Secretive Q
@decakay.bsky.social
From finance to neuroscience to aquariums
My first car didn't warm up if it wasn't moving, so I couldn't even idle it to melt off any freezing rain.
Popcorn and eggnog will do you well!
Popcorn and eggnog will do you well!
January 1, 2026 at 2:21 AM
My first car didn't warm up if it wasn't moving, so I couldn't even idle it to melt off any freezing rain.
Popcorn and eggnog will do you well!
Popcorn and eggnog will do you well!
The only thing they will notice is actual inflation in their district. But it can't happen because of obvious sabotage causing shortages, because that builds gumption rather than fatigue
December 31, 2025 at 6:41 PM
The only thing they will notice is actual inflation in their district. But it can't happen because of obvious sabotage causing shortages, because that builds gumption rather than fatigue
I think it would prove to be a very exciting Easter Egg hunt!
December 30, 2025 at 9:51 PM
I think it would prove to be a very exciting Easter Egg hunt!
Holy crap, a civil exchange online haha
December 29, 2025 at 1:26 AM
Holy crap, a civil exchange online haha
Here's what happened, though. A sexist post was made by someone intending to denigrate her. It came across your feed. You asked a legit question and I was pretty rude about it
Though I'd honestly intended to respond to the OP, who could have fact-checked before forwarding a sexist meme.
Though I'd honestly intended to respond to the OP, who could have fact-checked before forwarding a sexist meme.
December 29, 2025 at 1:14 AM
Here's what happened, though. A sexist post was made by someone intending to denigrate her. It came across your feed. You asked a legit question and I was pretty rude about it
Though I'd honestly intended to respond to the OP, who could have fact-checked before forwarding a sexist meme.
Though I'd honestly intended to respond to the OP, who could have fact-checked before forwarding a sexist meme.
Holy fucking sexism. She started her own law practice and owns a franchise. You'll disagree with her, but holy fuck. "Salon owner", as if she's not done so much more.
December 29, 2025 at 1:00 AM
Holy fucking sexism. She started her own law practice and owns a franchise. You'll disagree with her, but holy fuck. "Salon owner", as if she's not done so much more.
Is Hegseth the guy who slept his way into promotions at FOX?
December 28, 2025 at 5:46 PM
Is Hegseth the guy who slept his way into promotions at FOX?
I have two different friends that swear by them!
December 26, 2025 at 6:28 PM
I have two different friends that swear by them!
Like, nail him on the China trademark. Make it a super-steep hill that others have to climb.
December 23, 2025 at 6:41 PM
Like, nail him on the China trademark. Make it a super-steep hill that others have to climb.
Shareholder news just doesn't work. Fiduciary duty means that sucking up to politicians is *actually* the 'game winning move'. Competing state-funded media has a place in any analysis, but the other bulwark will be solely private ownership.
December 23, 2025 at 4:15 PM
Shareholder news just doesn't work. Fiduciary duty means that sucking up to politicians is *actually* the 'game winning move'. Competing state-funded media has a place in any analysis, but the other bulwark will be solely private ownership.
It's a problem of game-theory and externalities more than capitalism. Capitalism *fails* on AGW because people refuse the grant property rights to the remaining carbon buffer. That's not a failure of the model, it's a failure to predict humans. No socialist model of AGW would survive people either.
December 20, 2025 at 8:44 PM
It's a problem of game-theory and externalities more than capitalism. Capitalism *fails* on AGW because people refuse the grant property rights to the remaining carbon buffer. That's not a failure of the model, it's a failure to predict humans. No socialist model of AGW would survive people either.
There was a large push from the center-right in economics saying "the only hope is to get down the cost of renewables". They're not wrong, except that half of society forgot that you need price incentives to create them.
December 20, 2025 at 8:35 PM
There was a large push from the center-right in economics saying "the only hope is to get down the cost of renewables". They're not wrong, except that half of society forgot that you need price incentives to create them.
It should be harder, not easier, for a billionaire to avoid emoluments. He should have been impeached when China granted his trademark in China during his first presidency.
December 19, 2025 at 5:19 PM
It should be harder, not easier, for a billionaire to avoid emoluments. He should have been impeached when China granted his trademark in China during his first presidency.
I can't tell if Venezuela itself is a distraction. AFAICT, the interdicted oil tankers and the oil therein belong to Russia, so this noise around Venezuela might be providing cover for Putin to not seem weak while America punishes him.
December 19, 2025 at 3:27 PM
I can't tell if Venezuela itself is a distraction. AFAICT, the interdicted oil tankers and the oil therein belong to Russia, so this noise around Venezuela might be providing cover for Putin to not seem weak while America punishes him.
