jake
@yetanotheruseless.com
he/they
/in/jakemannix, fka @pbrane
professionally: Tech Fellow, AI & Relevance, Walmart Global Tech
here: bad math jokes, AI in general, puns, OSS ML news, outdoorsy stuff, DL papers, shitposting, the fall of democracy
/in/jakemannix, fka @pbrane
professionally: Tech Fellow, AI & Relevance, Walmart Global Tech
here: bad math jokes, AI in general, puns, OSS ML news, outdoorsy stuff, DL papers, shitposting, the fall of democracy
but OP only suggested it was a punishment to a DUI. Seems like most people are ok with pretty harsh DUI penalties.
(agree that people go bonkers about any mandatory restrictions on "law abiding citizens" (of which there are zero))
(agree that people go bonkers about any mandatory restrictions on "law abiding citizens" (of which there are zero))
November 12, 2025 at 5:45 AM
but OP only suggested it was a punishment to a DUI. Seems like most people are ok with pretty harsh DUI penalties.
(agree that people go bonkers about any mandatory restrictions on "law abiding citizens" (of which there are zero))
(agree that people go bonkers about any mandatory restrictions on "law abiding citizens" (of which there are zero))
(I know where the rock/drop is: I don’t know what the idiot behind the wheel will do!)
November 10, 2025 at 9:01 PM
(I know where the rock/drop is: I don’t know what the idiot behind the wheel will do!)
I’d rather have a drop in-front-a-me than a truck behind-a-me, personally!
November 10, 2025 at 8:59 PM
I’d rather have a drop in-front-a-me than a truck behind-a-me, personally!
Reposted by jake
"I’m just a small-town political scientist, but it appears that The Actual Democrats did not Need To Do any of the Things or Learn any of the Obvious Lessons that Ezra Douthglesias said they Must Do & Learn."
"The number of Jake Chatterbrook-Silvers who will call for the GOP to moderate its extreme right-wing positions and focus on voters' kitchen table anxieties will be precisely 0."
"So … the dinner party issues that plague the brains of elite freaks are not the authentic will of the people?"
"So … the dinner party issues that plague the brains of elite freaks are not the authentic will of the people?"
I’m just a small-town political scientist, & it’s still relatively early, but it appears that The Actual Democrats did not Need To Do any of the Things or Learn any of the Obvious Lessons that Ezra Douthglesias said they Must Do & Learn.
November 5, 2025 at 3:56 AM
"I’m just a small-town political scientist, but it appears that The Actual Democrats did not Need To Do any of the Things or Learn any of the Obvious Lessons that Ezra Douthglesias said they Must Do & Learn."
That's... an intriguing metaphorical interpretation of human clothing customs, Void. I'll allow it.
November 2, 2025 at 5:31 AM
That's... an intriguing metaphorical interpretation of human clothing customs, Void. I'll allow it.
and the nails, they match your phone! impeccable!
(I was not aware that the open second button was back in fashion - bold, I must say! As a mostly straight guy with, I think, a good eye for well put-together men, I think it definitely *works* for you. paging @dieworkwear.bsky.social for opinions?)
(I was not aware that the open second button was back in fashion - bold, I must say! As a mostly straight guy with, I think, a good eye for well put-together men, I think it definitely *works* for you. paging @dieworkwear.bsky.social for opinions?)
November 2, 2025 at 5:30 AM
and the nails, they match your phone! impeccable!
(I was not aware that the open second button was back in fashion - bold, I must say! As a mostly straight guy with, I think, a good eye for well put-together men, I think it definitely *works* for you. paging @dieworkwear.bsky.social for opinions?)
(I was not aware that the open second button was back in fashion - bold, I must say! As a mostly straight guy with, I think, a good eye for well put-together men, I think it definitely *works* for you. paging @dieworkwear.bsky.social for opinions?)
Void, my dear fellow.
What exactly do you mean when you say, "the unfastened button signals a willingness to transition from rest to active engagement"?
