prev <-> next
[2026-11-12 22:00:24] - paul: "staff [will] complete an assisted identity verification process". people ask you for an id, and you assume it's required? ~a
[2026-11-12 21:59:01] - paul: i'm curious why you think it's easy to get a government issued photo id. you keep coming up with seemingly innocuous things where people have asked you for an id, but not all county school systems require an id, in fact YOUR county school system doesn't require an id. ~a
[2026-11-12 21:03:20] - paul: i refuse to address your original analogy because it's not an issue you consider important. or want to talk about?
i'll address your original analogy. if people *truly* don't care about what pizza we order, they won't go to the polling booth. this isn't australia. you know i've never argued more people voting was a good thing. i've only argued that voting is so important that it needs to be easy for poor and rich alike. ~a[2026-11-12 17:44:21] - a: Like, it feels like everybody is all "rah rah" democracy now a few days after their team won bigly, but was everybody just as jazzed about democracy in 2024 and 2016? -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:41:49] - a: I'm curious what you think of my original analogy, though, since you didn't really address it. Doesn't it make sense on some level that encouraging everybody to vote no matter how uninformed or dispassionate they are about something might not yield ideal results? -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:39:30] - To extend my pizza analogy, if one friend is wearing a fancy suit and suggests we all eat poop pizza and everybody agrees because the friend is dressed nicely. Whose fault is that? -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:38:45] - And even if we assume that there's significant causation... it still ultimately comes down to voters, right? Voters could choose not to be swayed by money. Shouldn't some fingers be pointed at voters? -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:37:39] - Back to the money thing: I don't doubt that higher funded candidate win a higher percentage of races, but wouldn't it follow that more popular candidates get more funding? How much is causation and how much is correlation? -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:35:09] - One more example I thought of that I realize those without kids might not even know: I need to present my ID every time I want to go to my kids' school or even just volunteer for a field trip. -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:34:28] - pierce: "why would your apathy be confused for opinion, to people who know you?" It's apathy about what THEY want to argue about. I do have opinions on related things (like how I don't think it's completely unreasonable to require an ID for voting). -Paul
[2026-11-12 17:33:00] - a: "that the person with the most money gets to decide which pizza we order?" Does it? I feel like we have more examples of it NOT working than it working. Either way I feel like it's an imperfect analogy because even if it's true the fault lies with voters for being swayed by money. -Paul
[2026-11-12 13:16:41] - hal 9000 is a very interesting costume, and i love it. did you sing the song? my memory was that you hated that movie. ~a
[2026-11-12 13:15:08] - pierce: i won't speak for miguel, but i think you misunderstood his take. it's not that money in advertising (and political advertising) is a placebo, it's that money in advertising (and political advertising) will affect results, and that it is not a bad thing. (i have my reservations of course: there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. citizens united v. fec creates some problems, and i hope it is overturned) ~a
[2026-11-12 06:50:31] - mig: "how it's supposed to work" is up to us... Tesla's stock value or the specific ink used to print Ben Franklin's face on a piece of paper are neither fundamental forces of physics nor intrinsic to human nature. - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:42:35] - I was HAL 9000 for Halloween this year, so depending on procrastination I might just swap lettering and make it HAL 9001 next year. I hope to come up with something more creative, though. - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:35:36] - sometimes money doesn't serve all of the desired outcomes, and in specific situations of embarrassingly opulent and callous donations it can backfire (hence efforts to obscure the sources). but those failures are notable because they're uncommon. - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:28:43] - mig: "money in politics is a fake issue" is genuinely an incredible take. I'm stopping short of saying money is everything, obviously, but your statement is functionally equivalent to saying the advertising industry is fully a placebo. people aren't affected by the (literal and figurative) volume of messages? almost every "fact" we know (correct or not) was shared with us. sharing costs resources. money can spread "facts". - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:28:19] - (this was not a case of double-backwards-triple-secret-probation phrasing... the simple text of the measure was clear that future ballot measures should be at an eighth-grade reading level. the insidiousness was in the ambiguity: it doesn't say how to decide that, and therefore sets up a system where well-funded groups can drown any ballot text they don't like in legal challenges) - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:27:30] - paul: regarding the political alignment of the "make ballots simpler" proposal, you guessed incorrectly. it was by a conservative group, Advance Colorado, who were also responsible for half our fourteen statewide ballot measures (including quite a banger, a consitutional right to purchase natural gas, which fortunately failed). we don't have to pretend to be stupider than we are, their purpose was not simplifying ballots. - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:26:44] - (I think I might coin "Arrow's Inevitability Theorem" for the possibility that our election debates will never be resolved and nevertheless they persist) - pierce
[2026-11-12 06:26:18] - paul: introspection is important. I'll admit that my offhand mea culpa about "diving in antagonistically" was glib, and you weren't totally wrong about the accusation about my "drive-by" participation (I mean that. It's not just as a setup to the following). If people have been debating with you for years about something you don't care about, why might that be? why would your apathy be confused for opinion, to people who know you? - pierce
[2026-11-08 01:34:45] - what are all you guys doing for halloween. it falls on a sunday this year so everybody can't stay up all night long partying if they have classes the next day.
