jj4211
@jj4211@lemmy.world
- Comment on I Quit 1 day ago:
AI because its dumber than them and useless.
I am much better at washing dishes by hand than my dishwasher. I still mostly let my dishwasher have a crack at things to spare me from usually having to bother.
It’s a bit trickier with AI, as it’s more obnoxiously screwing up when it screws up, but at least upon occasion it’s able to spit out a few mind numbingly lines of code that would have taken me longer to type myself.
- Comment on Simpler times? 3 days ago:
I didn’t suggest that people who are abused tend to go down this path, I’m saying of those that abuse others, they themselves were likely abused.
I don’t know the percentage, but hypothetically if 2% of people abused go on to abuse others, this would be true without even saying anything about 98% of abused people.
- Comment on Simpler times? 3 days ago:
Abusers often are “paying forward” abuse they suffered.
- Comment on Why do companies always need to grow? 5 days ago:
Note that even if by all practical terms a business isn’t growing, then it’s still growing.
Part of the whole deal is that there’s an intent for the money supply to change for a roughly 2% inflation. In an oversimplified sense, the idea self be that everything gets 2% more expensive, everyone gets 2% raises, and investments at least generate 2% returns.
We’ve basically decided that we need to trick ourselves into feeling progress by making “standing still” look like growth. So if someone had flat income year over year, they actually lost in real terms.
- Comment on Spokesperson 5 days ago:
Like I’m going to look it up. Feel like he went MAGAing recently and I haven’t heard he died, so I’m guessing he is still kicking.
What would shock me is if someone pointed out a MAGA celebrity that has actually been relevent in the last 20 years, other than as a MAGA personality. Only one I can think of is Kanye West, but he clearly went deep off the end of crazy very publicly.
- Comment on Spokesperson 1 week ago:
Pretty much all of the NAGA celebs are “people who you hadn’t thought about for least 20 years who are bitter no one cares about them anymore”
- Comment on It's official: EA is going private. 1 week ago:
If it’s gone public, then generally going private is a bad thing. It’s usually some investors that are going to do something bad with the company.
A company that starts and stays private may be all the better for it (but that’s hardly assured either). If they are a success and didn’t bring a lot of investors, then it generally means they actually care about the work intrinsically.
- Comment on 1919 (correctly) 1 week ago:
Can’t speak to the ‘or whatever’ as there may be things I know that are truly urgently needed, but blood type isn’t really an example of a phone type emergency.
Ambulances frequently don’t even carry blood, and when they do, they usually have a small amount of O blood. The question of blood type doesn’t even come into play. Similarly at the hospital, while they may prefer to match blood type, they will use O blood at least in the short term, with a blood typing test being a matter of a couple of minutes to get the information directly instead of relying on pulling up and using the emergency contact information. This is assuming their medical record doesn’t just already have the information.
As said, I try to be available, but it’s largely ruined by the volume of bullshit calls making it impossible to be at the beck and call of any random caller while also living a vaguely sane lifestyle. So I’ll usually send to voicemail unless it’s someone I actually recognize that I know will only call over an urgent matter.
- Comment on 1919 (correctly) 1 week ago:
If it’s an actual emergency, call 911.
If it doesn’t need 911, society needs to accept that people are sometimes just not immediately available and be accommodating.
I will answer my phone if one of a handful of people call me if at all possible, but sometimes it just isn’t in the cards. It’s convenient to take care of seemingly urgent matters that way, but it’s not the end of the world if it has to wait a bit for someone to be actually available.
The world survived for centuries without the ability to immediately get a hold of everyone at a moment’s notice.
- Comment on 1919 (correctly) 1 week ago:
It really depends case by case.
If back and forth starts going, then it’s time for a call.
However text first to establish:
- Is it shorter to take care of in text. Particularly if one party of the conversation tends to be needlessly verbose, text can be a godsend to let you skim their BS and cut to the chase.
- If there has to be a conversation, when would be a good time.
- Comment on American media is freaking about homicides on transit 1 week ago:
No, he’s just saying deaths are big, but even bigger disparity is seen if you include non-fatal incidents.
- Comment on N. 5 2 weeks ago:
Johnny Five?
- Comment on Oh Jesus he is cooked 2 weeks ago:
Ironically enough, this shows how Kirk was actually at least somewhat better than most of the right wing pundits.
He would actually allow others to have the mic. He actually lets the dude speak. If not for that, you couldn’t have a video of him being made to look the fool.
Most of them will refuse to interact, shouting down questions, trying to cut off counterpoints, only interacting via one-way streams and speeches. Generally cowardly refusing to vaguely risk a difficult talking point arise.
