I binged this with “ibm json evil”: https://gist.github.com/kemitchell/fdc179d60dc88f0c9b76e5d38fe47076

Well, shit. It’s been one of those kind of decades.

My organization seems to have already thrown in the AI towel, or at least are resorting to magical thinking about it

We’re highly integrated with Microsoft - Windows Login, Active Directory, Microsoft 365, and even a managed version of Edge as the org-wide ‘default’ browser that we’re encouraged to sign into with our organizational credentials to sync account information, etc. Our AI policy is basically “You can use any Microsoft AI feature your account can access.”
They can try to block whatever sites they want with the firewall, but once you let a user get comfortable with the idea of allowing systems to exfiltrate data, you aren’t going to also make them more discrete. They’re trusting that by throwing open the floodgates users will actually use Microsoft’s offerings instead of competing offerings — as if folks who sometimes still cannot tell the difference between a web browser and ‘the internet’ will know the difference. And they are also trusting that Microsoft is going to uphold our enterprise license agreement and their own security to keep that data within our own cloud instance.

Boy howdy, this will be interesting.

Showing my age, and I guess my privilege, but I don’t split expenses that way. (And on reflection, showing my trauma, too.)
As a principle, I try to keep my friendships generous and non-transactional.

If I owe someone and it’s not formal, I round up to the nearest whole amount and give or send them the money (besides, if a friend is counting out the change, they can keep my pennies). I usually tell friends they can cover me the next time — with no expectation that will occur. If a friend is adamant about giving me money, I’ll round down, usually to the nearest 5 or 10.

It would make me feel sort of weird to be given exact change from a friend. I think if a friend insisted on paying exact amounts, and then got it wrong in a way that underpaid me, I’d probably mentally flag it.
I suffered from a lot of manipulation and guilt around money when I was younger. It’s not that I’m super chill about money. I still notice the details, I just make a choice not to give value to money in the context of my relationships. (And forgetting ‘normal’ interactions is easy, because ADHD, so they just disappear into the void. Abnormal ones do get remembered.)
So the pattern would quickly stand out and the relationship would be handled appropriately. I’m not going to be party to micro-aggressions by a wannabe sociopath.

Mind you, this is either fake or that person is extremely dumb. I don’t think an actual sociopath would brag about it on social media - those sort of low-stakes ego games seem like something they’d keep in the dark. I just like exploring my feelings and positions in the form of long-winded comments that I sometimes actually post.

But now Reddit will know every subreddit you visit will be entirely your choice. Removing the random button improves the quality of user analytics.

It also allows for algorithms fined tuned to keep you engaged not to be waylaid by some random sub that gives you a “well, that’s enough internet for today” moment.
Purely speculation, but would not be surprised to learn that subs that don’t encourage more scrolling or interaction (subs that are reading heavy, or direct people off site and keep them there) are shown less frequently than others. A random button breathes life into subs like those, whereas an algorithm-driven feed would slowly strangle them.

I already can’t do half the things I’m trying to do on my network, now I gotta figure out DNS?!?

My tin foil hat theory is that he was planning out another shooting and got interrupted.

Do you remember those “That was Easy!” buttons that proliferated about … 20 years ago. (Yikes.)

In this flight of fancy, Biden has one of those placed on the Resolute desk and custom records audio for it, then goes on a wild spree of political edicts fulfilling everyone’s wildest dreams.

Forgiving all student loan debt. Done. Pardoning illegal immigrants. Done. Amnesty for everyone currently seeking asylum. Done. Full citizenship for DREAMers. Done. Removing the post office retirement Fund requirement. Done. Legalize Weed? Done. Nuke the whales? Believe it or not, done.
And after the scrawling of pen across paper has completed, the caps clicked safely back into place, another sound: cheap plastic clacking together, and Nixon’s disembodied voice emanating from the Easy Button’s tinny speaker “when the President does it, that means that it is not illegal!”

It seems like you’ve been focusing a lot on opportunity in your statements, but you also have to consider motive.

After Biden’s term is up, the Republican Party is being handed full control of the U.S. government. They have the presidency, the house, and the senate. They simply do not need Biden.

Regarding Ukraine, Trump can just not send any more aid, and (illegally) stop any in-progress aid while calling it an official presidential act.