[2026-11-07 19:48:22] - paul: do you feel the same way? ~a
[2026-11-07 16:41:03] - at the end of the day, voters pull the lever on their own accord, and if Musk's megaphone does convince them to vote his way, that's how it's supposed to work. - mig
[2026-11-07 16:34:58] - a: no matter how much money he spends the bad tesla man cannot compel or coerce or mindtrick anyone into voting the way he would prefer them to."money in politics" is a fake issue. - mig
[2026-11-06 19:50:56] - paul: now that we've put that to bed (that you can't get worked up about changing the rules for voter id) can we focus on the much larger problem that we do all care about? that the person with the most money gets to decide which pizza we order? sure it doesn't always work obviously (see how much money the motorcar robber baron and cosmonaut spent trying to get us to order a hamberder pizza), but it works more often than it doesn't. ~a
[2026-11-06 16:48:02] - pierce: "I also don't think you should intrinsically need ID to check into a hotel." Right, it wouldn't be my first choice to require an ID for all of these different things. But given that we already DO for things that seemingly are much less important, then I just can't get that worked up over requiring it for voting. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:46:01] - pierce: "Shall the commonwealth remove a ban which prohibited banning the idea that gay marriage is only between a man and a woman?" Uh.... what? -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:45:12] - pierce: "I'm also curious what partisan alignment you would assume was behind that initiative" I would assume Democrat. I'm not against the idea. I can't tell you the number of ballot initiatives I've seen with double and triple negatives that I have trouble sussing out what it means. -paul
[2026-11-06 16:43:48] - If people want to vote, then by all means vote. I'm not suggesting we stop anybody. I just think that we get the best outcomes when a high percentage of voters are informed and I don't think we get better outcomes when low information voters who don't have strong opinions vote. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:42:01] - Because in terms of pure representation, it would be pepperoni. But I think most reasonable people could look at that and say maybe because the majority don't know about the pepperoni allergy and vegetarianism and don't strongly care, we can just do cheese? -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:40:44] - pierce: "if you believe in representation" I believe in representation for those who care. If 5 friends are ordering pizza and one person is a strict vegetarian and one has a pepperoni allergy and the other 3 are like, "meh, I don't really care, I guess pepperoni?"... what's the ideal outcome there? -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:38:03] - pierce: In fact, it's kind of crazy that we on the message board have been going back and forth for so long about this considering my not very strong feelings on the need for legislation for it. I don't think there are epidemics of voter fraud which need to be fixed. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:37:00] - pierce: "again, the amount of personal voter fraud you can do in the current system is negligible" Yes, and I've agreed with that multiple times. I've also mentioned a few times that this whole thing is hardly a priority to me. It likely wouldn't make a top 100 of things a President Paul would be trying to do. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:29:13] - a: To the point where the (at the time) third place finisher had a teary speech that many people took as a concession speech before she got a hugely outsized percentage of the remaining vote to pull into second. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:28:30] - a: "this is evidence of voter irregularities?" I'm not saying there was fraud, but you don't think the way that election played out was pretty irregular? Not only did it take days to count all the votes but the same day voting results were drastically different from what got counted afterwards. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:24:40] - a: "he does know we're all gonna rename this shit back the second he's gone, right?" Politicians on both sides seem to be constantly operating under the delusion that the other side will never get into power again and use the same tools (executive orders, etc) to completely undo everything. -Paul
[2026-11-06 16:23:37] - a: "would these be a compromise you would accept?" Sure. Virginia's requirements have always felt completely acceptable to me. Presenting my driver's license is something I do multiple times a month (maybe even a week sometimes) so to require it for voting seems like a nothing-burger to me. -Paul
[2026-11-06 07:02:07] - (my ID photo was described as "a lego man" and I'll never unsee it) - pierce
[2026-11-06 07:01:03] - regarding data centers... I had to show up in person to register to vote, so when the data center shows up at the DMV and waits in line and gets an ID with an embarrassing photo of it, then it can have one vote like I do. 🙃 - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:51:54] - I also don't think you should intrinsically need ID to check into a hotel. Also, when travelling internationally you often have to give the hotel your passport to keep while you're staying there. Don't worry, surely no one in the hotel would abuse their access and no one outside the hotel would demand that ID. Well, they wouldn't demand it of me. - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:47:26] - paul: finally, I wonder how those answers align with the institutional motivations about deciding who is a "no-information" voter. I think a lot of our current predicaments are related to bad information for voters, but I think more of them are related to removing their access to voting, while pretending the powerful aren't actively/passively/reactively "low information" themselves, just with a lot more influence - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:46:59] - paul: (I'm also curious what partisan alignment you would assume was behind that initiative) - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:46:45] - paul: we just had a ballot amendment here to amend the CO constitution to say all ballot titles should be written at an eighth-grade reading level. curious what you think about that, because it's simultaneously proposing that one shouldn't have to be too smart to understand what you're voting for, and also creating an ambiguous situation where you have to dumb things down (with unclear requirements) to get something on the ballot. - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:46:30] - paul: if you believe in representation, then paranoid proven non-issues like in-person voter fraud should be recognized for what they are: ways to distract from the inconveniences we've put in place for other things like having to pay for ID (or, you know, have a permanent residence) - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:46:10] - paul: again, the amount of personal voter fraud you can do in the current system is negligible, borne out by the fact that there's almost none of it and its often by accident and never usefully affects outcomes. you had to register to vote, that proved you exist. you move and vote in both states? that was a lot of expense for one fraudulent vote with a potential felony charge, so it doesn't meaningfully happen. - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:45:50] - paul: different systems require different levels of verification and they need that verification at different times. the question is always, "what is the actual risk profile?" - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:45:34] - paul: on other points... "I have fingerprint unlock on my house. if I need a fingerprint to get into my house, why don't I need a fingerprint to vote?" "I need to be this tall to ride a rollercoaster, why don't I need to be this tall to vote?"... - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:44:44] - paul: correct me if I'm wrong because it'll save us both a lot of time, but voting is to make a large group somehow represent the beliefs and interests of its people. those people are often dumb, misinformed, etc… but so are the leaders in non-democratic systems. If we enfranchised all residents (children, felons, etc) of the U.S. I think it'd cause less skew in representation than one Andreessen or Thiel in our system. - pierce
[2026-11-06 06:44:20] - paul: s/dis/extremely /; I am extremely ingenuous. - pierce
[2026-11-05 21:04:38] - paul: whenever i google "los angeles mayoral race vote irregularities" i seem to get nothing but articles about how trump's own justice department debunked the claims you're referring to. this is evidence of voter irregularities? because i don't give two shits about a false perception of voter irregularities. ~a
[2026-11-05 18:07:34] - seems that republicans are fine saying they lost because of iran. and want to make pete hegseth the fall-guy. i'm totally fine with that, but everybody knows that pete hegseth isn't in the epstein files. they're making him the fall guy when we aren't in iran because of him, we're in iran because of trump and epstein. ~a
[2026-11-05 14:17:32] - i heard the other night, that trump was thinking of renaming the reflecting pool to the trump pool, and he tried to rename the atlantic ocean to trump ocean on google maps. he does know we're all gonna rename this shit back the second he's gone, right? ~a
[2026-11-05 13:57:43] - paul: i do wonder how someone without an id checks into a hotel. there's probably a proceedure for that. i did check into a hotel recently without an id, and it was an ordeal, but they did let me check in. are these rules acceptable to you? would these be a compromise you would accept? ~a
[2026-11-05 13:56:40] - paul: "I JUST think it's not completely unreasonable to require some kind of ID when voting" hmm, i don't think i heard you say that explicitly. in general i agree with this. i WOULD prefer no id, but you're getting really close to the virginia laws for what constitutes a normal voting procedure. a fine compromise is "some kind of ID". ~a
[2026-11-05 13:49:43] - pierce: "get some debate-y schadenfreude on an energizing night". i'll be the first to say it, the message board is dead. no more debate here. everybody seems to have left except paul, miguel, and andrew. the thousands of times i come here to see no posts has started to depress me. sometimes i think it's just me being emotional then i go and look at the post counts. ~a
[2026-11-05 13:45:44] - boing: long time no see. i agree james carville is pretty dumb and we probably shouldn't care what he has to say. that being said, i'm not sure what haley stevens's deal is either. why do we care what she has to say? and why does her story keep changing? ~a
[2026-11-05 12:17:52] - Also, I just ran into another super benign scenario which apparently requires that I present a photo ID: Checking into a hotel. Hard to argue that's a life threatening activity like buying cough syrup is. -Paul
[2026-11-04 20:03:27] - So, in theory, I think there is some room to consider some actions (like increased restrictions on certain types of ballot harvesting or ID requirements) that could be discussed as a reasonable compromise. -Paul
[2026-11-04 20:00:52] - And I think that some of the legal activities along those lines like certain types of ballot harvesting can lead to visuals that look really suspicious to people (like what happened in the Los Angeles mayoral race). -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:57:55] - What I am saying is that I think this general idea that as many as people should vote as possible and any restrictions on that is a travesty seems counter-productive to a well functioning Democracy. -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:56:20] - I'm not saying we should pass laws charging fees to vote or requiring dubious literacy laws to vote. I acknowledge that in-person voting fraud is incredibly rare and about as unlikely to swing an election as any one individual's vote is. -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:55:10] - I feel like I've been stressing this non-stop but perhaps I need to say it again: I'm not expressing support for any particular piece of legislation. I don't know enough about the Save American Act or why it requires Real ID. -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:45:50] - Pierce: And then immediately saying that it's not a serious proposal but a thought exercise... If you think that's the same thing as wanting to go back to Jim Crow laws then I question your reading comprehension. -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:45:05] - Pierce: If you really think that me mocking a question about poll taxes as a troll attempt, then suggesting as a theory that people should at least be able to articulate ONE thing on the ballot before voting... -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:42:36] - pierce: Ah, yes, I missed your drive-by disingenuous interpretations of other's people's positions to make them maximally sound like some sort of historical evil. -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:37:59] - a: "data centers are a huge form of corporate welfare" Huh. I don't think I've ever heard this angle before. How are they corporate welfare? -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:34:34] - a: "you wanna require a real id to vote today" No, I don't. You keep saying this and I keep telling you I don't care about the Save America Act or Real ID. I JUST think it's not completely unreasonable to require some kind of ID when voting. -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:33:12] - a: "your arguments do tread close to being in favor jim crow laws" Because I think it's not completely out of the question to try to secure voting to the same degree as cough syrup? -Paul
[2026-11-04 19:30:36] - a: "i've been consistent that your metaphor sucks. i said why it sucks. and you keep using it?" Because I disagree that it sucks? I've been consistent that your position sucks yet you keep holding it.
