H@l Inc@nd3nz@
@clintoon.bsky.social
I used to be on the other place, but I think it’s run its course. Mostly GB Packers, US Politics & Law. WI —> MA —> WI.
Seems like you’re insisting on telling a very particular “story of the NFL” if you can’t do so without mentioning Eli Manning.
November 25, 2025 at 5:33 PM
Seems like you’re insisting on telling a very particular “story of the NFL” if you can’t do so without mentioning Eli Manning.
That’s part of it. Here’s the other part: I regularly wear a suit for work. If I’m traveling I don’t. This is because the first thing that happens at the airport is that I’m asked to partially undress. I (rationally) would like to make that process as simple as possible.
November 25, 2025 at 5:25 PM
That’s part of it. Here’s the other part: I regularly wear a suit for work. If I’m traveling I don’t. This is because the first thing that happens at the airport is that I’m asked to partially undress. I (rationally) would like to make that process as simple as possible.
In that case, I have to know: what’s #1?
November 23, 2025 at 8:42 PM
In that case, I have to know: what’s #1?
Vibes are just too good to nitpick.
Choosing to believe the first drive is how they’re gonna play on Thursday but it makes sense to shorten this game against this opponent.
Choosing to believe the first drive is how they’re gonna play on Thursday but it makes sense to shorten this game against this opponent.
November 23, 2025 at 8:41 PM
Vibes are just too good to nitpick.
Choosing to believe the first drive is how they’re gonna play on Thursday but it makes sense to shorten this game against this opponent.
Choosing to believe the first drive is how they’re gonna play on Thursday but it makes sense to shorten this game against this opponent.
Willing to grant a bit of a pass, this one time only, because it’s plausibly rational with the short week coming up. The first drive vs. the rest of the game has been night and day unfortunately.
November 23, 2025 at 7:28 PM
Willing to grant a bit of a pass, this one time only, because it’s plausibly rational with the short week coming up. The first drive vs. the rest of the game has been night and day unfortunately.
On the one hand, only the independently wealthy could practically run for election then. On the other, only the independently wealthy run for election practically now. 🤷♂️
November 23, 2025 at 6:10 PM
On the one hand, only the independently wealthy could practically run for election then. On the other, only the independently wealthy run for election practically now. 🤷♂️
Not to mention, the first thing I’m asked to do before proceeding to my gate is to partially undress but these buffoons insist I’m irrational for opting for athleisure and slip-ons.
November 21, 2025 at 11:11 PM
Not to mention, the first thing I’m asked to do before proceeding to my gate is to partially undress but these buffoons insist I’m irrational for opting for athleisure and slip-ons.
Upon further review, it appears that you’re right. I withdraw my prior response.
November 21, 2025 at 6:26 PM
Upon further review, it appears that you’re right. I withdraw my prior response.
Ok, but hear me out: why not both?
November 21, 2025 at 5:03 PM
Ok, but hear me out: why not both?
Bingo!
The right way to conceive of LLM’s is as an intern whose feelings won’t get hurt when I say, “No. You did it wrong, try again,” not an expert to do the work for you.
The right way to conceive of LLM’s is as an intern whose feelings won’t get hurt when I say, “No. You did it wrong, try again,” not an expert to do the work for you.
November 21, 2025 at 2:55 PM
Bingo!
The right way to conceive of LLM’s is as an intern whose feelings won’t get hurt when I say, “No. You did it wrong, try again,” not an expert to do the work for you.
The right way to conceive of LLM’s is as an intern whose feelings won’t get hurt when I say, “No. You did it wrong, try again,” not an expert to do the work for you.
This is the crux: it’s not an educational tool. I use industry-specific LLM’s to “find 3-6 cases that stand for [a proposition I know to be true]” but not to write my brief.
The former is a time-saver. The latter is both incredibly dangerous (short term) and unhelpful to knowing more next time.
The former is a time-saver. The latter is both incredibly dangerous (short term) and unhelpful to knowing more next time.
November 21, 2025 at 2:44 PM
This is the crux: it’s not an educational tool. I use industry-specific LLM’s to “find 3-6 cases that stand for [a proposition I know to be true]” but not to write my brief.
The former is a time-saver. The latter is both incredibly dangerous (short term) and unhelpful to knowing more next time.
The former is a time-saver. The latter is both incredibly dangerous (short term) and unhelpful to knowing more next time.
