelevant this just shows a list of guys basically all of whom were never good enough to matter even .5 points to a point spread. all of them are not actual difference makers, merely good at best

The largest Non-QB reaches since 2016 according to the NFL Consensus Big Board. Only one player makes the top 36 in this years class

@_John_Shipley “This is .... a tough pick to get on board with. This, so far, is one of the biggest reaches of the entire draft based on the consensus board, with Boerkircher being ranked at No. 63 overall“

@_John_Shipley This piece says 2nd rounder was 63 on consensus board did you mean 163? Tone doesnt mske sense otherwise

Jaguars NFL Draft Tracker: Instant Grade on Emmanuel Pregnon Homerun si.com/nfl/jaguars/on…

@WinterSportsLaw Seems like this would be the bare minimum in 2026

A good example of how forward thinking college programs are now operating, with respect to roster management. It’s not just men’s basketball and football where this is happening.

@MikeHerndonSk1 @SigmundBloom What quote from this video makes you think the chiefs had him above ? I isn’t hear Tate mentioned once?

Washington wanted Tate at 6. KC wanted Tate at 9 (and I’m guessing would have been willing to trade up since it sounds like he was above Delane for them).

@HighyieldHarry @TheSalonDon Yes the best cbs make 9 million dolllars , totally

@TheSalonDon Like this a lot - seeing this point with Love a lot - he’d be 7th highest paid RB or something

The value of the draft is not the players but the salary saved per player If you picked a CB #1 he would need to be the best CB in the league to justify the $9m salary But if you pick an above average OL at #1 you are still saving $20m per year at that position If you only picked QBs, OL, and DL Your entire trenches would be paid an average of $3m per player This would allow you to get the highest paid free agent at every other position

@HBendaas @tysonbrody You are consistently one of the dumbest people on this site

@tysonbrody Which client is asking you to go on offense against Saikat and Track AIPAC, and why didn't you first disclose you were doing this for a client when you started tweeting about this incessantly last week?

@Laroo21 @AndThatsBB B2b World Series royals had alcides Escobar leading off and like worst hitter in baseball OMAR INFANTE hit 2nd for what seemed like at least 1000 PAs lol

@AndThatsBB I’m a pro analytics guy but I can’t lie, when the lineups were constructed like this the game was more exciting

I miss old lineup construction: 1. Fastest player 2. Bat control guy (he sucks) 3. Best all-around hitter 4. Best power hitter 5. Lumbering power or bust hitter 6. High-OBP guy who leads off now 7. Bad switch hitter 8. Catcher 9. Gold Glove defender (-5 DRS, can't hit)

@jga41agher @RajChipalu The Lakers are not serious contenders they had zero shot of winning the title and the odds reflect it, just like Houston has/had zero shot, why would the national media be discussing either of these teams in depth. We don’t care about the 10th and 11th best teams in the league

@RajChipalu honestly it's a joke and exposes that nba media is heavily influenced by groupthink and "subscribe to my channel, please!" the lakers were never taken seriously to the point that nobody ever allowed themselves to talk about them objectively as a successful basketball team.

JJ getting no love for Coach of the year was always laughable

@JReber16 @MattJHarris85 Specifically what were his alleged defensive problems because that doesnt seem consistent with the numbers cited in the tweet you are replying to

@MattJHarris85 Tillers problem *was* his defense lol You’d know this if you were a KU fan and watched him for 35 games.

Is Bryson Tiller a work in progress on offense? Sure. But he's already shown the kinds of chops to be an impactful presence defensively at the high-major level. If #Mizzou can refine his rim finishing — especially as a roller — this is (obviously) a high-level pickup.

