DB Main
@dbmain.bsky.social
Bell Labs Distinguished Member of Technical Staff
Lead Econometrician, Corporate Strategy, Lucent
That's my kid getting the Bronze at the World University Games.
She's a beautiful enigma
I keep a VanLife Blog here:
https://dbmain.substack.com/
Lead Econometrician, Corporate Strategy, Lucent
That's my kid getting the Bronze at the World University Games.
She's a beautiful enigma
I keep a VanLife Blog here:
https://dbmain.substack.com/
LOLZ, I didn't suspect you of being this foul mouthed.
February 1, 2026 at 10:36 PM
LOLZ, I didn't suspect you of being this foul mouthed.
Fuck! Thanks Parker, I fell for it.
February 1, 2026 at 10:32 PM
Fuck! Thanks Parker, I fell for it.
Update: Ad Hominemer doesn't know what Ad Hominem means
February 1, 2026 at 10:25 PM
Update: Ad Hominemer doesn't know what Ad Hominem means
Sparky, he's as dumb as fuck. He surrounds himself with people dumb as fuck.
But sure, he pulled off a massive conspiracy involving thousands of people crossing hundreds of jurisdictions (dozens Democratic controlled) and left behind no evidence and no one has broken ranks.
THAT TOTALLY HAPPENED!
But sure, he pulled off a massive conspiracy involving thousands of people crossing hundreds of jurisdictions (dozens Democratic controlled) and left behind no evidence and no one has broken ranks.
THAT TOTALLY HAPPENED!
February 1, 2026 at 10:24 PM
Sparky, he's as dumb as fuck. He surrounds himself with people dumb as fuck.
But sure, he pulled off a massive conspiracy involving thousands of people crossing hundreds of jurisdictions (dozens Democratic controlled) and left behind no evidence and no one has broken ranks.
THAT TOTALLY HAPPENED!
But sure, he pulled off a massive conspiracy involving thousands of people crossing hundreds of jurisdictions (dozens Democratic controlled) and left behind no evidence and no one has broken ranks.
THAT TOTALLY HAPPENED!
If you got the literary reference, turning it around on me would take a different form, one consistent with your argument.
Like: "You're surrounded by *dragons* and are convincing yourself they are windmills."
See? You're welcome
Like: "You're surrounded by *dragons* and are convincing yourself they are windmills."
See? You're welcome
February 1, 2026 at 10:19 PM
If you got the literary reference, turning it around on me would take a different form, one consistent with your argument.
Like: "You're surrounded by *dragons* and are convincing yourself they are windmills."
See? You're welcome
Like: "You're surrounded by *dragons* and are convincing yourself they are windmills."
See? You're welcome
Breaking News: Ad Hominemer decries Ad Hominem
February 1, 2026 at 10:16 PM
Breaking News: Ad Hominemer decries Ad Hominem
It's hilarious that unlike you, at my advanced age, and admittedly a fraction of what I once was, I am able to discern the difference between motive and proof of a crime.
February 1, 2026 at 10:14 PM
It's hilarious that unlike you, at my advanced age, and admittedly a fraction of what I once was, I am able to discern the difference between motive and proof of a crime.
Julie Brown?
You are a magnificent creature.
You are a magnificent creature.
February 1, 2026 at 10:11 PM
Julie Brown?
You are a magnificent creature.
You are a magnificent creature.
Am I surprised he didn't get the literary reference?
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am not.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am not.
February 1, 2026 at 10:10 PM
Am I surprised he didn't get the literary reference?
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am not.
Ladies and Gentlemen, I am not.
This is like the Chef's Kiss of idiocy.
It's kinda hysterical.
"Guys, I KNOW it's true. Now let's figure out how"
It's kinda hysterical.
"Guys, I KNOW it's true. Now let's figure out how"
February 1, 2026 at 10:09 PM
This is like the Chef's Kiss of idiocy.
It's kinda hysterical.
"Guys, I KNOW it's true. Now let's figure out how"
It's kinda hysterical.
"Guys, I KNOW it's true. Now let's figure out how"
Mook, you're chasing windmills.