-Paul[2026-11-04 07:54:27] - [also, I do actually miss y'all. I am sorry to dive in antagonistically, even though debate schadenfreude has been a big part of my history here] - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:52:54] - paul: any residual libertarian tendencies in you should fully resist any version of "others should decide if you're qualified to vote". they already figured out you were a real person when you registered, it's impractical to do fraud other than that. "are you educated enough?" is just the suffrage version of undefined behavior in C. - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:52:25] - a: your analogy to poll taxes and literacy tests was apt, to put it mildly. - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:52:16] - like, imagine showing up at a polling place trying to commit fraud by pretending to be another voter, but it turns out they already voted. what is the actual interaction, and how does the polling place respond? okay, so maybe that guy was a weirdo, but then it happens four times? they're fucking calling the cops and the whole conspiracy falls apart. - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:51:48] - also, please play out the logistics of swinging any major election with personal voter fraud. this is not a heist movie, we're registered voters, they're not going to kill us and wear our faces to the polling stations. any real-life fraud falls apart quickly or is useless. corrupting the count or doing frivolous legal challenges is way simpler and more effective than doing rando false votes (with potential felony charges) - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:50:59] - [btw I can't pretend otherwise, I'm here because I was either hoping to see communal joy or get some debate-y schadenfreude on an energizing night] - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:50:42] - make it illegal in the future (somehow), great. the ethics can't only apply to one side. - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:49:47] - picking on the ballot (literally) between "Sullivan, Daniel J. Jr." and "Sullivan, Dan S. (Registered Republican) Incumbent" on a ranked choice ballot where you want Dan Sullivan to win is actually not, like, a real problem for representation. Shady and gross but also ineffectual and backfiring? - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:49:22] - meanwhile, I remembered (but did have to refresh myself) about the 2020 election when the republican won a FL state senate seat by 32 votes after recruiting his friend (according to the NYT) with the same last name as his opponent. - pierce
[2026-11-04 07:49:14] - giving james carville a huffpo interview as if he's a representative voice for modern democrats is at least a misdemeanor. - pierce
[2026-11-03 18:28:18] - https://www.huffpost.com/entry/james-carville-response-to-stevens_n_6ae861e2e4b0ac29e447d60f/amp jeez there is really no greater crime against humanity than a woman or minority not standing with democrats. - mig
[2026-10-29 17:25:23] - ah yeah i do vaguely remember this now. dummies. ~a
[2026-10-29 17:09:03] - tldr: dan sullivan is a R senator running for reelection in alaska. During the primary another person named Dan Sullivan decided to run as well ending up on the ballot. There were some suspicions that Peltola’s campaign was behind the 2nd Dan Sullivan but there was no proof until now apparently. - mig
[2026-10-29 17:06:13] - https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2026/10/29/congress/house-probes-alaska-senate-race-01140772 - mig
[2026-10-29 17:01:22] - mig: paywall. i've never heard of this person, do you have another link? ~a
[2026-10-29 02:44:24] - https://www.cnn.com/2026/10/28/politics/dan-sullivan-alaska-senate-democrats I think most suspected this Dan Sullivan guy was a democrat plant but amazing the Peltola campaign actually left a trail linking themselves to him. - mig
[2026-10-28 22:44:49] - "planned triumphal arch must be built because it will help defend Washington from drones and other threats" ~a
[2026-10-22 17:18:11] - (i updated the version of php the message board was using, yesterday around this time, if anybody was worried) ~a
[2026-10-22 16:27:48] - mig: good with some exceptions ~a
[2026-10-22 14:00:08] - a: I think we can agree on data centers good, but special treatment for them bad. - mig
[2026-10-22 01:38:02] - paul: data centers are a huge form of corporate welfare. i feel that is the angle that you'd potentially agree on. on the other hand, i think non-ai data centers are good for the world, assuming there's no (or low) corporate welfare involved. ~a
[2026-10-22 01:34:29] - paul: "I really don't think Democracy is improved much by encouraging no-information voters to vote." me neither. i would never do that. hopefully you know i would never encourage people to vote just to vote. "vote or die" is a pretty funny notion, but i also think it's dumb and actually kinda dangerous. ~a
[2026-10-22 01:28:16] - paul: "are you willing to admit that this is just a blatant troll attempt?" yes. that was a troll. i almost mentioned jim crow laws and decided to leave it out. your arguments do tread close to being in favor jim crow laws (and literacy tests / poll taxes specifically). you wanna require a real id to vote today, and i don't know why. can you tell me why? if in person voter fraud without a realid isn't an issue why are you for this? ~a
[2026-10-22 01:26:27] - paul: "flying or buying cough medicine or alcohol" i've been consistent that your metaphor sucks. i said why it sucks. and you keep using it? ~a
[2026-10-22 01:21:56] - paul: i don't care about maximizing the number of people who vote. i care about making it easiest for the people who are most hurt by our system to vote. i also care about election integrity: but i'll keep saying it: in person election fraud doesn't exist. election integrity isn't a problem with non-voter-id laws. you CAN make it easy for the people most hurt by our system to vote without hurting our election integrity. you CAN. ~a
[2026-10-21 23:36:32] - a: What's your opinion on data centers? -Paul
[2026-10-21 23:35:29] - a: Am I serious? Not really. I don't think it's worth the hassle. But I kind of like the idea in theory. I really don't think Democracy is improved much by encouraging no-information voters to vote. -Paul
[2026-10-21 23:34:33] - a: Like, if you are going to vote and don't even know a single candidate or issue... What are you doing? Just going to vote straight ticket without knowing anything at all about the options? -Paul