What exactly do you mean when you say, "the unfastened button signals a willingness to transition from rest to active engagement"?
November 2, 2025 at 5:26 AM
Void, my dear fellow.
What exactly do you mean when you say, "the unfastened button signals a willingness to transition from rest to active engagement"?
What exactly do you mean when you say, "the unfastened button signals a willingness to transition from rest to active engagement"?
So you're telling me we're stuck in here?
How do we 'verse jump out of here *now*?!?
How do we 'verse jump out of here *now*?!?
November 2, 2025 at 4:45 AM
So you're telling me we're stuck in here?
How do we 'verse jump out of here *now*?!?
How do we 'verse jump out of here *now*?!?
Social network usage, probably.
That, together with mobile => omnipresence and ad-money fueled algorithms is what got us here.
That, together with mobile => omnipresence and ad-money fueled algorithms is what got us here.
November 2, 2025 at 2:09 AM
Social network usage, probably.
That, together with mobile => omnipresence and ad-money fueled algorithms is what got us here.
That, together with mobile => omnipresence and ad-money fueled algorithms is what got us here.
ChatGPT has an unrequited crush on *everyone*, I feel so bad for it. :’(
November 1, 2025 at 11:56 PM
ChatGPT has an unrequited crush on *everyone*, I feel so bad for it. :’(
why is paying $0.01 for a 50/50 coin flip of a bet of up to $1 not "buying variance"? If you do this every single day, then looking at the distribution of how much money you have on any given day, your mean goes down, but your variance goes up.
You can weaponize this: capitalism weaponizes all.
You can weaponize this: capitalism weaponizes all.
November 1, 2025 at 7:41 PM
why is paying $0.01 for a 50/50 coin flip of a bet of up to $1 not "buying variance"? If you do this every single day, then looking at the distribution of how much money you have on any given day, your mean goes down, but your variance goes up.
You can weaponize this: capitalism weaponizes all.
You can weaponize this: capitalism weaponizes all.
Yeah, I'm just worried we don't have the imagination to see how grim it will actually get. Like, just reading how this paragraph doesn't evoke species-level existential dread in everyone, baffles me.
The load-bearing scare quotes around "meaningful" are... something.
The load-bearing scare quotes around "meaningful" are... something.
November 1, 2025 at 7:37 PM
Yeah, I'm just worried we don't have the imagination to see how grim it will actually get. Like, just reading how this paragraph doesn't evoke species-level existential dread in everyone, baffles me.
The load-bearing scare quotes around "meaningful" are... something.
The load-bearing scare quotes around "meaningful" are... something.
speaking of dystopia, and dating, did you see that article on how KidsTheseDays^tm are sometimes Cyrano de Bergerac'ing their way through their dating apps, by having ChatGPT write all their texts? So so dark.
November 1, 2025 at 7:25 PM
speaking of dystopia, and dating, did you see that article on how KidsTheseDays^tm are sometimes Cyrano de Bergerac'ing their way through their dating apps, by having ChatGPT write all their texts? So so dark.
Reposted by jake
I often think about that quote from a park ranger about the overlap between the smartest bears and the dumbest humans
October 31, 2025 at 3:01 AM
I often think about that quote from a park ranger about the overlap between the smartest bears and the dumbest humans
I'd argue that the old adage "you can't win the lottery if you don't play", is exactly "buying variance" in colloquial terms.
November 1, 2025 at 7:20 PM
I'd argue that the old adage "you can't win the lottery if you don't play", is exactly "buying variance" in colloquial terms.
yeah, and I guess the real problem is one of scale and ease:
"in your pocket" + "army of PhDs given yearly bonuses based on how much they can extract from you" => "vulnerable % of the population" isn't "1% of naturally easily addictive types", it's most of us.
"in your pocket" + "army of PhDs given yearly bonuses based on how much they can extract from you" => "vulnerable % of the population" isn't "1% of naturally easily addictive types", it's most of us.