It does no good being a radical if you bomb a Cracker Barrel thinking it's the Pentagon.
It does no good being a radical if you bomb a Cracker Barrel thinking it's the Pentagon.
February 1, 2026 at 10:05 PM
Mook, you're chasing windmills.
It does no good being a radical if you bomb a Cracker Barrel thinking it's the Pentagon.
It does no good being a radical if you bomb a Cracker Barrel thinking it's the Pentagon.
"Aside from every single detail, they were correct"
You are amazing.
You are amazing.
February 1, 2026 at 10:03 PM
"Aside from every single detail, they were correct"
You are amazing.
You are amazing.
Bear in mind that QANON *were* idiots, who thought High Priestess Hillary Clinton was sacrificing babies in the non-existent basement of a DC pizzeria.
Coincidentally, they too believed they were "factually" correct.
Coincidentally, they too believed they were "factually" correct.
February 1, 2026 at 1:16 PM
Bear in mind that QANON *were* idiots, who thought High Priestess Hillary Clinton was sacrificing babies in the non-existent basement of a DC pizzeria.
Coincidentally, they too believed they were "factually" correct.
Coincidentally, they too believed they were "factually" correct.
Ah. You're no better than ETA and MAGA that say the same thing without a semi-plausible explanation of how that's possible.
February 1, 2026 at 4:23 AM
Ah. You're no better than ETA and MAGA that say the same thing without a semi-plausible explanation of how that's possible.
Our system is nothing like that in either of those places.
February 1, 2026 at 4:11 AM
Our system is nothing like that in either of those places.
But you are, in fact, not likely to get away with it.
You, like ETA, refuse to recognize the audits and technological safeguards that would detect/prohibit the kind of "cheating" you think happened.
You, like ETA, refuse to recognize the audits and technological safeguards that would detect/prohibit the kind of "cheating" you think happened.
February 1, 2026 at 4:10 AM
But you are, in fact, not likely to get away with it.
You, like ETA, refuse to recognize the audits and technological safeguards that would detect/prohibit the kind of "cheating" you think happened.
You, like ETA, refuse to recognize the audits and technological safeguards that would detect/prohibit the kind of "cheating" you think happened.
"He is more likely to commit a crime"
=/=
"He committed a crime"
=/=
"He committed a crime"
February 1, 2026 at 4:06 AM
"He is more likely to commit a crime"
=/=
"He committed a crime"
=/=
"He committed a crime"
You know that if you were on trial, past convictions are inadmissible.
For a reason.
For a reason.
February 1, 2026 at 4:05 AM
You know that if you were on trial, past convictions are inadmissible.
For a reason.
For a reason.
"But we do know he cheated. That much is a fact"
You and I have very different standards of "facts".
You and I have very different standards of "facts".
February 1, 2026 at 4:03 AM
"But we do know he cheated. That much is a fact"
You and I have very different standards of "facts".
You and I have very different standards of "facts".
You realize that this is evidence of absolutely nothing, right?
February 1, 2026 at 3:59 AM
You realize that this is evidence of absolutely nothing, right?
And it's **Marc** Elias
February 1, 2026 at 3:57 AM
And it's **Marc** Elias
ETA's primary "data scientists" are an IT guy who resets passwords and a lady with a Google Search Optimization business who just claimed the Central Limit Theorem can't be applied to human behavior (who is also lying about her PhD)
February 1, 2026 at 3:57 AM
ETA's primary "data scientists" are an IT guy who resets passwords and a lady with a Google Search Optimization business who just claimed the Central Limit Theorem can't be applied to human behavior (who is also lying about her PhD)
Who's hiding anything?
Would you mount a grand conspiracy that has a high probability of being detected via the layers of audits and technological safeguards?
Would you mount a grand conspiracy that has a high probability of being detected via the layers of audits and technological safeguards?
February 1, 2026 at 3:52 AM
Who's hiding anything?
Would you mount a grand conspiracy that has a high probability of being detected via the layers of audits and technological safeguards?
Would you mount a grand conspiracy that has a high probability of being detected via the layers of audits and technological safeguards?