gordian-mind

The term neoliberalism has no meaning, it's purely used in a pejorative way by leftists. If you want to talk about world markets, just say world markets. Or "free market", but it has free in it so it makes the effect less powerful.

Also, the reason the EU does not have that many tech companies is not global competition; it's that it takes 6 months to hire someone, you cannot fire them ever, and nations tax you based on your unrealized valuation because they don't really believe you should be running things on your own.

That’s interesting, because this is another clear case of total fabrication.

I will skip the $135bn figure, produced by an influence NGO and once again counting paid leave, to focus on the more serious and important alleged $500bn loss from IRS cuts.

Firstly, the statement that “the Internal Revenue Service predicted more than $500 billion in revenue loss due to DOGE-driven cuts” is fraudulent. There was no official IRS prediction of such a loss. The Washington Post reported an anonymous short-term forecast. Its exact wording was:

“Treasury Department and IRS officials are predicting a decrease of more than 10 percent in tax receipts by the April 15 deadline compared with 2024, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share nonpublic data. That would amount to more than $500 billion in lost federal revenue.”

So, did this happen? It did not. By April 2025, collections had risen 9.5% year over year to about $850 billion, rather than falling by more than 10%. This came after a roughly 25% reduction in the IRS workforce between January and May 2025. Over the whole of fiscal year 2025, revenue increased by 6%.

Here is a follow-up Washington Post article lamenting that DOGE unfortunately failed to lower tax revenue:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/06/12/irs-tax-f...

Wouldn’t that make the original claim dishonest, given that it was presented without any meaningful uncertainty? Apparently this distinction is unclear to them.

This entire sequence was absolute bullshit. You can read articles like this with a smile, knowing that they may be completely wrong and that the authors do not care enough about the truth to revisit their claims before basking in their own righteous certainty:

https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/happy-tax-evasion-day

DOGE was met with worldwide media outrage in the first weeks of its creation, and scorched earth legal tactics by the opposition. The people involved, even the lowest employees, got worldwide scrutiny, including character assassination articles in the biggest publications.

To get out of this saying they "had no interest in acting it out" is bizarre.

I found this "estimate" in one second.

In another second of reading it, I saw the 21 billion were payouts to let go of employees. Do you realize how silly it makes the report?

So now Elon is responsible for the waste in government? Yeah, it makes sense...

Some people find their self-worth through their hatred of others, and it's clearly your case.

Nope, they're his rockets. He did employ people to help with the project, alright.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nq8HrxfSZMc

Political signaling is not comedy, and it's not funny. Just be normal.

Elon is known for landing rockets

It makes sense in the black-majority country of South Africa, which was the context of Grok's rant. They sing "kill the Boers, kill the farmers" at major political rallies, and it's not even illegal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubul%27_ibhunu

It's deranged to believe correctly naming something is "affiliation".

It's because spilling water doesn't do anything: water evaporates, becomes cloud, rains down etc.

Meanwhile, datacenters sacrifice water by sending it to Mars in order to compute criminal deepfakes of innocent politicians.

Personally I see nothing wrong with prediction markets, so it feels weird to see people around here freak about it as if it was the antichrist put in place by <current politicians they don't like>.

That cannot be the reason: Firefox has a market share of 3%...

Would you kill? Kidnap? Crash a plane into a building?

Thanks for the precision.

This didn't save his wife. You are free to help your wife in non-illegal ways.

By tampering he becomes an accessory, which in some juridictions are punished on the same level as the principals. In this case, the principals have been convicted on terrorism charges.

This title by Reason seems unreasonable. The man was convicted of "tampering with evidence". In other circumstances, it would have been perfectly legal for him to transport these pamphlets.

As it turns out, when someone (your wife) gets arrested and tells you to do "whatever you need to do" and "move whatever you need to move at the house", it is highly illegal to then proceed to do so.

"A mediocre student who had studied SAT-style questions for weeks leading up to the test would likely outperform a high IQ student who last solved those types of problems over a year prior."

That's why hard questions exist.

It's weird that you don't mention academics. My words were precise though. This "open hostility" is not an official stance but a projection.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2025/12/17/trump-adminis...

Currently, the few "pro-democracy" (left-liberal, I presume?) European governments are cracking down hard on freedom of speech. Your worldview is lacking coherence.

It's okay, the service they provide is invaluable: cheap movement. If anything, I wish the EU was regulated by Ryanair to stop taking all my money for zero result.

"I am also a European academic. That means the current US government has become hostile to me"

Such a bizarre claim. EU academics seem under mass psychosis lately.

What about the polo player's genome?

So, you didn't? Instead of a compilation, did you do a quick check?

"Ten scenarios that I invented in which AI is making my life miserable."

"Wow it turns out I just invented something damaging about someone, let me just equivocate that it's not so bad to lie about this, since I think they're a bad person anyway."

Did you make a compilation of everything they publicly said for ten years, in order to check whether your statement is correct?

This is a dog whistle to an audience that doesn't like it when companies make profit (but who would probably deserve a higher salary, according to themselves).

Overly generalizing the notion of "communication" makes this whole exchange useless, pure noise. A LLM wouldn't have made that mistake.