@HalfCourtHoops If you are 5

@uhohthatsweird @blindsat @hecubian_devil There are a ton of these types in political discourse (the David sirotas and Matt stollers and whatnot) who are just complete morons I have no clue why they are taken seriously on twitter

@uhohthatsweird @blindsat @hecubian_devil It’s insane he’s the face of the anti AI movement because he is so transparently an idiot incapable of good faith arguments, reading basic financial statements, etc. . It’s very hard to parse what is real and what is not in this space but he contributes nothing to the discourse

There’s two big problems I have with Ed Zitron’s analysis in particular, and the “AI will never be truly impactful nor economically viable” argument in general 1) It doesn’t seem to understand the history of technology. Not just computer technology or software, but technology writ large. AI firms aren’t profitable currently. The capex is insane, the business models murky. The ultimate social and broader economic impact remains largely speculative. As Zitron correctly argues, AI is, for now, just “exactly the shit that software has always done — automations, shortcuts, reminders, and document work.” None of this suggests it won’t become profitable or hugely impactful, and a better understanding of the history of technological development and investment would reveal this. I think specifically back to the printing press—a development so obviously revolutionary in retrospect that it’s easy to forget that Gutenberg’s press was never consistently viable in his own lifetime, and by 1458 (18 years after his first press was completed) he was *extremely* bankrupt. For the first *several decades* of print, printers operated with razor-thin or often negative margins, and bankruptcies were common. And of course, they didn’t do anything humans couldn’t already do—copy and reproduce texts. Presses were expensive, high-investment businesses for the time. The market for their output was limited (not a ton of literate Europeans at the time) and often incapable of financial viability outside of select markets like Venice where literacy was much more widespread. Contemporaries also had a lot of familiar complaints. Printers, as a rule, exercised little-to-no editorial oversight. They’d print whatever sold. Misinformation, plagiarism, and inflammatory content were rife. And print took a long time to transform society. By the time print became undeniably, obviously transformative—with Martin Luther and the Reformation—nearly *eighty years* had passed since Gutenberg’s first press. About sixty since he’d gone bankrupt and been barred from Strasbourg for being such a profligate debtor. This is the thing: if you understand the history of technology, none of the arguments made about AI are new, or even unusual. They’re the norm for new technology. The initial investment boom is exuberant and irrational. The ultimate market for the product is foggy. The social impacts speculative. The difference from what human labor can already do is underwhelming. The quality is worse than what human artisans produce. And yet, sometimes, new technology does indeed become economically viable and socially transformative. Maybe AI will flounder and fail—but none of *these* critiques are actually a good guide for determining that, because they’ve been true of *most* new technologies, dead-ends and revolutionary successes alike. 2) The stakes of believing this dismissal of AI *and being wrong* are massive. *If* AI becomes economically viable and socially transformative, the effects are likely to be horrendous, on the level of the individual (making us all less competent and capable thinkers, with a demolished sense of agency) and on the level of society (unemployment, intense mass surveillance, previously-impossible levels of propaganda consolidation—the destruction of mass politics as we know it, and a huge threat to the ability to organize). If we pat ourselves on the back for being wisely skeptical doubters, instead of taking legislative action, and we’re wrong? It would be a world-historical disaster for the left. But, hey, we’d feel really smart on the way down.

@buccocapital @david__simon What data?

@david__simon Can you give it a shot? The data says this is happening. The responses in the comments and in my inbox and my DMs from lawyers are saying this is happening. Not being snarky. Genuinely curious

@Desmond_burner @bballbreakdown I really don’t think Florida would be -300 for any given 5 minute stretch of play even with foul trouble. It’s def correct to think about as a factor but it’s a lot closer to 60/40 than 75/25

@bballbreakdown Huge part that’s not included here is Iowa foul trouble and the difference in team skill. If that game goes to OT Florida becomes a -300 fav again. Not the same on one shot. Between being the much better team, Iowa foul trouble and a 3 losing you the game, they shoulda foul

Todd Golden strategy for fouling up by 2:

@AndyMasley @SashaGusevPosts Reconsider my epistemological processes. I think some negative polarization is a reasonable version of this but of course plenty is what you are describing

@AndyMasley @SashaGusevPosts Went through a libertarian phase in college (still sympathetic to some positions) but you go to your local libertarian meetup and realize 90% of them are sov citizens or worse it’s perfectly reasonable to wonder how did I get to the same end point as these morons maybe I should

My best work