|
PostNouveau posted:It's honestly more suspicious that he told people that. John McAfee did the same thing and then definitely committed suicide when the law closed in on him. McAfee just wanted it to look like the Illuminati silenced him for good or something. So because a crazy person did a thing, it's not suspicious that a whistleblower killed himself while half-way through a deposition into malfeasance and corruption. That's some insanely twisted unlogic, but sure, you do you, hoss.
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
If someone who owns a gun tells his loved ones that he's not going to kill himself, he's absolutely planning to kill himself. Every time.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:52
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:So because a crazy person did a thing, it's not suspicious that a whistleblower killed himself while half-way through a deposition into malfeasance and corruption. Yeah, I don't buy that statement as compelling evidence because people have used it in the past to deflect culpability for their suicides onto others.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:53
|
|
|
Or to use their suicide as a last middle finger if, say, they feel they will only get a Pyrrhic victory against a giant multinational corporation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:57
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Yeah, I don't buy that statement as compelling evidence because people have used it in the past to deflect culpability for their suicides onto others. I think this part got glossed over by people who think he killed himself. He was supposed to return the very next day for more depositions. He was not finished giving statements, now he cannot, because he is dead. Its painfully obvious that Boeing would stand to gain from a whistleblower all of a sudden not finishing their story.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:58
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:Yeah, I don't buy that statement as compelling evidence because people have used it in the past to deflect culpability for their suicides onto others. That's insane chain of reasoning ("because some people lie about X, all instances of people saying X are lies"), but you do you. I don't actually have a horse in this fight.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 16:59
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:That's insane chain of reasoning ("because some people lie about X, all instances of people saying X are lies"), but you do you. I don't actually have a horse in this fight. That's not what the user said. The user said "because people often lie about X, someone saying X is not evidence that X is true." That's a very sound chain of reasoning. There's obvious reason to suspect foul play because this giant corporation probably benefits from his death. But "he said he wasn't suicidal, that's evidence that he wasn't" is kinda naive about how suicidal people behave. And you'd think if Boeing was gonna go this route then they'd figure out how to do it before the deposition even started, but I don't know that world. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:04
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:That's not what the user said. The user said "because people often lie about X, someone saying X is not evidence that X is true." That's a very sound chain of reasoning. 1) Good thing we're explicitly talking about whether or not there's evidence at all, not the relative strength. Explicitly. Scroll up and read. 2) No, it's not a sound chain of reasoning. Please try again. Logic has rules and you are breaking them. This is a very dumb argument.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:10
|
|
|
koolkal posted:The Fed were the ones who came out and predicted multiple rate cuts last year. The Fed's dot plots often just mirror whatever the futures market looks like for rates of a given duration. Those dot plots only get shown every couple of months, you could argue that the market trades in the direction of where the next meeting's dot plots will be, based on inside information, but it's also just as likely (to me, anyway) that they intentionally give prognostications that don't differ strongly from the market at the time, so as not to spook the market themselves (basically let the market spook themselves over time).
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:13
|
|
|
single-mode fiber posted:The Fed's dot plots often just mirror whatever the futures market looks like for rates of a given duration. Those dot plots only get shown every couple of months, you could argue that the market trades in the direction of where the next meeting's dot plots will be, based on inside information, but it's also just as likely (to me, anyway) that they intentionally give prognostications that don't differ strongly from the market at the time, so as not to spook the market themselves (basically let the market spook themselves over time). Eh, the simpler reality is that both the Fed officials and market analysts have similar backgrounds and are looking at similar data so it's likely they would come to the same conclusions. Hence why I think that the Feds themselves were also a bit surprised by the latest data considering how many of the officials surveyed were predicting 3 or so rate cuts previously.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:21