I think Trump is really weak. The instances of him taking advantage of other people relate to money, sex, power, and his ego. (In a topical sense - I don’t think he’s smart enough to get ego fulfillment from things like achieving policy goals.) He doesn’t engage in a hard push for matters of statecraft or policy goals. He leaves that to the sycophants around him. Surely they could conceive of such an idea, but even if they did try to put something like that in motion, do you think he would grant anyone in his circle enough power to carry out such a plan? And if they could carry out such a plan, I just don’t see Trump’s ego accepting help from ‘the competition’, let alone other nations viewing a Democratic-led Trump envoy with anything but suspicion. Other countries have intelligence services. They’ll be able to figure out why someone pulls a policy 180, and they’ll do whatever is best for their country.

And to your point about Trump demanding loyalty - absolutely. But from his sycophants. He doesn’t need any particular democrat to be a sycophant. I think, honestly, he’s a lazy slob who is so used to money and power carrying water for him that he just finds the next person. He doesn’t have the grit to be malevolent unless it’s for money, sex, power, or his ego.

And, for the record, I am not the ‘both sides’ person. I have no idea what that line of thought is about. For what it’s worth, I wouldn’t make that argument because I don’t think Trump loves his male children enough to care what happens to them. I believe he’d only care if something affected his public image.

What I’m seeing is proof that Trump (rather, the Republican Party) failed to use the justice department to go after Hunter for tax evasion.

And while I do see that Trump clearly wanted to use the DOJ vindictively, and that he apparently wanted to put Hunter to death over tax evasion, I’m not seeing anything to support your claim that Trump would use the DOJ to manipulate Joe.

So what point are you trying to make here? That if Trump wants to manipulate Joe, leading off by killing Hunter is his go-to? Removing your leverage in the opening play is kind of a shit strategy, if I’m honest.
Are you trying to imply some other claim and hope I’ll validate it in the absence of an actual argument from you?
You’re just throwing stuff at the wall and hoping something will stick.

Is the above an accurate read of why you shared that article on two separate comments I made? Comments submitted without elaboration or clarifying why you think they support the statements you’ve made.

Look — Trump is a dangerous old fool, and he will do awful things. Possibly, even awful things that are vaguely similar to what you are describing. But your arguments, reasoning, and supporting ‘evidence’ aren’t good. If you’re going to be argumentative, insulting, and present conspiracy theories online, at least do it well.

Looked through to find one of these takes near the top.

That is a ridiculous idea.

A doddering, old, ex-president that is known to be forgetful is somehow going to help Trump, the current sitting president?

One step further: All the things above, but everyone Joe could talk to knows that his son is a political prisoner? Maybe we can add a footnote to this thought, too that questions why someone who got ran out of politics by his own party would care to meddle in the affairs of democratic institutions or those of our allies. (With the understanding that certain actions and certain conversations are violations of the Hatch act, which, under a vindictive DOJ, would see Joe in prison.)

In this absolute farce where he’s emerging from his quiet sundown to try to engage with people about politics, does anyone see Joe as anything but a prisoner himself?
Who would trust any words from him about anything other than Amtrak or ice cream?
You’d have to be a complete fucking moron to think that scenario could play out. That’s the sort of dumb shit that happens on TV, and may be something that Trump tries, but is not something competent humans fall for.

Today’s word of the day is: Specious.

I have so many thoughts.

Well, first - I posted this yesterday, so it can’t possibly be the brain dead take of the day.

And second, my comment is a sardonic statement that discusses the need for reform of how the U.S. does presidential pardons. It pivots to imply the Supreme Court will do the exact wrong thing if someone sued about this, and implies Trump will imitate the Catholic Church, re: forgiving sins. It makes no mention of the DOJ, nor my thoughts of how Trump plans to use it, or even whether I think this pardon is valid.
So, if you’re going to incorrectly insult me, could you at least stay on topic?

But, but isn’t Hunter an example of Trump weaponizing the DOJ?
No, it is fucking not. It is an example of the Republican Party weaponizing the media and grabbing any lever they can get their hands on, be it congressional investigations or friendly DA’s, to create a primetime cable TV media circus in much the same fashion they weaponized the media against Hillary before Trump had political aspirations, and even against her husband in the 90’s. If it was merely the DOJ being weaponized, Hunter Biden’s dick pics wouldn’t have been shown to congress. The DOJ is secondary. If the DOJ was primary, we’d never hear about the trial, and it wouldn’t go on for years in full view of the press.
So, no. But it’s close enough that if you didn’t lead with an insult, I’d just shrug it off.

And what would Trump need with Biden so much that keeping his son as a political prisoner would come in handy?
Joe is out of politics. I’m pretty sure most people forgot he was president until yesterday. Yeah, yeah, currently at the wheel, but after he gets on that Amtrak in January, he’s out. I honestly don’t know how he could be of any help or support to the republicans. Maybe they could put him on stage as a set piece somewhere, but then he’s just a sad old man that reminds everyone that the Republican Party will throw your kid in jail, but we already fucking knew that because of the migrant kids in dog kennels.

