A 1971 Chrysler Newport.

The thing was a boat. You’d hit a bump in the road, and the car would act like you crested a wave and bob front to back a few times. It was wider than most pickup trucks and probably heavier. Not only could it not fit in most parking spots, it could hardly fit in some lanes. Required leaded gas, which was getting hard to find at that point. If you needed to go uphill you had to build up speed because you would slow down, even with the gas pedal floored.

The best part is that when I finally brought it in for service, the mechanic came out and said “You’ve been driving that thing??” Three out of four motor mounts had broken and the last one was about rusted through.

It did have an 8-track though, and came with a bunch of Elvis tapes.

I hated Elvis, but did manage to find an 8-track of Peter Paul and Mary.

In 2012 I voted against Obama because I thought he was too conservative. I didn’t think his healthcare program went far enough, I didn’t like his foreign policy of continuing the Bush wars, and I thought he turned out to be far more establishment than he had indicated as a candidate in 2008.

I voted for Jill Stein. I said it wasn’t a protest vote and that I was voting my conscience, but it was totally a protest vote. Stein would have been the worst president in US history, and I even knew that at the time. I did it because Obama had a predicted 99% chance of winning my state, so I figured it was safe and would communicate to the democrats that there was a preference for more left leaning candidates.

What I did not do was try to campaign for Stein to try to get swing state voters to vote for her. I didn’t try to get swing state voters to not vote.

That’s exactly my perspective.

I came of age with the birth of the web. I was using systems like Usenet, gopher, wais, and that sort of thing. I was very much into the whole cypherpunk, “information wants to be free” philosophy that thought that the more information people had, the more they could talk to each other, the better the world would be.

Boy, was I wrong.

But you can’t put the genie back into the bottle. So now, in addition to having NPR online, we have kids eating tide pods and getting recruited into fascist ideologies. And of course it’s not just kids. It’s tough to see how the anti-vax movement or QAnon could have grown without the internet (which obviously has search engines as a major driver of traffic).

I think you’re better off teaching critical thinking, and even demonstrating the failings of ChatGPT by showing them how bad it is at answering questions. There’s plenty of resources you can find that should give you a starting point. Ironically, you can find them using a search engine.

First “democrats” is doing a lot of work here. I’m assuming the voters that you’re talking about turning out were democrats. I’m assuming the politicians they voted for were democrats. So what you mean is some subset (eg Third Way types, which have already been mentioned).

Use numbers. What was the turnout for the previous years? What was the turnout for Obama? For Bill Clinton? Was it bigger when Dennis Kucinich was in the race? Other than Bernie, he was the leftmost candidate that I can recall - at least in the top 5 in recent years. State the point you are trying to prove clearly, then demonstrate it.

I’m a Bernie supporter - he actually helped secure a research grant I worked on, I’ve met him in person, and I donated to each of his campaigns since I started to be able to do that kind of thing. I’m a member of the DSA. I’m also a scientist, and I deal with this kind of thing all the time.

What you’re basically coming off as, to be honest, is that family member in the maga hat who keeps yelling that 2020 was rigged.

You gave no competing hypothesis. I offered several.

This is a hot take.

Here’s the problem with your hypothesis:

You’re mixing together people who don’t vote with people publicly advocating not voting. That’s completely unsupported. Let’s see some stats on why people don’t vote. Is it because they don’t have time because they’re working, because they’re uncomfortable with the process, because they’re being lazy? On the other hand, what are the predictors of voting? We know age is a factor, so that would encourage us to think about the time availability question.

The second part is that the disengagement approach you’re advocating has driven the Democratic Party to the right. The Third Way movement came entirely from seeing Reagan’s engagement numbers. Not voting casts a zero information signal. First, the numbers only move mildly from year to year, and even when they do it tends to come down to the charisma of the candidate, not the policy positions.

A surprising number of Americans want universal healthcare, support LGBT rights and are against racism, yet vote for Donald Trump or DeSantis because they can get the crowds riled up in the way that policy wonks just don’t.

I mean, when the republicans did that huge study that found that economic and demographic changes in the US meant they needed to adopt more progressive policies (eg not being openly racist) if they wanted to have a future, the gop said “screw that, we will just depress the vote.”

So, no, your policy is not evidence-based, and it’s unreasonable. It forces the country to the right. If that’s what you want, go for it.

Yes. CA is looking to get single payer, but that has a longer runway because America.

I’m know I’m going to get downvoted for this, and a witch will put her curse on me, but here it goes.

I actually like audible. The subscription runs me somewhere around $12-13 per month, and includes one credit that can be used for any book. You can also buy extra credits for about the same price, and you can give audiobooks as gifts. My partner also has a subscription and I’ll frequently steal unused credits. I used to try to game the system and get the longest or most expensive audiobooks I could find with my credits. It was fun to get a 40 hour long $45 audiobook for $12. Now that I have an audible library that’s starting to rival my Steam library in terms of unplayed content, I’ll just grab whatever has caught my eye and pay cash for anything under $12. They have a lot of sales. They also have free content, but it rotates and sometimes they’ll pull the free books after a while.