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:1) Good thing we're explicitly talking about whether or not there's evidence at all, not the relative strength. Explicitly. Scroll up and read. No the post you were quoting is talking about "compelling evidence." That's what you called poor logic. But not really, because you wrote your own stupidly exaggerated paraphrasal of it, changing "not compelling evidence" into "always a lie", and called that poor logic. I agree the dumb idea you described is poor logic, but it's not something anyone said. quote:2) No, it's not a sound chain of reasoning. Please try again. Logic has rules and you are breaking them. Which rules? I think it's pretty intuitive, and logical: you can't trust someone when they say they're not suicidal, because suicidal people often try to disguise that they're suicidal for a number of reasons: because they fear they'll be stopped, because of social stigma, or even because of economic incentives to die in a way other than suicide. This man's death should be investigated for potential murder for obvious reasons. Boeing and its most invested shareholders should be held in suspicion. And either way, Boeing should be torn apart and reconstituted as a trustworthy manufacturer. But separately, we should be aware that just because someone says they're not suicidal, it doesn't mean they're not at risk - it's not even "compelling evidence" that they're not at risk. If we mistakenly believe otherwise, we might make the deadly mistake of neglecting someone who's at risk. We're on the same page about this guy's death being suspicious as hell but "he said he wasn't gonna kill himself, and that's compelling evidence that he didn't kill himself" reinforces really dangerous myths about suicide and its warning signs. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 17:37 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:27
|
|
|
Civilized Fishbot posted:No the post you were quoting is talking about "compelling evidence." That's what you called poor logic. I think it's sound logic. The post that started this conversation : Fart Amplifier posted:There is no evidence that the other guy didn't commit suicide. Stop buying into conspiracy theories After that people tried talking about whether or not that's sufficient evidence, but that's an entirely separate standard and conversation, one I specifically and repeatedly said I don't have a stake in. Civilized Fishbot posted:
"Intuitive" and "logical" are not even a little bit synonymous. They are in fact very frequently at odds with each other. No matter how many times people lie about a thing, it doesn't increase the chances that other people are lying about it. That's just how reality works on a fundamental level. Many people lie about their weight or age, but it would be ridiculous to assume that all ages and weights people say are lies. You a person in the world might be more likely to distrust people's ages/weights, but the lying doesn't make people older/younger or lighter/heavier. If we're discussing John's self-reported weight, that Bill lied isn't relevant. Again, I don't think this is some slam-dunk evidence. It's part of a larger investigation that should happen (something we agree on), with us being unable to tell from what we as randos on the internet know. I'm merely pointing out that 1) there is in fact evidence, even if it's contested and 2) no, that somebody else lied will never be relevant, it's an incredibly dumb argument. Also, please take an actual logic class. Not you, specifically, Civilized Fishbot, just kind of everyone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:45
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:1) Good thing we're explicitly talking about whether or not there's evidence at all, not the relative strength. Explicitly. Scroll up and read. You're misreading me, and this is indeed very dumb. If you don't disagree with the "because people often lie about X, someone saying X is not evidence that X is true" then you're just arguing about it because ... ? I don't know, but if I award you 5 Internet points, will you stop being rude about it? It seems like we do agree here. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make other than you're smarter than the guy who said "no evidence" or me over something I said.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 17:46
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:"Intuitive" and "logical" are not even a little bit synonymous. They are in fact very frequently at odds with each other. That's why I said "intuitive and logical": if they were synonyms I would've just said one of the two! This is a case where we're discussing reasoning which is both intuitive AND logical. That makes the logic easier to follow, when it roughly corresponds to human intuition. quote:No matter how many times people lie about a thing, it doesn't increase the chances that other people are lying about it. Again, "all X is a lie" is a strange hyperbole that you projected onto the original post you were criticizing. The post you're criticizing said "this claim is not compelling evidence that the man was not suicidal." Not "everybody who says they're not suicidal - all of them actually are!" quote:You a person in the world might be more likely to distrust people's ages/weights, but the lying doesn't make people older/younger or lighter/heavier. If we're discussing John's self-reported weight, that Bill lied isn't relevant. If we're discussing John's self-reported weight, and we're not sure whether to trust John, it is logical to ask whether self-reported weights are generally reliable. It's possible John is lying when most people tell the truth, or vice versa, but the general reliability of similar reports really is useful to get a better estimate of how much we can trust that specific figure. Because while we don't know John, we can make the assumption that he generally follows patterns of behavior demonstrated by other people, and if we trust that assumption, we'll get a more precise estimate of how much we can trust him (and maybe a more precise estimate of his weight). quote:Also, please take an actual logic class. Not you, specifically, Civilized Fishbot, just kind of everyone. I actually did take logic classes in college, a lot of math majors did even though they were in the philosophy department. The philosophy students didn't like us and didn't like our effect on the grading curve. We didn't like the philosophy students and we thought the building was a shithole. All of us were correct, and I'd love to take another logic class. Civilized Fishbot fucked around with this message at 18:24 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