And third - while I don’t disagree that the DOJ will be used punitively, you don’t seem like the kind of person I’d publicly agree with.
You lead with an insult because you can’t interact with humans normally. Following, what’s the point of the insult? Is there merit to it? Do you prove that whatever you think you read was “the braindead [sic] take” of yesterday? It looks like you switch topics and talk about something I didn’t discuss.
Which really seems more like you just have thoughts you want to share and cannot find an appropriate way to bring them up.

Fuck, dude. If you’re going to try to fight the good fight, could you do better in how you go about it?

Finally.

You’ll note I’ve not expressed thoughts about Hunter. Honestly, I don’t have clear thoughts on the matter. I think we should uphold rule of law. But I also think that’s bullshit given how inequitably the law is applied. I think that Hunter is a victim. Lots of parts of his story seem very much like other forces were involved than only his own bad choices. And I wouldn’t want Hunter in prison for a crime that rarely sees prison.
My ‘best’ thought about Hunter right now is that I think Joe should have waited until sentencing to see if the punishment was in line with other convictions of this type. If it was, then let the skewed and politicized rule of law prevail, and if it’s not, then step in.

Irrespective of this news story, but perhaps because of it, we may see a legal review of presidential pardon powers., and I welcome that.
Which is what the entirety of my first comment was about. Pardon powers are yet another area of the U.S. government that mostly runs on the honor system, and that is clearly not adequate anymore, lest we see a scenario as heinous as the joke scenario I outlined.

No one has any fucking nuance anymore, and must always “win” everything at any cost, up to and including completely disregarding morals and legal conventions, and that’s why every law, every email, and every online comment has to be a damned novel, full of definitions, trapping edge cases, and strict prognostications, because someone, somewhere, has got to be ‘that guy’ and ruin the fun.

The following statements are brought to you by insomnia and an emotional numbness that can only be the result of utterly losing hope.
Argumentative tone, inane statement, and general stupidity are well, probably just me, but let’s pretend they’re presented for effect.

So?!
Biden can just declare it and say he’s acting in the official capacity of his role as president. What are they gonna do, say it’s unconstitutional? Well, who cares? He can just pardon himself for issuing the edict and everyone that helps enforce it. What are they gonna do? Heck, he can even whack the offending judges for getting in the way and just make Hunter and Obama Supreme Court justices.

My hope of hopes is that this triggers a challenge and redefinition (and limitation) of presidential pardon powers.

Buuuutt… I am not confident things would go in any way toward that direction. Probably the opposite. I can imagine it being redefined to some legally egregious bullshit, as is the custom of these times.
Trump is gonna wind up with a stamp that reads “Presidential Pardon” and uses it with the abandon of a 3-year-old with a sticker book. He’s going to have a line of donors, stamping foreheads like it’s his own Ash Wednesday.

Well that is gross. Well done.

(Let’s be honest, maybe that one if Harley is around.)

Generally I shrug off that scenario. If I need something or want something, I’m available. But if I don’t, then it’s okay to give myself permission to be unavailable.

But also, my phone number isn’t from where I currently live. Numbers that call do show up in my call logs, even if they get sent to a nonexistent voice mail. A number from my current area code may get a call back after I look up their number. But I don’t bother to look up numbers that aren’t from where I’m currently at, or numbers that call me repeatedly. Spammers use computers that automatically retry their calls, so an unreasonable number of calls immediately after one another are a dead giveaway.

Your attention is a valuable commodity. No one is entitled to it. I take a lot of steps to ensure my attention is protected from misuse - including asking a business to give me their number so I can call them first, so they’ll be ‘known’ to my phone before they try to call me.

If I find myself in a situation like that, I have temporarily turned off automatically sending unknown numbers to voicemail. But about 99% of my existence is sending unknowns into the ether.

I send all unknown calls to voice mail. I’ve had my carrier disable voice mail for my phone line.
My providers all use email or are ‘known’ by my phone. … I hope.

Mine has two box knives, a box knife with a carpet blade, 4 pairs of scissors, a lighter, a bunch of twist ties, various types of command strips, a travel lock, keys to someone’s house (we don’t know whose), and empty battery packages. Batteries have been moved into to an organizer that lives in the storage cabinet in the basement, but the empty packages stay for sentimental reasons (we have ADHD).