Jimmy

@antibearthesis @paintoshi @Anas_se_ Agreed, every Monday I automate my buy. I still laugh when my grandparents are shocked by the DOW today. “49,000?! I remember it hitting 10,000 and thinking this is crazy!”

@paintoshi @Anas_se_ i dca every month never missing a thinh

If you’re under 30, this is terrible news

The Democrat framing on affordability is basically right. Life is too expensive for the average person, and people aren’t imagining it. New cars are averaging around $50k. Rent, groceries, insurance, utilities, healthcare, and borrowing costs are all eating people alive. You can cut subscriptions and “fun money” and still feel squeezed because the mandatory stuff is what exploded. Calling affordability concerns “bullshit” is politically tone-deaf. People do not care what the macro charts say if their paycheck buys less life than it used to.

@CalltoActivism He didn't say affordability is BS, he clearly said the Democrat framing of affordability is BS. Agree or not report what he said accurately. I'm not MAGA but clickbait and disingenuity irks me.

BREAKING: A DC pollster just texted me “it’s over” after Donald Trump’s speech today where he called “affordability” a “line of bullshit.” There is not one Republican lawmaker who is up in 2028 that didn’t just shit their pants. He just gave Democrats the perfect ad.

@bluega2024 @staginglight @angertab @grok I will admit either through my own bias veil or believed truth, he was blocked relentlessly by congress or frivolous lawsuit for all of that so I was willing to let it pass

@0oMalt @staginglight @angertab @grok Pretty good? Like when he built a wall from sea to sea, repealed and replaced Obamacare, and locked up Hillary.? Three central promises of his 2016 campaign. Yeah, who could have possibly seen it coming that he would lie again in his 2024 campaign? 🤷‍♂️

I'm sick of hearing people complain about the oil prices as if these are record numbers. @Grok, what was the highest price per gallon in the USA under Obama (and year), then adjust that price for inflation to USD today.

@resisfertile I would just keep my job, do like 10 push ups in the morning, afternoon, and night time. Easy additional 100k/year? FOR LIFE. I can do this probably for 40 years before I get too old, and also that would scale up drastically as I get more fit. Its a win-win

how someone answers this is a helpful rubric for deciding should you pay any attention to any of their views. Do they display first level, second level, or third level thinking?

*Sigh* Not Arch, but I daily Cachy - Objectively incredibly good OS. I think it makes Arch easy, but still don't recommend it for the average user. My server is Ubuntu Server like a normal human, work is Windows, Arch is my gaming and AI desktop and some personal development work.

@0oMalt @findmyplushies Can say that about anything.... Anyone who daily drives Arch only does it to say they daily drive it..

why do ai bros and blue checkmarks always try to put kali in some random what distro do you use tweet like wtf are you gunna do with kali? daily drive it?

@TargetedPers0n @angertab @grok Agreed, but lets send more money to Israel to bomb kids and Churches while we watch videos of Jews punch nuns in the streets. Disgrace of a human

@angertab @grok I'm sick of cucks telling us everything is fine because it was worse under Biden. Who cares that most of what he campaigned on was lies and we're getting gouge at the pump to be Isreals bitch, right?

Agreed - To note I voted for Trump 3x. I am absolutely pissed off with his entire second term. Random wars, Israel first agenda, it's ludicrous. He broke every single political point he made (Which is crazy because for republicans, his first term was pretty good in terms of what he said he was going to do)

@angertab @grok FUCK ALL THE WAY OFF. If there was a Democrat President right now, you'd be screaming bloody murder, and rightfully so. There was no reason for this. We were promised half-price energy within a year, not doubled. In words you can understand: Obama BAD. Biden BAD. Trump BAD.

So I asked AI (I know) but it gave me some actually great outputs: Bank runs — Red outcome: panic/defection can become self-fulfilling and collapse the system. Labor strikes — Mixed outcome: blue succeeds when enough people join; red wins when participation collapses. Vaccination/herd immunity — Blue outcome when threshold is met; red outcome when too many free-ride or opt out. Montreal Protocol/ozone layer — Blue outcome: broad cooperation worked. Climate change coordination — Mostly red/mixed outcome: partial cooperation, heavy free-riding, slow progress. Mass protests/revolutions — Mixed outcome: blue wins if participation reaches critical mass; red wins if fear keeps turnout low. Honeybee/ant quorum behavior — Blue outcome: decentralized coordination often reaches a group-beneficial decision. Tragedy of the commons/overfishing — Red outcome: individual incentives can destroy the shared resource. Nuclear arms control — Mixed/blue-leaning outcome: partial cooperation reduced some risk, but defection risk remains. Emergency evacuation/panic behavior — Mixed outcome: coordinated movement saves more people; panic/selfish behavior worsens survival. Out of these, Blue won 2x, Red won 2x, and 6x it is basically 50/50 (Edge to blue though as 50% threshold was met)