Being Amazon, it’s pretty platform universal. Their apps are pretty much everywhere, like with kindle. They also have a very large library with a number of books labeled as exclusive to audible. These include full cast productions, which can be really fun.

All of that gushing aside, their software is fucking horrid. Every few months they’ll do an update that breaks something. It doesn’t make the app unusable, but it’ll change the invisible hit box size for the buttons or screw up the logic somehow. I currently have negative 56 minutes in the book I’m listening to, and although I can go back and forth using the +- 60s buttons, the scrubber/progress bar isn’t working. I suspect they have major QA issues at Amazon, like a lot of the big companies do.

Anyway, between the ubiquity, the prices, the free content, and almost seamlessness of the experience, that’s the service I use. I listen to audiobooks every night while falling asleep as well as when I’m working around the house or whatever. I listen to the point of having two pairs of AirPods so I can swap them when the batteries die after 4 hours. Plus, depending on the book, the kindle edition and the audible edition can stay in sync. Sometimes that’s helpful, sometimes very much not.

I know there’s more open source options out there. I had to do that to get Cory Doctorow’s new book since he refuses to publish via Amazon, but it was a much bigger pain in the ass than I’d prefer. At this point in my life I really want something that just (mostly) works and requires zero attention. I’m mid to late stage career in science/tech and I want to dedicate exactly zero brain cycles to listening to an audiobook. Audible does that. Plus, like I said, they have Amazon money so they have a number of exclusives and freebies and sales.

I might have recommendations as far as books go if I knew your or your daughter’s tastes in literature, but as far as the base app, I’m sticking with audible.

California comes pretty close.

To little fanfare, as the new year has gotten underway, California has closed one of the largest remaining gaps in its healthcare coverage system. As of January 1, all low-income Californians, no matter their immigration status, no matter their age, qualify for healthcare coverage.

This may be the most poorly written article I’ve ever read. It’s completely unintelligible.

It must have been written by a really poorly trained LLM and just posted without anyone having looked at it. Forget artificial intelligence - this is artificial stupidity.

I have read about individuals doing this, but to my knowledge it has never happened in any sufficient numbers to tilt a primary in any state.

Some states run open primaries, so that any person can vote in any (but only one) primary. Other states run closed primaries, such that any voter who has registered as a member of that party can vote in that particular party’s primary. Yet others (eg, California last time I checked) have mixed modes. I believe the CA GOP primary is closed by the Democratic primary is open.

You can tell relatively easily by the number of votes in any given primary election whether they’re consistent in terms of turnout with previous years. As far as I’ve ever read, they tend to be year over year consistent. The one trend that has been noted in recent years is a small but as far as I know steady increase in independent voters (who as stated may or may not be able to vote in primaries depending on their state, but based on number of votes cast do not seem to have been a deciding factor in primary votes).

I generally have suspected that the idea of people switching parties to act as primary spoilers is largely just projection, as we tend to expect malfeasance of the Other, but the hard truth is that you can barely get large numbers of people to vote in actual elections, much less in something like a primary.

Representative Lauren Boebert of Colorado has both of those covered.

Excellent analysis!

I did read the books on the original series. I have but haven’t yet read some of the others (I have at least one audiobook that was free at the time). I absolutely loved them, after sitting in shock as one “main character” after another was killed in a horrible and tragic way. I had gone in cold, and did not realize that GRRM took the authorial advice to “kill your darlings” quite so literally.”

I didn’t get into them until the pentology was finished, and I remember wondering to myself “Who the hell does he finish this? He’s introduced a major new plot line on the third book (maybe it was the Dorne subplot) and new, major characters kept popping up. I had no idea how he was going to start tying everything together, because even the last book had not started winding things down quite - the tensions were still building. It felt like he was painting himself into a corner while doing the floor like the ceiling of the Sistine chapel. Given the pace of subsequent development, I think I may have been just a bit right on that. I’ve done it to myself and recognize the symptoms.

I appreciate House of the Dragon being good. The problem is that S1 was also good. The problem is in the prequel-ness itself. I know that it all ends with Dany going inexplicably insane and Jamie’s arc goes from scoundrel to hero to … whatever the hell that was. I know the complex plot lines they’re setting up will never be closed. If GRRM ever finishes the book (I’m certainly not expecting two) and winds things down properly, I might again feel invested enough in the universe to try the other stories set in it, but right now it might have just ended with “and then Ned woke up and realized it was all a dream.”

Lastly, you raise a good point and that would have at least maybe delivered some interest. I can’t see anything but civil war with Bran as the bored and incapable god-emperor facing a Stark-Lannister alliance or something. The problem is that the most central and intriguing plot lines were left hanging or ended in the fastest and worst way possible.