So now that Alabama is joining Ohio in moaning about the DNC convention date being past the cut off date for ballot access I have to wonder, who chooses the convention date first? The GOP this year because they are not the party holding the White House so they go first, or does the DNC pick their date first and force the GOP to pick a date before that? This whole date thing is of course a nothingburger.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:21
|
|
|
Digging around sources for the Wikipedia articles on the 2024 conventions, the Republicans announced their dates back in December 22, which was before the Dems announced anything or had even finalized the list of finalist hosts. https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/21/politics/republican-national-convention-2024-dates/index.html
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:54
|
|
|
Cimber posted:So now that Alabama is joining Ohio in moaning about the DNC convention date being past the cut off date for ballot access I have to wonder, who chooses the convention date first? The GOP this year because they are not the party holding the White House so they go first, or does the DNC pick their date first and force the GOP to pick a date before that? Is there some rule that one gets to pick first and the other can't pick until that happens and has to avoid that date? Like, a law, not a tradition
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 18:56
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Is there some rule that one gets to pick first and the other can't pick until that happens and has to avoid that date? Like, a law, not a tradition The party that holds the White House by tradition holds their convention last. Which surprises me that the MAGA RNC hasn't changed theirs just to buck tradition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 19:31
|
|
|
"We're gonna have our convention October 29th, because F you Dems! HAHAH!" Though that would really screw up their fundraising, but its not like they care about campaign finance laws anyways or suffer anything from breaking them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 19:37
|
|
|
red states going "hehehe what if Biden wasnt on the ballot" seems like another dog catches car thing and im not even sure what it would do because it seems soooooooo loving stupid and a nothingburger
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 21:14
|
|
|
Cimber posted:"We're gonna have our convention October 29th, because F you Dems! HAHAH!" Feels like the Dems getting their convention bounce on the Tuesday of the general election would be bad for the GOP.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 21:33
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:If someone who owns a gun tells his loved ones that he's not going to kill himself, he's absolutely planning to kill himself. Every time. Hell, Kurt Cobain swore he didn't have a gun.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 21:35
|
|
|
Didn't the Boring whistleblower tell someone (his wife?) that if he dies it's not suicide? Not so much "I won't commit suicide"?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 21:50
|
|
|
Bunch of people including a 15 yo shot up a Ramadan prayer group in Philly
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:00
|
|
|
Charliegrs posted:Didn't the Boring whistleblower tell someone (his wife?) that if he dies it's not suicide? Not so much "I won't commit suicide"? I don't think there's a meaningful difference here. Both are plausible in the context of "I believe the Boeing corporation is going to kill me" and both are plausible in the context of "I am suicidal but I would like not to be remembered as a suicide victim." If I thought a corporation might plausibly send someone to kill me and stage it as a suicide, I probably wouldn't hang out in my car by myself, but I've never been in that situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:02
|
|
|
I don't think a Boeing executive ordered a hit on the guy. I also don't think the guy committed suicide. I believe both of these things equally the same. What I do know is that there are a lot of crazy people out there, including someone who was arrested for shooting at cars on the highway on Monday because the eclipse triggered them into thinking god or whoever was telling them to commit light domestic terrorism.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:16
|
|
|
Boris Galerkin posted:I don't think a Boeing executive ordered a hit on the guy. I also don't think the guy committed suicide. I believe both of these things equally the same. We can synthesize these two statements. Lockheed Martin ordered the hit to make Boeing look like assholes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:22
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:red states going "hehehe what if Biden wasnt on the ballot" seems like another dog catches car thing and im not even sure what it would do because it seems soooooooo loving stupid and a nothingburger To me it reads like there was a boring piece of election minutia that is destined to be cleared up without any impact but some bored content writers saw it and decided to get some quotes and clicks.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:26
|
|
|
