@heparain.bsky.social
Most of these guys are arguing just so they can prove Will wrong. They are not ready to engage in a good-faith conversation.
November 12, 2025 at 7:05 PM
Most of these guys are arguing just so they can prove Will wrong. They are not ready to engage in a good-faith conversation.
Are you speaking English?
November 12, 2025 at 3:10 PM
Are you speaking English?
Keep arguing for arguing’s sake. Good day.
November 12, 2025 at 3:01 PM
Keep arguing for arguing’s sake. Good day.
Well, you can wind the clock 15 yrs back and reassess the results, as nothing material has really changed (maybe more CVT engines in non-luxury vehicles, but those should last a while with proper maintenance)
November 12, 2025 at 2:59 PM
Well, you can wind the clock 15 yrs back and reassess the results, as nothing material has really changed (maybe more CVT engines in non-luxury vehicles, but those should last a while with proper maintenance)
If I wanted my comeback I’d have asked your mom.
November 11, 2025 at 9:55 PM
If I wanted my comeback I’d have asked your mom.
“ instantly void your warranty if you even think about changing your own oil on it”
Tell us you know nothing about cars without telling us.
Tell us you know nothing about cars without telling us.
November 11, 2025 at 8:24 PM
“ instantly void your warranty if you even think about changing your own oil on it”
Tell us you know nothing about cars without telling us.
Tell us you know nothing about cars without telling us.
Arguing for arguing’s sake. Could you name 2-3 cars that you can buy in 2025 for 30k with planned obsolescence ie not run comfortably for 10-15 years with regular maintenance without major issues? Focus on IC/hybrid ICs for now, for a better comparison.
November 11, 2025 at 8:23 PM
Arguing for arguing’s sake. Could you name 2-3 cars that you can buy in 2025 for 30k with planned obsolescence ie not run comfortably for 10-15 years with regular maintenance without major issues? Focus on IC/hybrid ICs for now, for a better comparison.
I bought a new Hyundai Elantra for $16200 in 2012. Got to 120k miles mo problem before being written off in an accident.
November 11, 2025 at 8:19 PM
I bought a new Hyundai Elantra for $16200 in 2012. Got to 120k miles mo problem before being written off in an accident.
Nah, he was pretty well-known in rightwing circles.
November 11, 2025 at 8:12 PM
Nah, he was pretty well-known in rightwing circles.
Second, “empirical”. So, you’ve done a longitudinal survey sampling a wide variety of physical goods at comparable price points and timeframes (say 1950s vs 2020s), and concluded that on avg, they’ve gotten shittier, right?
I’m assuming that’s what you mean by “empirical” as opposed to “anecdotal”?
I’m assuming that’s what you mean by “empirical” as opposed to “anecdotal”?
November 11, 2025 at 6:15 PM
Second, “empirical”. So, you’ve done a longitudinal survey sampling a wide variety of physical goods at comparable price points and timeframes (say 1950s vs 2020s), and concluded that on avg, they’ve gotten shittier, right?
I’m assuming that’s what you mean by “empirical” as opposed to “anecdotal”?
I’m assuming that’s what you mean by “empirical” as opposed to “anecdotal”?
Based on your wording, that “physical goods are not, as an empirical matter, experiencing enshittification?”
First, you don’t know what enshittification means.
1/
First, you don’t know what enshittification means.
1/
November 11, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Based on your wording, that “physical goods are not, as an empirical matter, experiencing enshittification?”
First, you don’t know what enshittification means.
1/
First, you don’t know what enshittification means.
1/
Yes that’s what he’s saying.
Take some time out, go breathe, think critically and engage with the objective of arriving at correct conclusions, not winning arguments.
Take some time out, go breathe, think critically and engage with the objective of arriving at correct conclusions, not winning arguments.
November 11, 2025 at 2:55 PM
Yes that’s what he’s saying.
Take some time out, go breathe, think critically and engage with the objective of arriving at correct conclusions, not winning arguments.
Take some time out, go breathe, think critically and engage with the objective of arriving at correct conclusions, not winning arguments.
You want to argue the graph is faulty because it stops at 2019.