“Dany forgot about the Black Fleet?” A queen capable of bringing her people from the literal point of extinction to conquering the known world, with a team of advisors and tacticians forgetting about a major armed force whose betrayal and push for conquest was well known? That’s like “The President of the United States forgot they were at war with China who had dispatched their fleet to attack Washington.” And then to have a ballista, fired from the pitching deck of a sailing ship, and hitting not only a moving target but a flying one? No one in history has ever shot a ballista at a moving flying target, to my knowledge, then pull in the wind and the waves.

I really only picked on Bran in particular because that was the ending-ending. From top to bottom it was absolutely terrible with every authorial decision worse than the last.

Like I said, I think GRRM painted himself into a corner. I think he gets some of the blame, because the show runners are obviously nowhere in the league of GRRM when it comes to story creation, and I don’t know how involved he was at that point. I don’t know if he skimmed a paragraph and signed off or what. Honestly, I don’t think even George knows how to finish his story because he kept adding one more thing. He’s a mature writer and gifted author, but I don’t have a competing hypothesis right now.

I do blame the showrunners for deliberately turning out an absolute piece of crap just to finish the thing even after being offered additional seasons by HBO. It was the worst example of deus ex machina I’ve ever seen.

“Who has a better story than Bran the Broken? Let’s make him king!”

Okay, not happy in the moment, but it was supposed to be. I’m still mad about it. Of all the shows I’ve re-marathoned, I’ve never even been tempted to redo GoT. It was like S8 was so bad it went back in time and ruined the entire rest of the show. I can’t even entertain watching any spinoffs.

I may buy the rest of the series as novels (ha) but even then it will be with trepidation.

I think that you are under informed and miseducated as to both the dynamics of complex adaptive social systems - particularly human ones but also as a theoretical concept. You’re also under formed about the diversity of actual human societies.

David Graeber was arguably the most gifted anthropologist of our generation, and both explicitly and repeatedly disproved your assertions as being native to humanity through rigorous investigation of actual human cultures spanning the globe and the past 10,000 years. I strongly encourage you to look into some of his books.

deleted by creator

The minimum you should target for contributing is the max company match - so in your case that sounds like 3%. In general, you should make sure you’re putting enough aside into an emergency savings fund (usually 3-6 months of normal expenses) and after that prioritize retirement savings.

In your company’s 401k, you’re going to be limited in terms of investment vehicles. The default is usually some kind of targeted date fund. Those spread your invested dollars across multiple industries and international funds. The benefit to the targeted date funds is that they rebalance your portfolio so that your money moves to more stable (but lower return) investments as you get closer to retirement. Some programs are very limited in their options, but I think that they all have targeted date funds.

Another possibility is using an index fund that tracks something like the S&P. These funds also are diversified (although not so much as the limited date ones). The reason a lot of people like them is that there are several alternatives that have a very low fee schedule versus managed funds - if you pay high fees, you’re cutting into your growth. The Vanguard funds are among the most popular for that reason. However, that may not be available through your 401k.

Basically your 401k should be a set it and forget it kind of thing. Pick a percentage, pick a fund, and don’t think about it until next year. You should review it annually, and you do have the option of increasing your percentage contribution if, for example, you get a 10% raise and want to start contributing 4% instead of 3%.

The person you’re meeting with possibly will not be allowed to give you investment advice. They can review your options and answer your questions, but if it’s just an HR person and not a financial advisor, don’t expect financial advice. You’re going to want to go in there having read these threads.

The big thing is not to overthink it at this point. I’m going to hazard a guess that you’re relatively far away from retirement, so getting in now is absolutely the right thing to do, but it also leaves plenty of time for you to educate yourself more. The part about meeting the 3% match at a minimum is just because that’s basically free money. If you are making $30k, your 3% would mean putting $1k per year into the 401k. Your company would match that, which means you’re making money right from the start.

There are multiple websites that allow you to calculate your retirement savings based on your age and how much you invest per year. It’s good to become familiar with the way the math works. Your 401k may provide such a service, but there’s plenty of free ones as well.

Good luck!

I’d like to see community merging as an option on the client side. I would like to see a combination of multireddits (so that all of the various /news subs were presented to the user as /news), and that multiple posts around the same article could have their posts merged transparently.

This way, the system could still respect the rules of federation (eg defederated hosts wouldn’t appear) and users would on top of that be able to choose which /news subs they wanted to see as unified.

I’m going to second The Good Place. Both it and Ted are complete now, and they close their story arcs perfectly. The third one I would add is Schitt’s Creek.

I also really liked Our Flag Means Death, but they haven’t said whether the second season will be the last one or whether they’re going to try for a third. I’d still recommend it, though.

We must send them the historical documents so they can work to achieve the perfect society.