Piell posted:Let's flip this in reverse - do you think there is any method that a Trump Republican could use to convince you to vote for him? Is there some policy argument or method of conversation that would convince you to vote for him without changing any of his policies towards trans people, asylum seekers, etc? I know this is a bit old know, but I think this is actually a valuable exercise - if you want to participate in a conversation about converting people, you probably should be aware of what would get you to vote for Trump, or at least what would have, or at least what would make the idea compelling. Because there almost certainly is something. There's probably a lot of things, even if the circumstances are vanishingly small for it ever happening. If you don't know what those things are, that is probably due to a lack of self-awareness more than anything else, and the exercise is worth doing even if you don't figure out a way. I'm well aware of what it would take for me - I'm a human being, admittedly one other folks find hellishly weird, but I still have very human psychology with all of its flaws and weaknesses. I've been fooled by people I trusted about things that matted deeply. I've distrusted people who didn't deserve it for reasons that only made sense because of my own ignorance of the larger truth. I've given into spite and lashing out out of pessimism and tried to justify it to myself. Part of why I see many of these people as reachable - not all of them, and certainly not in time for the next election at this point, but eventually reachable, is because I can see the path, however winding, that would have lead me to the same place, and the sort of paths that would take me back out. Because I have seen people who would hate who they ended up as go down that road and seen people who were gungho for Trump turn against him, in my personal life. Hell, a decent portion of Trump voters are folks who fifteen years ago would never have supported a Republican (or any politician, for many of them) who have been convinced to fall in line. I know it's possible. Even if it is only possible, realistically for even 10% of them over the next fifteen years... a 5% swing from Republican to Democrat is actually absolutely loving massive, politically speaking. But yeah, I think it is worth, honestly and sincerely, looking inwards and figuring out "What would it take for me to vote for Trump?" even if that scenario is vanishingly unlikely - if nothing else, it might help you become more aware of how some future Republican would be tyrant might appeal to friends and family that aren't yet on board and pull them over to the other side, and let you do something to stop it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:50
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Bunch of people including a 15 yo shot up a Ramadan prayer group in Philly Also in Philly, there have been a rash of meat truck hijackings lately. While I'm sure the robbers take some pork for themselves, what kind of market is there for stolen bacon?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:52
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Also in Philly, there have been a rash of meat truck hijackings lately. While I'm sure the robbers take some pork for themselves, what kind of market is there for stolen bacon? Me. I am the stolen bacon market
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 22:57
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Also in Philly, there have been a rash of meat truck hijackings lately. While I'm sure the robbers take some pork for themselves, what kind of market is there for stolen bacon? Probably a lot of street vendors and small grocery stores that don't ask questions about the source of their cheap bacon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:00
|
|
|
That sounds like the plot of an always sunny episode.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:05
|
|
|
In some places they portion it out into car trunks, then drive around going door to door asking folks if they want to buy meat. The cold chain on it is extremely questionable at best.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:08
|
|
|
Bar Ran Dun posted:In some places they portion it out into car trunks, then drive around going door to door asking folks if they want to buy meat. The cold chain was what I was mainly wondering about. I figured they would sell in bulk just to move it quicker, but that would require a giant rear end freezer they probably don't have. I guess lots of travel coolers it is then Alternately, mob run meatpacking fronts are back in business baby
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:12
|
|
|
Stolen meat is the only ethical meat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:14
|
|
|
All meat is stolen, if you think about it
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:27
|
|
|
Cimber posted:So now that Alabama is joining Ohio in moaning about the DNC convention date being past the cut off date for ballot access I have to wonder, who chooses the convention date first? The GOP this year because they are not the party holding the White House so they go first, or does the DNC pick their date first and force the GOP to pick a date before that? reorganizing it is a big annoying hassle, mostly for travel plans and expenses, but that's about the extent of it sucks for the poorer national delegates e: on the plus side the sooner they change it, the fewer state conventions have actually selected their national delegates. Get on it, guys Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Apr 10, 2024 |
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:34
|
|
|
Zapp Brannigan posted:The party that holds the White House by tradition holds their convention last. Which surprises me that the MAGA RNC hasn't changed theirs just to buck tradition. I think the dynamic here is that the incumbent party wants the later convention so that they have more momentum going into the final stretch of the campaign (conventions produce a polling boost) and the non-incumbent party needs an earlier convention because the convention is an essential part of unifying the party around the nominee.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 12:09 |
|
|
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4585718-fisa-702-spy-powers-rule-vote/quote:Group of Republicans blocks FISA bill with spy powers deadline looming Idiots causing chaos get it right for once
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2024 23:58
|
|