He said vile things, but he at least let others speak. And now the right wing is on a crusade to try to suppress any voice that would have stood against, rather than letting them speak.
- Comment on I Got This Right, Right? 3 weeks ago:
Think that’s a fair assessment. On the one hand we are more connected than ever and sentiment travels fast and echo chambers let dangerous extremist thought fester. On the other hand, Germans were experiencing just a much worse actual living situation.
- Comment on I Got This Right, Right? 3 weeks ago:
I’d even say all indications are that his leanings don’t matter in the specifics of this event.
It’s probably more informative that folks can credibly have theories for either leaning to lead to this event. Lots of reasons that could believably drive any political leaning over the edge if they are close.
- Comment on I Got This Right, Right? 3 weeks ago:
I will point out one thing that should be obvious, the shooter was only 22. So it’s possible he doesn’t have a very baked and stable political ideology. I knew a hard core outwardly homophobic conservative at 17 who came out as gay and did theater by 20. I knew a fairly liberal person when she was about 18 that over the years got to a place where she publicly praised Trump and called COVID a hoax and the vaccine a conspiracy. No idea how that happened, even as I saw it first hand.
Given the situation, it is at least clear he was unhinged if he would get to this point, either way. I would have hoped this would be a lesson for people that people get dangerously moved by angry rhetoric, but a lot of folks are ramping up rhetoric instead.
- Comment on Happy Birthday! 3 weeks ago:
Right, but it says “Mario”, and that was not the first game that featured the character.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 3 weeks ago:
Of all the people I was worried about materially contributing to the mess, Charlie Kirk was pretty low on the list.
He said vile stuff, but he was not himself a wielder of power. His rhetoric and words had power, he did not. His death in this manner has given strength to that rhetoric and those words without removing any of his meaningful influence to the system.
Better that these folks suffer the fear of what they court, to have their own MAGA fanatics turn against them with violence that scares them, but leaves them largely intact to have them retreat from their position without becoming martyrs.
Now if some folks actively wielding the power in harmful ways meet some ends, I might have a little less mixed feelings about it.
I will confess to perhaps not celebrating, but appreciating the connection between his sociopathic stance on gun deaths and he himself joining a group he himself said we shouldn’t be so concerned about.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, worried about this and the punishment doesn’t fit the crime, and too much room for his death to be weaponized, like you say.
Would have much rather him taken a few to the vest from a handgun from a pissed off obviously MAGA person. Give him some pain and a good scare to have him realize personally just how risky the hornet’s nest is that he is stirring. Something that might be a close enough call for others to see without becoming a rallying cry and a clear link to the violence of the rhetoric without a chance to blame ‘the other’.
- Comment on Posting for the "Now guys he was MURDERED! Don't celebrate!" Crowd 3 weeks ago:
I will have empathy
How dare you dishonor his memory.
- Comment on DEI, more like DIED 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, without knowing context, you might think it’s someone admitting that we need gun control, but no, his point was that we shouldn’t care about the gun deaths so much…
- Comment on Related: https://lemmy.wtf/comment/16937362 4 weeks ago:
To be fair, he probably was constantly being cursed/hexed by someone or another.
- Comment on A conundrum 4 weeks ago:
So back when I rented, it was only two landlords and only three years and it was fine, so I was spared the slumlord experience. In fact, my second landlords were a very nice couple, and when I got laid off they actually waived that months rent to help me get sorted.
However those slumlords do exist, trying to evict in face of rent controls, being stingy with maintenance. They however still may be cheaper than a 30 year mortgage, especially if they have no tenant. A tenant might face an aggressive rate hike with the landlord betting they don’t want to move out, losing the price advantage relatively quickly. Ultimately if a residence is empty, the owner is aware the tenants are likely cross shopping properties they could mortgage instead, so they have to be somewhat competitive then. So they are very happy when the real estate market holes prices because they can extract higher rents from the property they aren’t having to buy in current market conditions. They aren’t saints and may treat their tenants like crap, but they are subject to price competition, depending on the market they are in.
- Comment on Time to bash Americans again 4 weeks ago:
Maybe they needed the more affordable healthcare?
- Comment on A conundrum 4 weeks ago:
If the landlord has a 10-year mortgage they just took out, the rental market wouldn’t cover that, because that landlord is competing with comparable properties that didn’t choose that amount. They are also competing with people that bought the property a decade ago and don’t have the same mortgage burden. They are also competing with some that even considers their accumulation of equity a component of their wealth and wouldn’t mind being mildly underwater early in their loan for the long term advantage.
