|
Qwazes posted:The efficient market at work! Yeah, I can't find the appropriate graph at the moment, but markets after a shock basically look like the graph of, and bear with me here, the rate of change for a taut string that had been flicked. Basically big swings that gradually settle.
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:11 |
|
|
Sub Par posted:Eh, where I've lived in the south, it's always meant more as "Wow, you're an idiot/naive/gullible, and..." more than "gently caress you". Yeah, it can be a way to be mean to someone but it isn't always used that way. The best way to explain it I think is that it's a phrase that expresses pity or concern. I often hear it used earnestly with no mean intentions. It seems using it the "gently caress you" way is almost like sarcasm, so it really depends on the context. Bless my heart I'm from the South.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:30
|
|
|
Space Poodle posted:See also: Matt Walsh. He's been super this-dude's-not-a-real-Christian for months, now. Feldegast42 posted:Just federal prisons, correct? State penitentiaries will be unaffected (and I'm guessing that's where most of the outright corruption / abuse occurs)
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Late to this party but I have had a poo poo day and this caused me to burst into happy tears over lunch hahaha
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
Hey, that means that Gary won't be beholden to private prisons anymore! Feel The Johnson!
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:40
|
|
|
James Garfield posted:Don't give Matt Walsh that much credit. He says Trump isn't a real Christian because Trump is too socially liberal and not pro-life enough.  Where is 1995 on this chart
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:41
|
|
|
ErIog posted:You're an idiot. It's August. The campaign just started. Trump's been the presumptive nominee since May (three months ago) and has been in the race since last June. Like I realize Trump supporters want to pretend that the last 14 months of Trump's campaign never happened, but it did. Junior G-man posted:I think it's because she's smart enough not to go Tiffany shopping in the middle of an election campaign that she's a very visible part of. Nah. Trump being mega-rich* is something he considers to be a positive part of his campaign, I doubt that's a huge factor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
zoux posted:Where is 1995 on this chart
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
zoux posted:No idea. I'm just bothered that a billionaire has successfully shuttered an unfriendly national media outlet. Seriously though. A billionaire was upset they said mean things about them, and people are picking the side of the billionaire. Said billionaire is a shithead too. It's like McDonalds Hot Coffee all over again where people side with the soulless corporation over a woman who had her genitals burned off. I get people don't like gawker but they actually provided some journalism. Sorry Hulk Hogan turned out to be a giant racist rear end in a top hat, I guess?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:way at the top, chart only goes to 1000, idiot Gah! Oh also I'm starting to see "Why hasn't Obama said anything about the LA floods yet" on conservative twitter so get ready for that talking point.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
UFOTofuTacoCat posted:I often hear it used earnestly with no mean intentions. It seems using it the "gently caress you" way is almost like sarcasm, so it really depends on the context.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:47
|
|
|
Wasn't Hulk Hogan's suit against Gawker over them releasing a sex tape of him without his consent? Like, yeah, he's a shithead, but at the same time, websites shouldn't be able to get away with that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Seriously though. A billionaire was upset they said mean things about them, and people are picking the side of the billionaire. Said billionaire is a shithead too. It's like McDonalds Hot Coffee all over again where people side with the soulless corporation over a woman who had her genitals burned off. Even there, Hogan being racist is new but everyone who follows wrestling closely knew how big of an rear end in a top hat he was. Go find The Death of WCW, that goes into great detail about his poo poo in the 90s
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:49
|
|
|
Gawker was the same company that did "gawker stalker" providing real-ish time locations for celebrity sightings. Not real sorry they got their asses handed to them, even if it was at the hands of a cartoon supervillain.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
zoux posted:Gah! You mean when he declared them a state of emergency and opened the FEMA doors for them?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
zoux posted:
you would almost think hillary didn't cause mass incarceration, nobody tell reddit
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Wasn't Hulk Hogan's suit against Gawker over them releasing a sex tape of him without his consent? It's more complicated than that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Wasn't Hulk Hogan's suit against Gawker over them releasing a sex tape of him without his consent? Yes except it was much more complicated than that and a federal appeals court has already ruled that the video was considered "newsworthy," so most legal observers I've seen have guessed Gawker will win on appeal. Of course, they're also being sued in another Theil funded lawsuit for exposing a guy who claimed he invented email (he didn't). But presumably if Gawker loses a jury trial on that one everyone will back the fraudster there too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:53
