Sadly it seems to be true. Heard it late last week from a coworker in a position to know.

Grand Seiko makes some truly beautiful watches, and also some terribly gaudy horrors.

The price isn’t keeping anyone at that level of wealth from buying a Nautilus or a Lange 1 or a panda Daytona. But they can still flex with ultralimited pieces like Zuck’s Greubel Forsey.

I didn't realize that "fools and their money will soon be parted" was a flex.

“There are three of these things made in a year, and I’ve got the juice to get one of them” is. Zuck doesn’t care about a million dollar price tag, any more than I would care about a couple bucks.

If he was buying a solid gold furby would you have the same take? That's great that he doesn't care, still looks like an idiot to me.

The point is that the market doesn’t move enough on the jobs data to trigger a circuit breaker, not that there’s a -20% move and it doesn’t trigger.

Yeah, it still doesn't make sense - why would a .3% surprise cause more than a 2% move? Even today, it wouldn't. The expectation is baked in to the price already, and the surprise isn't big enough to warrant a massive move. It still shows a lack of understanding of how the markets work.

A Russell conjugation: my LLM-based coding output, your Claude throwaway code, his complete AI slop.

Oh, first time hearing that term. Thank you, I love it!

Though I don't think this is at play here. Maybe a bit but seeing how my coworkers prompt, there is objective difference. I will spend half an hour on writing a good prompt, revise the implementation plan with the LLM multiple times before I allow it to even start doing anything while my coworkers just write "fix this" and wonder why the stupid AI can't read their minds.

I am producing AI slop as well, just hopefully a bit less. Obviously hand crafted code is still much better but my boss wants me to use "AI" so I do as I am told.

you don’t know that, maybe the term “landlord” hurt their feelings

landlord really is a derogatory term, they should be referred to as “housing providers”.

"Housing hoarders" seems more apt. Landlord is a euphemism

No one “hoards” housing, they buy it then rent it out for others to use.

That is hoarding, with the intent of parasitically using it to benefit from the misfortune of others.

No, hoarding is accumulating for the sake of accumulating. A housing provider offers a service, 12 month leases on places to live temporarily. It is a cutthroat low margin business, very few people are truly getting rich being small time providers, most are just breaking even and banking on their asset appreciation.

A "service" that wouldn't be necessary if landlords weren't taking away housing from them in the first place. Mao had the right idea about landlords.

Why is it cheaper than owning a home? Because landlords are driving up the price of homes by using an essential human right as speculative asset and investment class.

The burden is imposed by the "provider", as a result of their greed.

If a central AC unit blows you’re staring at a $4-$5k bill, mandatory, or you have no AC.

If your attic gets some mold that will be $8k to get rid of it.

Home insurance, you must pay. Property tax, you also have to pay. Water and electricity too.

Or, you can pay a housing provider a flat monthly fee, and not worry about any of that.

I like to think Lehrer would have appreciated the irony of being predeceased by his obituary’s author.

For my money Rachel Aviv is the best and most interesting writer currently on the New Yorker staff (give or take a David Grann, who is pretty much just writing books these days it seems). I go out of my way to read whatever has her byline.

IANAL but I believe the option has to be exercised before the company reaches $50M in assets—that’s when you buy the stock.

> Now the question I ask is: how was it distilled? what chemicals were used in the process? are those chemicals safe? and a million other related questions. With regular pot there's none of that.

You absolutely should be asking those questions about “regular pot” as well. AIUI concentrates are among the bestselling and most profitable products in legal states, and they use uncertain chemicals of questionable provenance even if the delta-9 THC is 100% natty. But even if you’re just buying flower you could reasonably be concerned about pesticides or mold [1].

I think there are some quite good reasons to oppose cannabis legalization (for example, it’s made the super-high-potency concentrates which are associated with bad outcomes much more widely available) and it’s possible your own culture war or other biases are getting in your way here. But there are also lots of good arguments in favor of course.

[1] https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/marijuana-mold-contami...