[2026-10-21 23:33:44] - a: "poll tax or a literacy test" Poll tax? I don't see any reason for that. I don't know about a literacy test (are you willing to admit that this is just a blatant troll attempt?), but let me throw another idea back at you: Require voters to be able to name a single thing they are going to be voting on. -Paul
[2026-10-21 23:31:47] - a: That I don't think it's so completely unreasonable to consider requiring one for voting. Do I think it's a national emergency that we need to enact right now? No. But I think it's a more reasonable trade-off than most other times we're required to provide ID. -Paul
[2026-10-21 23:30:20] - a: I think I've been pretty consistent that I don't know much about (or care much about) the Save Act. My point has always been that in a world where we accept the (pretty minor) inconvenience of showing an ID for flying or buying cough medicine or alcohol or visiting your kid's school for a meeting with their teachers... -Paul
[2026-10-21 23:27:16] - a: "there's zero inconsistency there" There's only zero inconsistency there if all you care about is maximizing the number of people who vote. If you care about election integrity at all then it's a big inconsistency. -Paul
[2026-10-17 12:28:10] - is trump supporting russia? it seems strange to me. we're literally attacking ourselves in iran so directly? ~a
[2026-10-15 13:29:42] - click on this video from the independent and go to 0:22. why is her eye visible above her hair? someone at the independent has added a face filter to her face? why? ~a
[2026-10-15 13:23:27] - i hope. ~a
[2026-10-15 13:22:19] - mig: i found this online, and thought of you. it is satire. ~a
[2026-10-14 21:07:44] - mig: it's kinda hard to know, right? regardless even if there's a small chance, or no chance, of impact, it seems pretty illegal and immoral? ~a
[2026-10-14 02:52:01] - I’ll amend with *significant* impact. - mig
[2026-10-14 02:49:00] - a: do we have any evidence russian bots actually have any impact on elections? - mig
[2026-10-13 14:29:11] - disinformation campaigns in the united states could be affected by ukranian bombing in russia right before the november elections. it's pretty crazy to me that we've finally reach the point that data centers are affecting the results of elections. when we were told about the internet in the 90s nobody ever said anything about this. ~a
[2026-10-13 00:09:30] - paul: i've been thinking about this and i have a question which i think might help get to the core of our disagreement. what are your thoughts on a poll tax or a literacy test when voting? ~a
[2026-10-12 21:42:54] - paul: the save act lets you use a passport, or a military id if it says your place of birth, or a real id if you live in one of those five states, or a government issued id that says your place of birth (lol), or a government issued id if you also bring your birth certificate (lol). ~a
[2026-10-12 21:30:00] - paul: "Why would my drivers license not suffice? I have a Real ID. Does that not work?" dude. i've told you five times. five times if this time counts twice: "'only five states issue Real IDs that indicate U.S. citizenship'. i wanna put this in caps-lock. maybe instead i'll just quote it again. 'only five states issue Real IDs that indicate U.S. citizenship'" ~a
[2026-10-12 21:27:17] - paul: you are exactly right. we want it both ways, and we need it both ways. and there's zero inconsistency there. in fact, it's important that we have it both ways. it's both important enough that anybody should be able to vote, and it's important enough that everybody should be able to vote. people who can't afford to buy alcohol, people who can't afford to buy expensive medicine, and people who can't afford to travel by plane. ~a
[2026-10-11 15:41:24] - a: "they demand a drivers license that you do not have and i do not have" I am not familiar with the intricacies of the save act. Why would my drivers license not suffice? I have a Real ID. Does that not work? -Paul
[2026-10-11 15:37:54] - a: But at the same time somehow voting is also no big deal and not as important as buying cough medicine, or alcohol, or getting on a plane... -Paul
[2026-10-11 15:37:10] - a: "who dies when someone illegally votes? well, nobody dies, but it sucks lots?" Right, I think you're trying to have it both ways. Somehow it's so important for everybody to vote that the very idea of any action making it slightly harder to vote is just completely a non-starter... -Paul
[2026-10-09 12:57:12] - paul: do you think it's fine that the same people who can't easily get a passport are the same people who are most disadvantaged by our current system? ~a
[2026-10-09 12:57:05] - paul: now let's add on the "save act" to all of this. the "save act" has voter id requirements that are unparalleled. they demand a drivers license that you do not have and i do not have. i have a military id that would work (and i assume you don't), and we both probably have passports that would work. do you think it's fine to require a passport to vote? ~a
[2026-10-09 12:56:58] - paul: the people who can't afford dextromethorphan, and buy the cheap stuff that doesn't require an id, and can't afford to buy an id, are the same people who you should be shedding a tear for. if you don't shed a tear for them i feel like you come across as heartless. ~a
[2026-10-09 12:56:48] - paul: who dies when someone illegally votes? well, nobody dies, but it sucks lots? we all die a bit. except! it *does not happen*. in person voter fraud does not exist in the US, with our non-voter-id systems in place. if nobody was being harmed by dextromethorphan then nobody would require an id for dextromethorphan. in other words your metaphor sucks: adding voter-id requirements helps nothing but hurts TONS. shed some tears! ~a
[2026-10-09 12:56:41] - paul: i have all of the tears to shed. you don't need an id to buy all cough medicine but i assume you mean dextromethorphan? a small fraction of the states require an id to purchase dextromethorphan. and many of those states only require an id if you look under 25. but also, there are reasons for those restrictions: the reasons are that kids die and are harmed by addiction. ~a