Great. No one lives up to your standards. I understand the sentiment. Your prescription is?
November 21, 2025 at 4:01 AM
Great. No one lives up to your standards. I understand the sentiment. Your prescription is?
You would tell the guy calling 911 he’s no better than the attacker because he didn’t personally intervene.
I’m not saying there isn’t a difference between the caller and the intervenor, I’m saying it’s absurd to deny there is one.
I’m not saying there isn’t a difference between the caller and the intervenor, I’m saying it’s absurd to deny there is one.
November 21, 2025 at 3:14 AM
You would tell the guy calling 911 he’s no better than the attacker because he didn’t personally intervene.
I’m not saying there isn’t a difference between the caller and the intervenor, I’m saying it’s absurd to deny there is one.
I’m not saying there isn’t a difference between the caller and the intervenor, I’m saying it’s absurd to deny there is one.
Which is to say, I’m unlikely to convince you and you’re definitely not going to convince me. So while I could choose to be more conciliatory my question is simply, “why?”
November 21, 2025 at 3:00 AM
Which is to say, I’m unlikely to convince you and you’re definitely not going to convince me. So while I could choose to be more conciliatory my question is simply, “why?”
I appreciate the note.
I could have said something different.
Your choice is to tell me I’m bankrupt.
Mine is to respond that telling yourself there’s no difference, while enabling those who are actually worse, is both self-defeating and not the morally righteous position you claim. 🤷♂️
I could have said something different.
Your choice is to tell me I’m bankrupt.
Mine is to respond that telling yourself there’s no difference, while enabling those who are actually worse, is both self-defeating and not the morally righteous position you claim. 🤷♂️
November 21, 2025 at 2:59 AM
I appreciate the note.
I could have said something different.
Your choice is to tell me I’m bankrupt.
Mine is to respond that telling yourself there’s no difference, while enabling those who are actually worse, is both self-defeating and not the morally righteous position you claim. 🤷♂️
I could have said something different.
Your choice is to tell me I’m bankrupt.
Mine is to respond that telling yourself there’s no difference, while enabling those who are actually worse, is both self-defeating and not the morally righteous position you claim. 🤷♂️
I said what I said. It’s petulant and childish, not morally pure, to insist there’s no difference because “The Democratic Party … chooses not to, free my siblings in Sudan, or Gaza, the Congo, Libya[,]” as if the alternative is cost free.
November 21, 2025 at 2:50 AM
I said what I said. It’s petulant and childish, not morally pure, to insist there’s no difference because “The Democratic Party … chooses not to, free my siblings in Sudan, or Gaza, the Congo, Libya[,]” as if the alternative is cost free.
I tend to think it’s more about normalizing that than alerting people that betting on sports is a thing, but I’ve gone 180 degrees from sure legalize it sounds fun to please make it stop.
November 21, 2025 at 2:46 AM
I tend to think it’s more about normalizing that than alerting people that betting on sports is a thing, but I’ve gone 180 degrees from sure legalize it sounds fun to please make it stop.
“Unless you do everything I want, immediately, it’s the same as actively working against me” is certainly a take.
November 21, 2025 at 2:36 AM
“Unless you do everything I want, immediately, it’s the same as actively working against me” is certainly a take.
Tipped the pass leading to the INT as well. Do we have a THICC MVP in the making?
November 20, 2025 at 11:05 PM
Tipped the pass leading to the INT as well. Do we have a THICC MVP in the making?
Objection: assuming facts not in evidence, speculation, killjoy-ery.
November 20, 2025 at 8:38 PM
Objection: assuming facts not in evidence, speculation, killjoy-ery.
This is the way. It may be unsatisfying, but it beats the alternative.
November 20, 2025 at 4:37 AM
This is the way. It may be unsatisfying, but it beats the alternative.
I’m not sure pointing out our top-of-market pass rusher has “never been a huge snap guy” is going to turn down the heat, but let’s see how it works out.
November 20, 2025 at 12:23 AM
I’m not sure pointing out our top-of-market pass rusher has “never been a huge snap guy” is going to turn down the heat, but let’s see how it works out.
This is because my vote is not primarily or even somewhat about signaling where the party should be, but about ensuring R’s aren’t in power.
November 20, 2025 at 12:01 AM
This is because my vote is not primarily or even somewhat about signaling where the party should be, but about ensuring R’s aren’t in power.