Corn Woman 🌽 @WomanCorn@schelling.pt
My divorce is the second-worst thing that ever happened to me.
(The worst thing that ever happened to me was my marriage, of course.)
If you think responding to me is a waste of time, I strongly recommend that you don't respond to me.
Save us both the time and energy.
Bob: The most charitable case is that Carol misread your post and then doubled down to cover their mistake.
Alice: You think that's the _most charitable_ case?
So how do you get a tweet with tons of replies that mentions no one and is set to "only the people mentioned can reply"?
"Well when events change, I change my mind. What do you do?"
-- Paul Samuelson
I keep seeing people using the option that turns Twitter into Facebook.
Please don't.
(I'm talking about "people you follow can reply".)
Submitted for your approval:
_We Did Start The Fire_, a song about rapid social change in the Paleolithic.
Bob: * produces a multi-part argument including evidence, inference, law, and probable outcome *
Alice: Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.
Bob: * head explodes *
Sometimes, I end up sitting next to my ex at the kids' sporting events.
And if that happens, we usually chat.
And if we do, inevitably, I come away upset at the end of it.
The PA at the pool is playing Metallica and AC/DC.
Better than Christmas music, I guess.
A library that does just what you need is better then writing it yourself, because it's better tested and maintained.
A library that does what you need + a lot of other stuff too introduces risk.
Managing dependency for too many libraries sucks.
Solve for optimal library size.
The visiting team just did an a capella rendition of _Hooked on a feeling_.
They're sure trying to.
You could make it illegal to do the trending thing.
Sometimes it's hard to target such a thing with the law that doesn't either hit lots of other stuff, or allow them to make a minor tweak and continue on.
Suppose a trend picks up amongst professionals as to how their profession should be practiced.
And suppose other people with skin in the game don't like it.
Can you pass a law to overturn a trend?
Can you pass a law to overturn an administrative policy?
Yes. Or at least to clarify the law that the agency must apply.
But then the legislature is down in the details.
But Chevron has been applied inconsistently. Every sitting supreme court justice has argued at least once that Chevron doesn't apply in a certain circumstance.
Suppose an administrative agency is tasked with setting and enforcing standards. And you don't like the standards they've set.
Can the court overturn the standards?
No.
This is called Chevron Deference, the principal that the court must defer to agency interpretations.
Can a legislature pass a law to overturn an administrative letter?
It's not clear.
If it's even adjudicable by the courts!
Lots of laws are enforced by withholding of funds. You may not even have standing to sue!