|
|
|
(can someone actually tell me where 1995 is on that chart)
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yes except it was much more complicated than that and a federal appeals court has already ruled that the video was considered "newsworthy," so most legal observers I've seen have guessed Gawker will win on appeal. Don't forget Thiel's lawyer sent them two other C&D's because of articles they wrote that they actually took time to do some investigation on, one on Trump's hair, the other on a sports gambling site.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You mean when he declared them a state of emergency and opened the FEMA doors for them? He really should be doing more to raise public awareness though, to get people to start sending their charity there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You mean when he declared them a state of emergency and opened the FEMA doors for them? But he didn't say the magic words! Radical Islamic terrorism
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
zoux posted:
What do the different colors mean?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
Pakled posted:Wasn't Hulk Hogan's suit against Gawker over them releasing a sex tape of him without his consent? The argument was that he was a national figure, and the video revealed something else other than the fact he liked to bone his friend's wife (that he's a giant racist). And that detail is of public interest. Hogan certainly suffered from it since Vince McMahon took him out of the wrestling hall of fame, among other things that damaged his image. Either way, Univision is still planning to keep the gawker affiliate sites running (Jezebel, Deadspin, Kotaku, etc.).
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Regardless of the specifics of this case and your feelings about Gawker, you should be pretty goddamn concerned that a billionaire was able to destroy a news outlet he didn't like simply by having money to throw around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
greatn posted:He really should be doing more to raise public awareness though, to get people to start sending their charity there. You're going to find I am not exactly sympathetic to this bullshit, having spent the better of this summer knee deep in flood relief in WV.  so please, ASK ME, about what's more important
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:56
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Yes except it was much more complicated than that and a federal appeals court has already ruled that the video was considered "newsworthy," so most legal observers I've seen have guessed Gawker will win on appeal. if we had video of Trump taking a piss at a urinal, and then he accepted a bribe near the sink, it would be ridiculous that I'd release the video with his dick in it
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:The argument was that he was a national figure, and the video revealed something else other than the fact he liked to bone his friend's wife (that he's a giant racist). And that detail is of public interest. Hogan certainly suffered from it since Vince McMahon took him out of the wrestling hall of fame. Isn't there a way to run that story without showing the actual video? Like, just play the audio of him making the comments and not show video of him having sex?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
Not sure if this trend will continue, but if it does, that's curtains for Tiny Hands...
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:The idea of "after he has sex, he said some racist things, therefore we need to release the parts where he's having sex" is absolutely stupid on its face and the court making this decision must have been filled with idiots Maybe because the court didn't make the strawman argument you are sticking into their mouth?
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Gawker was the poo poo, RIP. Did anyone used to comment on Crosstalk, their old hidden forum? It was pretty good for a couple years.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:You're going to find I am not exactly sympathetic to this bullshit, having spent the better of this summer knee deep in flood relief in WV. Both are important.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Erwin the German posted:Not sure if this trend will continue, but if it does, that's curtains for Tiny Hands... Oh man, I just came here to post that. It's so delicious. quote:Surveys of voters nationwide and in battleground states conducted over the last two weeks showed that Mr. Trump was even with or below where Mitt Romney, the Republican Party nominee four years ago, was with white men when he won that demographic by an overwhelming 27 percentage points. quote:Mr. Frey tested different turnout assumptions, including improbably optimistic ones, like if 99 percent of white, non-college-educated men turned out to vote. None of the chain of events produced a Trump victory. quote:“If you set out to design a strategy to produce the lowest popular vote possible in the new American electorate of 2016, you would be hard-pressed to do a better job than Donald Trump has,” said Whit Ayres, a pollster who has advised Republican presidential and Senate candidates for more than 25 years. “This is an electoral disaster waiting to happen.” 