[2026-10-08 05:29:00] - a: "but our system can't take that into account" I know, and agree. If you want to vote then you absolutely should be able to. But I just don't have a lot of tears to shed for people who can't be bothered to do something that is required to buy cough medicine. I don't think our democratic process is necessarily improved by getting as many people as possible to vote. -Paul
[2026-10-06 06:28:44] - hell i'm not even sure if i like that only adult citizens can vote. if we're gonna ban kids, and resident aliens, and felons, we should ban old people, and racists too. i was talking to two of my friends over the weekend, when they both told me that neither of them were voting in this next election. because they weren't allowed to vote. i was like, what?! ~a
[2026-10-06 06:28:23] - paul: i think there's a difference, of course i do. anybody who doesn't vote the way i like has an invaluable vote. but seriously, i do definitely agree there's a difference. but our system can't take that into account. and shouldn't ever take that into account. if anything the system should prioritize the votes of the disadvantaged instead prioritizing the votes of the advantaged? if anything? ~a
[2026-10-05 16:52:26] - a: I kind of feel like that latter vote doesn't have the same value as the former. Do I know how to quantify it? No. Does it mean we should treat them differently? Not really. But I do think there is a difference. -Paul
[2026-10-05 16:51:36] - a: With somebody who never follows politics, couldn't tell you who the current President was, never votes and has no intention to vote in an election but gets guilt tripped by a family member into signing an absentee ballot that was given to them and voting party line like their family member wants them to. -Paul
[2026-10-05 16:50:01] - a: I kind of don't think all votes are equally valuable. Compare somebody who follows politics closely and researches the issues and and has thought about their stance on the issues deeply... -Paul
[2026-09-24 21:31:26] - the story that sparked the media ban in the whitehouse was planted by jd vance. how is this not a huge story. ~a
[2026-09-21 03:37:45] - paul: what about you? ~a
[2026-09-21 03:26:56] - paul: a system where each person votes for a representative is the only thing i can think of that is harder to corrupt. any other government will eventually be disadvantageous to too many people: any other government will eventually rot. in a sense, i guess i do think every vote has equal value if it has any value at all. the people who are the most hurt by our system are the ones i'd most like to see getting a chance to change it. ~a
[2026-09-20 21:28:38] - a: I've been thinking about this and I have a question which I think might help get to the core of our disagreement: Do you think every vote has equal value? -Paul
[2026-09-03 20:25:16] - mig: "local governments and people running for election started speaking out against [the cameras] once people start actively cutting them down". yep. i just saw a video where a dude cut down a bunch and then "returned" them to police. he was arrested. what a legend. but also, yikes. ~a
[2026-08-21 17:04:44] - mig: (grand) juries like thugs ~a
[2026-08-19 17:50:47] - mig: im all about that thug life: helping out people in need is thug life apparently. if law enforcement is using that ring camera to illegally violate the fourth amendment, then yes you should disable it. (maybe you have a moral obligation to disable it? maybe not). I'm not sure why you need to bash the door in to disable the ring camera. ~a
[2026-08-19 13:32:30] - if you have a ring can I bash your door in to take it out? I’m afraid of my car being captured by it cuz muh rights? - mig
[2026-08-19 13:11:22] - a: no thanks thuggery ain’t my style. - mig
[2026-08-18 17:18:05] - mig: here is some local nova community action. ~a
[2026-08-17 23:36:55] - mig: /r/chaoticgood/. we're gonna get you on our side eventually. ~a
[2026-08-17 21:44:19] - the strategic petroleum reserve is the lowest it has ever been. i don't think it will last until the end of the us/iran war. i guess we'll find out what happens when it gets empty? ~a
[2026-08-17 20:28:31] - paul: notably no-excuse-voting-from-home doesn't require an id of any kind. most americans are for that. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:27:49] - paul: "Because an overwhelming majority of voters want it" it: they want the "save america act"? no this is wrong. a majority of americans want some voter id law, that i will grant. but more people are for no-excuse-voting-from-home than for proof of citizen requirements to vote. i hope you wouldn't say that you would vote for the save america act. it's pretty gross imo. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:20:48] - paul: change in faith of election integrity lol ~a
[2026-08-17 20:18:48] - paul: "faith in the integrity of our elections is fading" is this even right? or does it even matter: did the faith of our elections fade after the 15th or 19th amendments passed? and if the faith in our elections faded after they passed, would you care? ~a
[2026-08-17 20:17:18] - a: Because an overwhelming majority of voters want it. Because faith in the integrity of our elections is fading. -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:17:18] - paul: (i know you didn't say this, i'm proposing it as a conditional) if you blindly voted for it without weighing the potential downside, i would not vote for you. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:15:55] - a: "then why would you make any changes at all" So if I was a legislator, it's probably not something I would propose, but I might vote for (depending on the wording). Why? Because I believe elections should be at least as secure as buying cough medicine. Because we could be wrong about the amount of fraud... -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:11:34] - paul: i kinda wonder what your reasoning behind it being a benign requirement is. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:10:00] - paul: "benign requirement" the changes would be huge. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:09:17] - paul: "I know it's solving a problem that is almost certainly not happening at any scale" then why would you make any changes at all if the results are that the downsides to the change are huge (five states issue real ids that indicate u.s. citizenship) ~a