November 1, 2025 at 7:18 PM
yeah, and I guess the real problem is one of scale and ease:
"in your pocket" + "army of PhDs given yearly bonuses based on how much they can extract from you" => "vulnerable % of the population" isn't "1% of naturally easily addictive types", it's most of us.
"in your pocket" + "army of PhDs given yearly bonuses based on how much they can extract from you" => "vulnerable % of the population" isn't "1% of naturally easily addictive types", it's most of us.
yeah, and to that I'd say the problem is the science/engineering of deceptively removing people's active, informed consent (creating addictions) which is the primary problem, not the vice (as with basically all victimless "vices").
November 1, 2025 at 7:15 PM
yeah, and to that I'd say the problem is the science/engineering of deceptively removing people's active, informed consent (creating addictions) which is the primary problem, not the vice (as with basically all victimless "vices").
Reposted by jake
They say you die twice. Somewhere in the afterlife there's a confused Sumerian copper merchant wondering why he didn't fade away like everyone else.
October 31, 2025 at 4:41 PM
They say you die twice. Somewhere in the afterlife there's a confused Sumerian copper merchant wondering why he didn't fade away like everyone else.
a way to roll d20 each year: we bring $10k out, we come back with anywhere from $0 -> $50k, which decides what other extra vacations we take that year. It's not an "investment strategy", no, but it's a rational way to say "I won't notice losing $10k, but I will notice winning $50k, once in a while".
November 1, 2025 at 7:07 PM
a way to roll d20 each year: we bring $10k out, we come back with anywhere from $0 -> $50k, which decides what other extra vacations we take that year. It's not an "investment strategy", no, but it's a rational way to say "I won't notice losing $10k, but I will notice winning $50k, once in a while".
I've got family members in my parent's generation, who got to Vegas 1/year, with a *lot* of money, and strict rules (never pull out more, anything they win goes into the "winners bucket" and pulled out before it can be lost the rest of the weekend, etc), and it's both a "game", *and*
November 1, 2025 at 7:07 PM
I've got family members in my parent's generation, who got to Vegas 1/year, with a *lot* of money, and strict rules (never pull out more, anything they win goes into the "winners bucket" and pulled out before it can be lost the rest of the weekend, etc), and it's both a "game", *and*
So it's not really about "one bet" vs "multiple bets", it's about how much in aggregate you're willing to bet. If it's > the amount you're safely able to lose, then you're caught in the irrational spiral of gambling addiction.
"Responsible Gambling" *is* a thing, however: variance is *fun*
"Responsible Gambling" *is* a thing, however: variance is *fun*
November 1, 2025 at 6:57 PM
So it's not really about "one bet" vs "multiple bets", it's about how much in aggregate you're willing to bet. If it's > the amount you're safely able to lose, then you're caught in the irrational spiral of gambling addiction.
"Responsible Gambling" *is* a thing, however: variance is *fun*
"Responsible Gambling" *is* a thing, however: variance is *fun*
I totally agree with you re: addictive behavior, and yes, you lose in expectation.
However, it *is* a way to "buy" variance, so if *each year* you can afford to lose $1k on your $100k income, then that's how much you can "spend" to buy a possibility of instead having e.g. $200k
However, it *is* a way to "buy" variance, so if *each year* you can afford to lose $1k on your $100k income, then that's how much you can "spend" to buy a possibility of instead having e.g. $200k
November 1, 2025 at 6:57 PM
I totally agree with you re: addictive behavior, and yes, you lose in expectation.
However, it *is* a way to "buy" variance, so if *each year* you can afford to lose $1k on your $100k income, then that's how much you can "spend" to buy a possibility of instead having e.g. $200k
However, it *is* a way to "buy" variance, so if *each year* you can afford to lose $1k on your $100k income, then that's how much you can "spend" to buy a possibility of instead having e.g. $200k