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Gawker/status/766316494695305218 drat
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:The argument was that he was a national figure, and the video revealed something else other than the fact he liked to bone his friend's wife (that he's a giant racist). And that detail is of public interest. Hogan certainly suffered from it since Vince McMahon took him out of the wrestling hall of fame, among other things that damaged his image. this is also not entirely accurate. the baseline issue would be if he is a "public figure" or not and if the video was "newsworthy." not that he was harmed (that's just a baseline to claim standing.) essentially, gawker's argument is that as a public figure with the ability to influence culture/society/people, Hogan is entitled to a lesser degree of privacy rights than say you or I. the original court ruling was essentially against that, but also because gawker and in particular nick denton handled themselves very poorly in the case.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:Maybe because the court didn't make the strawman argument you are sticking into their mouth? it's entirely in the implication of what they said, though! they didn't need to release graphic footage of Hogan having sex to demonstrate that he's racist! It's an obvious violation of his privacy. Imagine, for two seconds, that the exact same thing happened, but the person in question was a woman. Nobody would even begin to pretend that was a reasonable standard
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
Dead Cosmonaut posted:You're going to win neither the house nor senate without supporting it. And only one out of the eleven Democrats running this year running for contested seats in the senate supports the public option. I'm glad Trump is making this party a haven for closeted conservatives. I love this post so much. It's tremendously illustrative. 1: Start with a highly unlikely success condition (Winning the house) 2: Tie this to personal pet issue with no historical linkage or plausible impact vector (Public Option) 3: Use to mock those less pure from a place of righteousness. 4: Begin insufferable smugposting as soon as the obvious result occurs. This relies on a hypothesis that there is a large population of untapped voters for downticket Dems who either A: Vote Republican but would vote for a liberal who advocates for Public Option or B: Are disappointed the party isn't further left and stays home during Presidential Elections but would be satisfied with the milquetoast Public Option instead of full single payer. That's a creative, if ahistorical, view of the American Electorate. Let's use this template for other situations- Hawkish Dead Cosmonaut posted:You're going to win neither the house nor senate without supporting direct, troop intervention in the GWoT. And only one out of the eleven Democrats running this year running for contested seats in the senate supports the boots on the ground. I'm glad Trump is making this party a haven for closeted pacifists. This actually fails condition 2, in that we're aware FoPo/NatSec is a major factor for some voters on the right. Many of the trash people they trust in the Neocon establishment have endorsed Hillary, and playing up the dangers of delays due to Republican intransigence in a divided government could actually win voters: "Unlike my opponent, I'm committed to helping Hillary prosecute the War on Terror to its fullest extent, as recommended by [piece of human filth]". This is a plausible vector (and a poo poo strategy no meaningful Dem would recommend). Dead Tumblrnaut posted:You're going to win neither the house nor senate without criminalizing microaggressions. And only one out of the eleven Democrats running this year running for contested seats in the senate supports mandatory trigger warnings. I'm glad Trump is making this party a haven for closeted patriarchists. ProcessTrusting Dead Cosmonaut posted:You're going to win neither the NBA Championship nor the seasom series with the Warriors without rehiring Hinkie. And only one out of the eleven Sixers blogs I read will even let me make that case in the comments. I'm glad Simmons is making this team a haven for bandwagoning casuals.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
greatn posted:Both are important. Obama saying magic words about "send money blah blah" is nominal, at best. Trust me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
zoux posted:
Probably under the x-axis where you chopped it off for whatever reason
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 07:11 |
|
|
"After nearly fourteen years of operation, Gawker.com will be shutting down next week. The decision to close Gawker comes days after Univision successfully bid $135 million for Gawker Media’s six other websites, and four months after the Silicon Valley billionaire Peter Thiel revealed his clandestine legal campaign against the company." Looks like maybe the other six are staying open? The release isn't clear. Feldegast42 posted:Probably under the x-axis where you chopped it off for whatever reason The reason is I'm demonstrating you can't see a difference in incarceration trends before or after the crime bill.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2016 18:02
|
|