I got the time-zone wrong and missed the first hour. Biden seemed fine to me - what the heck did I miss in the first hour?

Since when was this court consistent with prior rulings?

Remember when SCOTUS threw out laws against gays? Then a bunch of states passed constitutional amendments against gay marriage? Then SCOTUS came and said “Na, none of that means anything, gay marriage for all!”

I feel like I am on the other side of that process this time: SCOTUS throws out Roe, bunch of states do constitutional amendments, SCOTUS rules “Na, none of that means anything, all abortions are now illegal!”

Does it lead to the death of all Hamas? If yes, Hamas will not be on board. If no, Israel will not be on board.

Ah, but Robbin Williams didn’t go on a year later to actually BECOME president.

Ya, who would want a TV personality in charge of a country

“Biden can’t be persuaded let alone pressured”

Which sums up both Biden’s strength and all his problems in one statement.

Could we seal Biden in a germ-free bubble a week before the next debate? The last thing you want Biden sounding like is sickly - he had a cold today and COVID last time they debated in 2020.

Meanwhile, North Korea just stated that they will be sending troops to the Donbas

Zúñiga referenced that paralysis during the rebellion, telling reporters the military was tired of the infighting and was seeking “to restore democracy.”

The infighting between the two parties is what democracy is. One party getting everything it wants and the other nothing is called a dictatorship.

But did he pardon the Navy’s LGBTQ+ ringleader, Dorthy?

Bang-bang control for AI?

Come on year of Jubilee! At least do the law against charging interest on loans!

Anyways, ya, the 11 are group the first two or the last two. If you group the first two, you sort of lessen the impact of “I am your god” with stuff about idols - but if you group the last two “don’t covet your neighbors property, such as: wife, house, horses, etc…” you basically are saying wives are property.

Vim vim vim … out of paper!

Sadly, if you can remotely work from rural America, you can remotely work from rural India.

Is… is this reverse Fetterman? Did Trump have a stroke and become a democrat?

This is where technology advancement need to be focused. I’m looking at smart home stuff right now so that I can automate as much of my house before I get old. Memory? We currently have AI transcription and context processing medallions, think of a decade of progress on that could get us to (please keep it opensource and the transcripts out of corporate hands). Walking? Well, lots of exo-skeletons out there. One might take off - I’m hopping for a balloon powered one. Dementia? Actual good use of context-aware genAI. Medications? Diabetics already have smart pumps, why not work on something like that for other medications?

I think once the babyboomers pass through the system, hopefully the next generations will finally begin to embrace technology and lessen the need for so many healthcare workers. I want LAN parties at my nursing home, not shuffleboard.

Yes, that maximizes happiness at the expense profit, the polar opposite of setting it at $100 to maximize profit at the expense of happiness.

Three thirsty people walk out of the desert, one at a time, and walk up to a water salesman. The first has $1, the second has $10, and the third has $100. What should the salesman charge in order to maximize profit while keeping all the customers happy?

$1 sounds reasonable, if their are other water salesmen it would probably be the best price, but it leave a lot of money on the table.

$10 sounds good, since 2/3s of the customers will get water and the saleman gets 600% more money.

$100 is the price that gets the most money, but leaves 2/3s thirsty and is way above what you should charge for water.

The answer, strangely, breaks the notion of “fair”. Let us pretend that these three bottles of water are the only sale this salesman will ever make, quitting the business right afterwards. Also, let us say that none of the three will ever see the other two people’s transactions. The answer then is to charge the first man $1, the second $10, and the third $100. Everyone gets water and the salesman gets the maximum amount of money. The problem is that we, subconsciously, feel that this is ‘unfair’ even though everyone got what they wanted. The ethical would set it at $1 while the businessmen would set it at $100 while trying to drive everyone else out of business. But what if the rich could be charged more than the poor? What if sales were based off of what each individual was willing to pay instead of which fixed price would garner the most profit?

Would this be a better world or a worse one?

Voice recognition vs. Download an app where you can’t make mistakes (and a giant corporation can harvest your data). Hmm, I wonder which mcway mcdonalds will go?

“Will you be using our app today?”