At least in my area, the way the real estate market has worked out is that renting is about 10-15% lower than monthly expense for a 30-year purchase after 20% downpayment. If the real estate bubble pops, that will probably flip back around, but for now, the renters are getting a discount for short term, which in my opinion is the way it should be, renters getting a bit of a break for their equity disadvantage. In a sane market, the renter gets a cheaper payment that makes financial sense for 2-3 years in a property rather than being forced to rent by an owner class making new ownership impossible.
- Comment on A conundrum 4 weeks ago:
I think the point is that properties on market are, as a rule, not very recently purchased with a 30-year mortgage. So the monthly cost now required to cover the owners costs may be based on financial conditions from 6 years ago. If the rental market has a lot of properties that have been held a while but house values have rocketed, then you have a critical mass of owners willing and ready to out-compete brand new mortgage rates even if they ignore their equity advantage.
In my area, that’s what we see, real estate prices are dramatically up as are interest rates, so mortgage cost to acquire is a fair amount above the going rate to rent comparable properties. Someone getting a 30 year mortgage to rent out a property would be underwater for very many years in the current market conditions around my area, as they have to compete with more aggressive owners that have had their properties for many years.
- Comment on A conundrum 4 weeks ago:
Actually, not necessarily.
In my local market, a house that would be about $2700/month in mortgage/insurance/taxes on a 30 year term after a huge downpayment would rent for about $2400/month right now.
There are some owners that in fact do count the equity, so they are willing to buy higher and be upside down compared to what a mortgage could be. The recognize the rent is only part of the income, that the property value going up is a potential gain to cash in that’s worth a few hundred a month to ‘deposit’.
Especially if the owners can pay cash and not incur the interest associated with a mortgage. It’s a bit of an odd choice right now as just letting the cash sit in a savings account offers competitive ROI with the current interest rates, but you’ve got a lot of property bought under previous conditions.
This only holds for relatively short term though, you’d expect rent hikes to go to $3000/month within a time period where that ownership monthly payment might only go up to $2800/month due to taxes and insurance rates. So 10 years into living somewhere you are now paying more to rent it than you would be if you had purchased comparable, even ignoring the equity part of the equation. If you include equity, then you better be planning to get out in 2 or 3 years at the most if you are embarking on renting, otherwise it’s much much better to buy even with higher mortgage payment, since you can cash in on the equity if you need to, eventually.
I’d say this is a relatively sane fiscal model of renting, that you need to give the renters a discount reflecting their lack of equity. I’m kind of glad to see rental rates being below mortgage rates in my area right now. That said, it wasn’t too long ago that rental rates in my area were higher than what mortgage could be, but large companies bought up housing stock and made it supremely difficult to actually buy as a private party. With the interest rates jacked up, those companies are cooling it a bit since they don’t have access to ‘free money’ anymore.
- Comment on A conundrum 4 weeks ago:
While renting in some markets can be cheaper than typical mortgage for comparable homes, the amount indicated seems a bit insane.
So either he is in a crazy real estate market, or there’s some additional context that makes it a poor comparison (going from renting in Virgina to Mortgage in San Francisco, going from a 1500 qt ft townhouse to a 3000 sq ft detached house with a quarter acre of land, or going for a 10-year mortgage). Or he’s just making it up or exaggerating because it’s the internet.
Interestingly enough that $4500 is pretty much exactly what it would be with 20% down on a $500,000 house for a 10-year mortgage. Of course, I’d expect such a house to rent for about $2700 rather than $1900. I could easily imagine he was renting a 2000 square foot 3 bedroom for $1900 and moving to what seems ‘slightly better’ 3000 square foot 3 bedroom with an extra special room or something, seeing that the 10-year mortgage is much cheaper in the long haul and going for it despite the huge monthly payment in the short term.
- Comment on Reddit lost it 4 weeks ago:
Probably why when Microsoft wanted to take another go at a “smart assistant”, they went with Cortana…
- Comment on A conundrum 4 weeks ago:
It depends on the market. Around here is similar, the market rental rate for a house is lower than what even the most lowest realistic monthly mortgage payment would be, but only by about 10% or so. I don’t know if you also dramatically upgraded your home quality.
Not too long ago around here it was the same as the post, renting higher than mortgage.
Even then over long term, the mortgage would make sense, since you can sell and get back some of the money and your principal and interest won’t magically get bigger because of market conditions.
In a sane world renting should be a touch cheaper than mortgage over the first few years, with tenants that only plan to be there 2 or three years. The owner gets a little income while taxes and insurance get paid and their asset maintained, and the tenant gets an easier and cheaper house to move in and out of for a short term living arrangement. Problem being when the market is upside down and when tenants are stuck never being able to build equity.