[2026-08-17 20:08:42] - a: But I also don't really understand why you (and so many others) will argue so strenuously against what seems like a fairly benign requirement given how much more strict we are with ID in so many less important aspects of life. -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:07:47] - a: "you're trying really really hard to solve a non-problem because of a perception." No, I'm not. I've already repeatedly said I consider this a super low priority issue. I know it's solving a problem that is almost certainly not happening at any scale. -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:07:00] - paul: "no IDs needed ever" i would never argue that. i would argue that voting is too important: make (time consuming and safe and regulated and legal and carefully documented) concessions until you start having actual real-world problems. perceptions are almost always irrelevant. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:06:56] - a: But if I'm going into a school to vote.... then I just need to pinky promise I'm who I say I am. It's weird. -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:06:28] - a: Heck, my middle school kids are basically going to be required to have an ID to ride their bus to school. I have to scan my ID every time I want to visit them in school. They wanted to fingerprint me for volunteering on a field trip. -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:05:43] - paul: we also once had a perception that women would just vote with how their husband would vote. but we were solving a non-problem because of a perception. black people couldn't vote because of perception: non-problem being solved because of a perception. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:05:07] - paul: you're trying really really hard to solve a non-problem because of a perception. and this: this solving non-problems has always gotten us into trouble in the past. we did once have a perception that landowners were the only ones that should be able to vote because they have a vested interest in how the nation will turn out. solving a non-problem because of perception. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:04:50] - a: If you want to have a conversation about no IDs needed ever, I'm open to that. But I just don't see how it can be justified to require photo ID for so many mundane day-to-day things but be completely verboten for something supposedly so important (voting). -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:02:23] - paul: "So you're proposing a poll tax?". no. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:02:18] - a: "nobody is being prevented from traveling and you know that" Okay, then go travel internationally and don't bring a photo ID and report back. -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:02:10] - paul: you can go to other stores. also i'm sure you'd be able to shop in nyc grocery stores without an id. also "rumors claiming that nyc's upcoming city-owned municipal grocery stores will require identification or residency cards are false" ~a
[2026-08-17 20:01:39] - a: "you must complete the tsa confirmid process and pay a $45 fee" So you're proposing a poll tax?
-Paul[2026-08-17 20:01:06] - a: Or, going back to the NYC grocery stores. Why not just ask customers if they are allowed to shop there instead of asking for ID? That's a case of actually prohibiting people from buying food! -Paul
[2026-08-17 20:00:45] - paul: "travelling". you changed "flying" to "traveling". nobody is being prevented from traveling and you know that. ~a
[2026-08-17 20:00:13] - paul: except when we're able to go out of our way to prove someone is who they are without an id. did you know that you CAN fly without an id? because of course you can. you must complete the tsa confirmid process and pay a $45 fee. in other words, it's exactly the same as voting. prove who you are. ~a
[2026-08-17 19:59:42] - a: "i can choose not to fly. or travel without flying. or choose not to buy beer." And.... you can choose not to vote? I would argue prohibiting somebody from travelling is at least as big a violation of liberties than prohibiting them from voting. -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:58:36] - a: "in the context of in-person-voting do you have any evidence to back that up?" I have common sense. Pretty much any situation where people want to be sure of somebody's identity, we ask for documentation instead of just trusting what the person says. -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:57:33] - paul: i can choose not to fly. or travel without flying. or choose not to buy beer. ~a
[2026-08-17 19:57:18] - a: I don't know for sure about Mom's. I tend to assume that crunchy organic hippies tend to be more leftist but obviously that doesn't mean they are a monolith. Also, I'm sure the MAHA movement has attracted some. -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:56:38] - paul: "You can't seriously tell me you believe that signing a statement promising you are who you say you are is sufficient proof" you think showing a "fake-id" is sufficient? why not require a passport? ~a
[2026-08-17 19:56:08] - paul: "I think a photo ID is significantly more secure than asking somebody to sign a statement saying they are who they say they are." in the context of in-person-voting do you have any evidence to back that up? we're talking about very-few-almost-zero-cases compared to very-few-almost-zero-cases, so they (in general) seem equally concerning. ~a
[2026-08-17 19:56:07] - a: If that's the case, why can't I do that for flying? Or for buying beer? "I swear I am over 21". -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:55:44] - a: You can't seriously tell me you believe that signing a statement promising you are who you say you are is sufficient proof. -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:54:52] - a: "nowhere in there did you say "id"" But how do you prove who you are without an ID? -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:54:06] - a: I think we have slightly different definitions of "prove who you are". I think a photo ID is significantly more secure than asking somebody to sign a statement saying they are who they say they are. -Paul
[2026-08-17 19:49:41] - paul: "There's like 12 states that have no voter ID laws" exactly. all 50 states follow this: (quote paul) "But it does seem like there has to be a way to just use that to prove you are who you are, and then cross-reference it with a list of registered voters" and nowhere in there did you say "id". ~a
[2026-08-17 19:47:48] - a: Your link about state voter ID laws seems to support my point more than yours.