I get that people don’t like this Will guy, but you’re clutching at straws at this point.
I get that people don’t like this Will guy, but you’re clutching at straws at this point.
November 11, 2025 at 2:52 PM
You want to argue the graph is faulty because it stops at 2019.
I get that people don’t like this Will guy, but you’re clutching at straws at this point.
I get that people don’t like this Will guy, but you’re clutching at straws at this point.
How many cars in the first place have these rent-seeking features that are crucial to the operation of the vehicle, as opposed to being super nice to have items?
How many cars on the mkt in 2025 charge a subs for heated seats?
Heck, how many cars had heated and/or ventilated seats 70 years ago?
How many cars on the mkt in 2025 charge a subs for heated seats?
Heck, how many cars had heated and/or ventilated seats 70 years ago?
November 11, 2025 at 2:50 PM
How many cars in the first place have these rent-seeking features that are crucial to the operation of the vehicle, as opposed to being super nice to have items?
How many cars on the mkt in 2025 charge a subs for heated seats?
Heck, how many cars had heated and/or ventilated seats 70 years ago?
How many cars on the mkt in 2025 charge a subs for heated seats?
Heck, how many cars had heated and/or ventilated seats 70 years ago?
You think those geriatric motherfuckers should be in the senate?
November 10, 2025 at 2:49 PM
You think those geriatric motherfuckers should be in the senate?
Reposted
Nobody in HIS echo chamber is asking that- literally the rest of the world on the other hand…
November 8, 2025 at 11:11 PM
Nobody in HIS echo chamber is asking that- literally the rest of the world on the other hand…
A bit of a dumbass take. You forget to mention that Mamdani was running against both the Dem and Republican establishment.
November 6, 2025 at 10:30 PM
A bit of a dumbass take. You forget to mention that Mamdani was running against both the Dem and Republican establishment.
Reposted
I can see this in my own extended family. It's soul crushing, frankly, to see people who are perfectly capable of morality and decency willfully take leave of that decency to indulge in the worst parts of themselves through Trump.
October 30, 2025 at 10:53 AM
I can see this in my own extended family. It's soul crushing, frankly, to see people who are perfectly capable of morality and decency willfully take leave of that decency to indulge in the worst parts of themselves through Trump.
A story in two pictures
October 26, 2025 at 11:20 AM
A story in two pictures
You said:
“some of the worst instances in history were not only legal, but mandated by law”
Well sure, eg 3/5ths in Article I of the US Constitution. That’s besides the point. There’s justice and there’s law. I’m only pointing out the lawful aspects of what he is doing to the WH.
“some of the worst instances in history were not only legal, but mandated by law”
Well sure, eg 3/5ths in Article I of the US Constitution. That’s besides the point. There’s justice and there’s law. I’m only pointing out the lawful aspects of what he is doing to the WH.
October 23, 2025 at 6:01 PM
You said:
“some of the worst instances in history were not only legal, but mandated by law”
Well sure, eg 3/5ths in Article I of the US Constitution. That’s besides the point. There’s justice and there’s law. I’m only pointing out the lawful aspects of what he is doing to the WH.
“some of the worst instances in history were not only legal, but mandated by law”
Well sure, eg 3/5ths in Article I of the US Constitution. That’s besides the point. There’s justice and there’s law. I’m only pointing out the lawful aspects of what he is doing to the WH.
Changing the topic again. I won’t litigate this new stuff that you bring up.
My original point was that strictly speaking, the president demolishing the East Wing isn’t illegal.
Anything else is just you finding something else that you can use to win this pointless argument.
My original point was that strictly speaking, the president demolishing the East Wing isn’t illegal.
Anything else is just you finding something else that you can use to win this pointless argument.
October 23, 2025 at 5:57 PM
Changing the topic again. I won’t litigate this new stuff that you bring up.
My original point was that strictly speaking, the president demolishing the East Wing isn’t illegal.
Anything else is just you finding something else that you can use to win this pointless argument.
My original point was that strictly speaking, the president demolishing the East Wing isn’t illegal.
Anything else is just you finding something else that you can use to win this pointless argument.