It super-duper depends on how we spend the profits from the pipeline. If Canada went back to 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid, the income might create net benefit.
But, chances are our governments and households will leverage against the pipeline, meaning that we get further from being able to pivot.
But, chances are our governments and households will leverage against the pipeline, meaning that we get further from being able to pivot.
December 19, 2025 at 2:38 AM
It super-duper depends on how we spend the profits from the pipeline. If Canada went back to 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid, the income might create net benefit.
But, chances are our governments and households will leverage against the pipeline, meaning that we get further from being able to pivot.
But, chances are our governments and households will leverage against the pipeline, meaning that we get further from being able to pivot.
This is so weird. AFAICT, the security reasons for doing this are actually to seize Russian assets (the oil on those tankers belongs to Russian oil companies). So to wag-the-dog like this must be to give Putin some cover at home while actually punishing him for Ukraine.
December 19, 2025 at 1:00 AM
This is so weird. AFAICT, the security reasons for doing this are actually to seize Russian assets (the oil on those tankers belongs to Russian oil companies). So to wag-the-dog like this must be to give Putin some cover at home while actually punishing him for Ukraine.
I think we agree. Now, I *do* respect 3rd party voters even while I'll look at the math and sigh. But it's the sit-outers that need to be brought in
I do agree tho, it's worthwhile not splitting the vote to prevent Trump's momentum. That's a theory-vs-practice thing. This 'lesser evil' thing sucks
I do agree tho, it's worthwhile not splitting the vote to prevent Trump's momentum. That's a theory-vs-practice thing. This 'lesser evil' thing sucks
December 18, 2025 at 10:27 PM
I think we agree. Now, I *do* respect 3rd party voters even while I'll look at the math and sigh. But it's the sit-outers that need to be brought in
I do agree tho, it's worthwhile not splitting the vote to prevent Trump's momentum. That's a theory-vs-practice thing. This 'lesser evil' thing sucks
I do agree tho, it's worthwhile not splitting the vote to prevent Trump's momentum. That's a theory-vs-practice thing. This 'lesser evil' thing sucks
It should be *easier* to trip up a billionaire on the emoluments clause, not harder. If your fingers are in more pies, you have higher burdens to meet proving that you don't have conflicts of interest ...
Trump should have be emolumented when China granted his Trademark after being elected
Trump should have be emolumented when China granted his Trademark after being elected
December 18, 2025 at 10:23 PM
It should be *easier* to trip up a billionaire on the emoluments clause, not harder. If your fingers are in more pies, you have higher burdens to meet proving that you don't have conflicts of interest ...
Trump should have be emolumented when China granted his Trademark after being elected
Trump should have be emolumented when China granted his Trademark after being elected
Obviously if it's a close race any additional vote for a candidate is valuable. A suppressed vote is worth one. An earned vote is worth one. A switched vote is worth two.
I do suspect that non-voters are a different cohort than 3rd party voters. 3rd party voters are at least engaged.
I do suspect that non-voters are a different cohort than 3rd party voters. 3rd party voters are at least engaged.
December 18, 2025 at 10:05 PM
Obviously if it's a close race any additional vote for a candidate is valuable. A suppressed vote is worth one. An earned vote is worth one. A switched vote is worth two.
I do suspect that non-voters are a different cohort than 3rd party voters. 3rd party voters are at least engaged.
I do suspect that non-voters are a different cohort than 3rd party voters. 3rd party voters are at least engaged.
Oh, I'm not disagreeing. People need to maximize their votes against Trump for the short period of time where it matters. I was just disagreeing that voting for someone else (who will lose) was the same as voting for him.
December 18, 2025 at 9:10 PM
Oh, I'm not disagreeing. People need to maximize their votes against Trump for the short period of time where it matters. I was just disagreeing that voting for someone else (who will lose) was the same as voting for him.
Hmmmn, no. A suppressed vote counts the same as a vote for a non-viable party. A switched vote is counted twice. A vote for is a vote for.
3rd party is useful. It shows discontent in a way that 'staying home' doesn't.
3rd party is useful. It shows discontent in a way that 'staying home' doesn't.
December 18, 2025 at 8:10 PM
Hmmmn, no. A suppressed vote counts the same as a vote for a non-viable party. A switched vote is counted twice. A vote for is a vote for.
3rd party is useful. It shows discontent in a way that 'staying home' doesn't.
3rd party is useful. It shows discontent in a way that 'staying home' doesn't.