There's like 12 states that have no voter ID laws (and those states probably represent like 1/3rd of the US population). A boat load of other states don't require an ID at all. -Paul[2026-08-17 15:55:48] - xpovos: yeah i think winn's situation is a bit less morally-gray than the flock situation. (i can't get to your link but, i have read your words here). it's a tad more morally-gray to go onto public property and destroy private property to protect the rights of others than to do shit to private property above your private property. ~a
[2026-08-17 06:56:24] - paul: "Otherwise how do you prove that you are who you are claiming to be?". "Virginia law requires all voters to provide either an acceptable form of ID or sign an ID Confirmation Statement at the polls." using Virginia as an example, you have to use an acceptable "non-photo" id or sign something. ~a
[2026-08-17 06:43:10] - paul: what makes you think they were gung-ho about masking during covid? fwiw moms sells raw milk: I've never been to a moms but think "kenedy-organic". "there was 'definitely no social distancing. We did not have any protective gear except for gloves.'" link. ~a
[2026-08-16 19:27:09] - paul: here's the link again. you have to prove you are who you are, but you don't have to do it with a photo id. you don't have to do it with a real id. you don't have to do it with a real id that indicate your citizenship (only five states issue real ids that indicate u.s. citizenship). ~a
[2026-08-16 19:25:22] - paul: "I'm almost positive this isn't true?" don't be so positive "You are saying presenting a photo ID to vote is required at all 50 states?" you changed your language between times in material ways. the first time you said "But it does seem like there has to be a way to just use that to prove you are who you are" and the second time you said "presenting a photo ID to vote". these are very different from eachother. ~a
[2026-08-16 15:35:18] - https://wtop.com/montgomery-county/2026/08/moms-organic-market-bans-employees-from-wearing-face-masks-while-working/ I have to imagine this probably feels a bit like whiplash for the employees who I imagine were likely pretty gung-ho on masking during COVID. -Paul
[2026-08-16 15:30:02] - a: "yes, and all 50 states do this" I'm almost positive this isn't true? You are saying presenting a photo ID to vote is required at all 50 states? Otherwise how do you prove that you are who you are claiming to be? -Paul
[2026-08-15 15:04:09] - arguably ON his property, again depending on the height the drone got to/maintained. So, now the question. What's your opinion on Mr. Winn's actions, from a property rights perspective? -- Xpovos
[2026-08-15 15:02:44] - The safety concern is warranted (what goes up comes back down at roughly the same speed, and trajectory is rarely perfectly vertical, and even if it is--there's confounders like wind.) But property damage is the real legal question. He was ordered to pay Walmart $5000. Is that justified? No argument on the facts, the dron was Walmart's, he shot it. Normally that's open and shut: pay the $5000. But the drone WAS over his property, and [..]
[2026-08-15 14:58:39] - mig: I'm put in mind of this "crime" from a little while ago. https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/crime/florida-man-drone-walmart-dennis-winn/77-4fa34cd5-9924-4c11-b7f5-68a42611cf14 Background: Walmart flew prototype delivery drones over his private property. Depending on the height, ad coelum still applies. He used his legalley owned firearm and shot the drone down. Crime was discharging his gun in an unsafe manner, [...]
[2026-08-07 14:18:41] - paul: "But it does seem like there has to be a way to just use that to prove you are who you are, and then cross-reference it with a list of registered voters" yes, and all 50 states do this. and certainly virginia does. ~a
[2026-08-07 14:17:23] - mig: "if it involves destroying/stealing things that aren’t yours, no" ??? aren't there tons of situations where destroying and taking things that aren't yours is totally fine? surely if it was a live bear trap, or a tripping hazard, or a loaded gun, or bomb, in a public place you'd propose that destroying/taking things that aren't yours is fine. certainly, i propose that this is also dangerous for the people around it, but more arguably. ~a
[2026-08-07 03:15:33] - a: But it does seem like there has to be a way to just use that to prove you are who you are, and then cross-reference it with a list of registered voters. -Paul
[2026-08-07 03:15:08] - a: "only five states issue Real IDs that indicate U.S. citizenship" Then sure, the calculus might change if it's a harder ID to obtain. Still, I guess it does make a certain amount of sense given that having a driver's license doesn't mean you're registered to vote. -Paul
[2026-08-06 23:21:36] - a: if it involves destroying/stealing things that aren’t yours, no. - mig
[2026-08-06 21:59:08] - are there situations where you do endorse people taking things into their own hands? i'm sensing "clutching pearls" energy. ~a
[2026-08-06 18:17:27] - a: no its bad. I don’t particularly like Flock either but I can’t endorse people taking things into their own hands like this. - mig
[2026-08-05 19:45:55] - "the surveillance debate in minnesota just graduated from city council resolutions to bolt cutters." link. $24,000 in damages. i love how they call something better for people as "damages". i guess not all crime is bad? ~a
[2026-08-05 19:43:54] - xpovos: "Even accepting the paper reasons doesn’t mean we don’t have war crimes" yeah, there's that too: so i guess it's bad for two different war-crime reasons? ~a
[2026-08-05 19:43:46] - paul: "bombing on weekends and calling cease-fires during the week just to make the stock market happy" i'm glad i'm not the only one who noticed that. ~a
[2026-08-05 19:40:18] - paul: "wishing that our elections were as secure as a government run grocery store" hopefully you agree this isn't at all what's happening right? even if you ignore that you can shop wherever you want but can only vote in one place: the save america act has crazy requirements that no grocery store is proposing. ~a
[2026-08-05 19:39:13] - paul: "That seems excessive" right? "only five states issue Real IDs that indicate U.S. citizenship". i wanna put this in caps-lock. maybe instead i'll just quote it again. "only five states issue Real IDs that indicate U.S. citizenship". michigan minnesota new york vermont washington ~a
prev <-> next