@interface_a I'll dig through the history books and see if I can find an example of a red button blue button game played by everyone on Earth and let you know what I find. 🤡

The problem with the red button/blue button thing is that blue button people still live with this filter over their eyes that distorts reality. They lack the self-awareness to realize that if they were actually in that situation in real life, they’d push the red button too. That’s exactly why they get so mad and take it personally when we don’t see it their way. They call us immoral and evil. But we see the world realistically. They don’t. When you factor in the other 8 billion people on Earth and the raw fear of possibly dying, there’s zero chance 51% hit the blue button. 95–98% of people would take the guaranteed safe option and choose red. We know this because we deal in reality, not fantasy. For us red-button people, pushing blue is suicide. Is it sad that out of 8 billion some will inevitably hit blue and die? Yes. But if blue is suicide, I’m still hitting red. The vast majority of blue button people lack the self-awareness to know how they’d actually react under pressure. They’re the morons who die first in horror movies.

The train analogy is not equivalent because it changes the hidden assumptions of the original problem. In the red/blue button scenario, every human being is already inside the dilemma. Nobody is safely standing outside it. Babies, unconscious people, disabled people, people without information, confused people, irrational people, and people who cannot meaningfully choose are all counted in the outcome. That matters because “just pick blue” only works if enough of the entire human population can understand the scenario, act rationally, and coordinate. My objection is that this assumption is doing too much work. The train analogy avoids that problem by imagining 500 competent people standing next to a track, aware of the situation, physically capable of acting, and deciding whether to jump. That is not analogous to “every human being must privately press a button.” It removes the exact edge cases that make the original scenario morally unstable. To make the train analogy closer, you would have to include infants, unconscious people, elderly people, injured people, people who do not understand the instruction, people too far from the track to act, people who trip by accident, and people who are already on the track and cannot move. Once you add those people back in, the analogy stops supporting the simple conclusion. The issue is not whether cooperation is good. Cooperation is obviously good. The issue is whether the scenario unrealistically assumes universal competence, comprehension, and agency, then morally condemns people for accounting for the people who cannot participate.

.@BobMurphyEcon I thought you’d appreciate this

Despite what you may think, Trump isnt Hitler. If you can't discern the difference between the below direct quotes, I don't know how to help you. It seems we have truly lost what history actually was. (And I deliberately picked some of trumps worst quotes BEFORE his election to compare the rhetoric) Hitler before his election: “The Jew is a parasite in the body of nations.” “International Jewry is responsible for both capitalism and Bolshevism.” “We must remove the Jews from our midst.” “Germany cannot live if the Jew lives within it.” “If at the beginning of the war we had held thousands of these Jews under poison gas… millions of lives would have been saved.” Trump before his election: “When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best… They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists.” (2015 announcement speech) “They’re bringing crime. They’re bringing drugs.” (repeated framing in rallies) “A total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.” “The media is among the most dishonest groups of people I’ve ever met.” “The system is rigged.”

@_ZenzenE_ @kawagiwirl Donald trump won the popular vote in 2024, that alone tells me there’s no way I’m putting my life in the hands of humanity when I can literally just save myself. It’s too big a gamble, and it’s also an unnecessary one.

Im genuinely wondering why would anyone even press blue in the first place 😭 🔴 = 100% chance of getting nothing 🔵 = 50% chance of getting nothing / 50% chance of losing something Why would you bet on negative ?

Again, changing the entire premise of the question doesn't prove the point, it only means you dont understand the question. The premise is more akin to "Everyone int he world is immediately teleported into a blank room with two buttons, no coordination is available" The bus you presented is a false starting premise because you are presented with multiple additional points of information. That changes the premise

@0oMalt @JonathanRawles Pick a bus. one bus has a normal, happy drive :) the other will drive off a cliff if less than 50% of the users are on that bus. There’s room for everyone on both buses. Is it wiser to go on the bus with a 50% chance of death? Or the one where nothing will happen ever?

Sorry, I’m a “Blue Button” pusher. Here’s a very simple “push red” framing, and still 22% choose blue. Mankind is not purely logical or statistical, and it’s sensible to take that into account.

