Blocking people that annoy him on Twitter is the only humanizing thing about him. Deciding that someone has annoyed you enough on that platform that you don't care to ever hear from them ever again is the only thing that made that platform usable when you have any minimal audience.
"I've known you for all of 10 seconds and enjoyed not a single one of them" followed by blocking is good, actually. That doesn't make you any more correct or wrong, of course.
The first video says that Thiel is answering the question "What do you make of people celebrating Luigi?" and his response was "There may be things wrong with our healthcare system, but you have to have an argument and find a way to convince people" and that shooting random CEOs "isn't going to work".
Somehow I'm supposed to be led to believe this makes Thiel come across as stupid. My only guess as to how is because the OP must think that shooting CEOs in the street is an obvious rational good and that opposing such is idiocy, or reactionary fascism (in leftist usage, a synonym for idiocy), or so on.
To me it feels like an awkward API that creates opportunities to work the limitations of a normal API... which to me is not a great thing. Potentially useful, sure, but not great.
Does it? Could you explain which mechanism you suggest using? Because the main results from social choice theory about ranked choice voting that come to mind seem to be all about impossibility of fair elections (eg Arrow) or even paradoxical situations such as cyclic preferences (eg Condorcet).
Welcome to the reality of anything that Elon Musk has extensive control over.
SpaceX is useful because upper management actively subvert him. Tesla had a functional process before he decided to smear his face all over the public image of it. Twitter was one example of interesting architecture before he gutted it (and caused a LOT of problems; I'm informed about 80% of the infra he took out has been put back in).
He's the very real example of an accidental success without any understanding of why he succeeded.
Which would probably raise less than a modest wealth tax on billionaires, but we know that will never get traction (even though its an extremely popular policy)
reply