My first sentence is good advice. I assume they are already following it.
But, they sound entitled. There is no reason that the general public has to make unusual accommodations for their condition. It’s up to them to restrict their activities and provide protective gear as their situation requires.
Like many others, I’m a cancer survivor too. I’m not expecting special treatment or sympathy.
I don't read the slightest sense of entitlement in their post*. All they said was they have rational reasons to wear a mask themself and those rational reasons make them not a kook when they choose to wear a mask.
Your reply would be more on-target if they'd asked everyone else to wear a mask around them because of their medical condition, but nowhere did they make nor imply that request.
I'm in Miami, I very very rarely see anyone wearing a mask except senior citizens. The way it should be because they are at higher risk of not only covid but flu etc.
got attacked as a
fool with no care whatshoever for the public health
The next 7 words in their post change the meaning of your selectively quoted material above. They’re objecting to people telling them to not wear a mask, not asking you to wear one.
Entirely AI generated music. Lyrics generated by GPT variants, album art by diffusion models, music composed and performed by Jukebox (customized) - http://soundcloud.com/baltigor
If it was "our" citizens getting paid near (US) minimum wage to sit at home and monitor a robot all day then yes, I'd still be all for it. Teenage me would have much preferred that to fast food, and even adult me would happily take it as a second or interim job if needed and unable to find better paying work for some reason. And I'm sure it'd be a great opportunity for the physically disabled or other people unable to leave home.
This is a win for everyone involved. A US company gets to outsource easy work at a price below our minimum wage that they can afford to a population which can live happily with those lower wages due to their nations cost of living.
I live in South Africa. DeGroot and his ilk were nothing like "woke". They were monsters that dehumanized citizens and murdered with impunity. You should know that, which makes your comment suspect.
> I live in South Africa. DeGroot and his ilk were nothing like "woke". They were monsters that dehumanized citizens and murdered with impunity. You should know that, which makes your comment suspect.
But I do know that they dehumanised citizens, because I specifically said:
> it's nowhere near as bad as having laws on the books, that courts had to enforce, that made you less of a human than white people.
Why did you ignore that? Is there something about that comment that makes it hard to read, or hard to understand?
I never claimed that the Woke followers were murdering others with impunity, I said that I see a resemblance between them and the apartheid rulers. I never specified what the resemblance was, but since you appear to assume that "murder" was the resemblance, let me clarify that I did not intend to claim that the Woke followers were murdering people.
The resemblance I see is the dehumanisation of non-Woke followers (not dehumanisation of just the Woke-opposed, but of anyone who may even be neutral).
If you compare people to apartheid murderers and _don't_ specify how you mean, you can't exactly claim he's jumping down _your_ throat taking that the wrong way.
"Oh, these leftists seem like Adolf Hitler"
"Fuck you"
"Hey, hey, I didn't specify _how_ they're like Hitler, I just meant how he dehumanises people, not _any_ of the things almost everyone in the world knows him for"
This is why I hate the anti-woke, just incredible levels of smug, trolling styles of communication, constantly saying inflammatory bullshit and then pulling back and acting "attacked" and calling people "close-minded" for not asking you to elaborate on obvious "veiled" insults and bile.
> HFTs do not front run for fucks sake. It’s illegal ...
This is objectively false. Cursing does not strengthen an argument. HFTs paid to jump the queue. It should be illegal but it is not. There are a number of low-latency strategies that are beneficial for price discovery such as index arbitrage or market-making (with requirements to stay in the market). A strategy that is not beneficial is to pay the exchange for first-look. That is front-running.
It’s very well-defined in the industry and when you complain about something completely unrelated using that term it muddies the argument for the general public and makes you sound ignorant to the people involved with the industry (both regulators and private participants).
I cursed because it’s the same ignorant argument over and over spreading false information about how the market functions. Actual front running is illegal and companies would get shut down in a heart beat if they were doing it.
Again, this is exactly the behavior I mentioned in the above post. When the general public raises the important question of how much extractive behavior there is in HFT and asks whether the benefits outweigh the value lost by disadvantaged parties, they get brushed off and told that they’re ignorant. Your response focuses on one specific technical allegation while casually admitting that yeah, maybe there’s another type of extractive behavior that happens but “don’t you know the difference between one technical definition of extractive behavior and another?” At the same time no actual answer is given to the core question — presumably the assumption being that unless you are in the HFT world you’re not qualified to have the question answered, even if it affects you and you’re paying for it.
It’s simple though, stop claiming people are breaking the law (front-running) if you want to have a productive discussion. It’s not a “technical detail”, it’s a fundamental property of not being able to beat an order that made it to the exchange before yours.
The reason your concerns are brushed off is because they are nonsensical to anyone who actually understands the market. You’re complaining about extractive behavior but are unable to articulate how it is actually happening and calling it “front running” shows that you definitely have no idea how HFT is making money.
Describe the steps by which you think having something like first look or just faster access to the exchanges allows HFTs to unfairly extract money from normal trades.
There’s an entire book by Michael Lewis that describes these steps. I don’t have enough knowledge to tell you how accurate his description is, and I’d be willing to hear a cogent argument in response. But if you agree that those activities are indeed happening and you’re simply claiming that the abuses he describes are not technically illegal or technically the SEC definition of “front running” then your point is noted and my response is: so what? That’s not a defense against the allegations.
> There’s an entire book by Michael Lewis that describes these steps.
Yes, it was widely derided as a one-sided argument used to support a new exchange (i.e. it was glorified marketing material). It was an entertaining book, but it excluded any realistic view about how “the evil side” works in his narrative.
> then your point is noted and my response is: so what? That’s not a defense against the allegations.
The point is that there are no fucking allegations here. When someone comes out and says, “I don’t like HFTs because they front run orders,” and the reply is “that’s not front running”, what is left to defend? They are being accused of a crime they aren’t committing because people don’t know what the crime is.
It’s like claiming the 7-eleven extorted you into buying a hot dog because they offered a 2 for 1 sale. Then someone points out that isn’t extortion. Then you say “so what? That’s not a defense against the allegations.”
Let’s put this another way. There is a reason that no regulation or arrests came out of flash boys. When you actually look at what HFTs do, there is nothing “unfair” to regular market participants. If you put in an order to sell AAPL at $125, there is no way for them to get ahead of that order in the exchange.
i wonder this; if there is a stop loss already on the books at x price and a HFT enters a market order at that price when a stock is falling, which order will get filled first? i feel like answering this question would sort of answer the argument you guys are making?
as for useful work... we should really just be honest with ourselves/each other [and machine learning/ai might help us to do this] about what is actual useful work. it begs to challenge freedom, but ultimately i think we're headed for an efficiency level that will make the most efficacious worker look lazy af...
Exploding nuclear bombs destroys civilian infrastructure and harms ecosystems.
Destroying civilian infrastructure harms civilians.
Both are despicable acts of destruction.
One is not deserving of the other.