This argument feels like self-interest dressed up as something deeper. It leans hard on words like dignity, coercion, and responsibility, but once you slow down on those, they don’t really carry what the argument needs them to. Take dignity. You’re treating it like it just means looking out for yourself. That’s a pretty thin version of it. Most traditions people actually take seriously, whether it’s Immanuel Kant, Stoicism, or religious ethics, tie dignity to what someone is willing to stand for beyond their own outcome. When someone takes a risk for others, we call that dignity. When someone protects themselves at all costs, we usually call that something else. Coercion is similar. That word only really makes sense if there’s someone doing the coercing. Here there isn’t. This is just a situation where what happens to you depends on what other people do. That’s not unusual, that’s basically how any shared system works. Calling that coercion stretches the word until it stops meaning anything. And on responsibility, this is where things flip. The people choosing blue are taking on risk knowing it protects everyone, including people who can’t really reason through the choice. The people choosing red are stepping away from that and saying whatever happens to others isn’t on them. You can frame that as clarity or independence, but it’s hard to call it responsibility in any meaningful sense. The “blue voters are compromised” line kind of gives the game away too. It shuts down disagreement before it even starts. If anyone who disagrees is already written off, then the argument doesn’t actually have to engage with anything. What’s ironic is that red only looks like the safer or stronger position because there are people willing to pick blue. If everyone thought the same way, the whole structure collapses. So the idea of being above it all ends up depending on the very people it’s dismissing.

I don't expect this explanation to convince any blue voters, because they are already compromised beyond repair. Integrity seems to be an undervalued reason for pushing red. (I used AI to compress what I wrote to 1/4 the words, so excuse any uncanny; I can't proofread worth crap on a phone) Blue requires staking one's life on unknown actions of millions in one uncoordinated vote. This undermines personal dignity in three ways. •Needless gambling. Red ensures survival regardless of the crowd. Blue trades certainty for a collective lottery: live only if enough others join. Large anonymous groups rarely coordinate above 60/70%, even with communication. Life becomes a bet, not an asset worth guarding; lacking baseline integrity. •Accepts coercion. Blue says surrender safety or die if the majority withholds. It yields control to unseen voters. Red refuses the frame: your outcome stands alone. Dignity demands self-determination against external pressure. Blue volunteers for it. •Shifts responsibility outward. Blue voters choose the risk knowingly, yet blame red choosers. This erodes accountability. Dignified conduct owns one's choices. Blue diffuses ownership, breeding dependency. Blue demands faith in unforced alignment. Red needs only self-mastery. The former erodes dignity by design; the latter upholds it through prudent refusal.

@runitsukino @John_Cyrano "My opinions and thoughts are better than everyone else's" We should just make you Supreme Leader...oh wait even in North Korea, voting is in the high 90%'s

@John_Cyrano not everyone will vote red, that's obvious but the people that voted blue chose to do that

what if 100% of people vote red tho? don't they all survive? what does voting blue even accomplish then?

@goblinodds "Let me change the problem entirely to fit my need to force people to think like me"

red/blue question except 100% of people involved are mentally competent to vote

@Techjunkie_Aman @ProtonVPN @mullvadnet Mullvad on my router - Every smart device, asset, computer, etc goes through it NAS, random Airport Wifi, hotel wifi, etc. ProtonVPN. Just works a bit better and less blocked pages

One of these VPNs hides you completely. The other builds around you. Both are good. But they’re NOT the same ↓

You're solving for "my kid won't press it." The scenario requires solving for "no kid, no toddler, no dementia patient, no drunk, no contrarian, no nihilist anywhere on Earth presses red." That's not a parenting problem , it's a coordination-at-scale problem. You're confusing personal control with collective outcomes, which is the exact failure mode the thought experiment is designed to expose. And no, you cannot "communicate consequences" to a 7-month-old. They don't have stable object permanence. They can't model causality across time, let alone death. Telling a parent to "get across 'you might die'" to a pre-verbal infant is like telling them to explain calculus to a dog. It's not a skill issue... it's a neurological development issue. This is Piaget 101. "Just parent better" isn't a counter to the dilemma. It's an admission you didn't understand the question.

@0oMalt @veratadev @plasmarob You must be a dogshit parent if you can't get across "you might die, don't do that" effectively.

@Nemtastic1 @lporiginalg @cremieuxrecueil It's because they need to protect their identity around the red button as well as to convince themselves that they are right. Us blue pushers just helped save their grandkids, family members, nurses, school teachers, Priests, etc. We feel good about that, they don't

@lporiginalg @cremieuxrecueil The red partisans have surprised me with the stridency of their self-assured superiority complex. I understand the argument for red. I don't even think it's necessarily terrible. But their utter contempt for the blue pushers is disappointing.

1. This is not a partisan experiment. The majority of Trump voters chose the blue button. 2. It's painfully obvious that reds are worse at mentally modeling blues than vice versa.

@veratadev @NathanielKristo @plasmarob Lmfao, no, only the ones that hate their children or havent experience why a continuous irrational being is like. Babies and young kids do the darndest things - Youd know that as a parent and every parent I have asked almost unilaterally chooses blue because of this

@0oMalt @NathanielKristo @plasmarob sorry, are you implying every woman thinks the same way?