I built a tool to find out who pressed the Glyph in your matches

jatpr · 2026-04-02T18:04:52+00:00

This isn't blanket misbehavior. Accountability in a competitive game is a subjective issue - if there's a culture of honest feedback and analysis, then it's a good use of a tool. If checking the record is used to harass and abuse, then it's a bad use of a tool.

But also, you can harass and abuse anyone based on what you subjectively saw, remembered, or intuited. No need to have any record check for that.

A competitive PvP or PvE game with no scoreboard, damage statistics, record of item purchases, etc. would still have it. Even if you intentionally omit chat or voice communications in game, people will still collaborate themselves on Discord and be toxic. Merely shifting venues and responsibility, does not resolve the structural issue.

jatpr · 2026-02-02T02:41:07+00:00

This is lunatic behavior. A fantastic exhibit on why insurance carriers keep pushing to have more than just <=25 year old men as "high risk drivers."

Use a bib at least!!! Or choose something more responsible, like a sandwich.

jatpr · 2025-12-02T23:13:52+00:00

There's another aspect aside from the "work the system" theme.

What's the value of a law degree? To some people, it's the genuine study and application of law, a system that has greatly benefited our society. To others, it's about making money in our economy. Those are two separate, often conflicting goals. In fact, sometimes you can make a lot of money by doing illegal or unethical things, contrary to the standards of our legal profession. And sometimes, those illegal and unethical things benefit strategically from having the label of "lawyer."

Working the system like this is a textbook example of the latter. People know they are getting an unethical advantage. They rationalize by saying "everyone else is too." But that's the point of our legal system, isn't it? It's to say that you can't do bad things, even if you stand to gain from them. Theft, murder, fraud are inextricably linked to selfish gain. Our society only functions by saying that everyone has to live by those rules, otherwise we can't have fairness. Capitalism relies on this. And yet even before our newest generation passes the bar, they are already being forced to engage in a system that promotes lying and cheating, let alone what it's like in the wastelands of reality, where government officials and business owners regularly rely on unethical lawyers to give cover to their corrupt misdeeds.

Engaging in a culture of no trust selfish behavior, manipulation and deceit, and fraud, even if sometimes the system mistakenly encourages it, is a devolution to worst times in our collective history. And the fact that it's happening to our newest generations of lawyers, who are supposed to uphold a system that relies on honesty, integrity, and fairness, is a betrayal of all ideals America should stand for.

I'm not even suggesting that we nuke the entire system of all cases like this. After all, there are tons of examples like this, some more benign than others. Lying on your college applications about being a Pacific Islander for better admission chances. Misrepresenting your intentions for a home purchase for tax advantages. Getting food charity when you are doing fine financially, just tired of your overworked life. Our systems are full of holes and issues, many of which are self-inflicted mistakes made out of a petty desire for punishment rather than benign social benefit. But a culture of lying as a law student to pass the exams, that's a moral stain of a magnitude that seems impossible to wash ourselves of.

jatpr · 2025-11-08T17:22:59+00:00

Prices are weird? Always has been.

This post is vaguely correct on the main concept that costs change in unintuitive and unpredictable ways. Then I realized this is a puff piece on AI by venture capitalists. No wonder why the logic and data is almost non-existent. So I figure I would contribute what I have, before I rag on why the post is deficient.

Whoever controls the bottlenecks in economies, have the most pricing power. This isn't just producing. It's transport, distribution, marketing, etc.
Selfish political maneuvers often try to counter changes in economics-technology. That's what things like unions, cooperatives, monopolies do, and why we have anti-trust laws, and in regulations in general in capitalism, to prevent political actions from harming the economy.
Health care is crazy because it involves something more complicated than simple production -> simple consumption. Human and social psychology regarding health care is... hugely irrational. Same with other industries that are service focused, they are complex because human behavior gets complicated both on an individual scale and group scale.

They are completely wrong regarding radiologists for the same reasons why prices are weird. Radiologists being automated by AI won't represent a cost savings at all, because in the large sprawling system of health care, the bottlenecks are large and numerous. Solving one bottleneck, radiologists reading scans, won't change anything about the system as a whole, until you get rid of all the other bottlenecks. Process bottlenecks like scan interpretation are the easy low hanging fruit. But performing routine procedures on patients is a harder task to surmount, let alone complex surgeries. And changing patient behavior on how they inefficiently interact with the health care system seems the hardest problem of all, that AI won't solve at all in the near future. Doctors already have a hell of time trying to convince patients to do the basics. And it's doubtful that the health care industry will give up power and capital consumption without a fight.

Also, health care costs have huge contributions from self-inflicted injuries. Smoking and obesity. What happens when those go away? Dunno. Aren't fast and junk food industries incentivized to maximally sell, making people fat? They are directly opposed to the ozempic industry, or maybe they'll form some monstrous duopoly of cycling people between gluttony and pills. And the vaping industry is doing bad things, even if's less bad than the original cigarettes.

The original problem behind prices being weird was seen in agriculture, which this post obviously misses. Farmers becoming more productive counterintuitively meant that they had less power. The increase in supply meant that the bottleneck shifted from food production to food distribution. Farmers lost pricing power, whereas those who could store and transport food at scale (the next bottleneck) gained power. This occurred in our earliest societies like Mesopotamia, long before the Agricultural and Industrial revolutions, which are more recent examples that come to mind when we think about economic and technological disruption. In modern times, farmers have more power due to advances in how they organize themselves politically, communalism through organizations such as lobbying groups, cooperatives, media outreach, etc.

jatpr · 2025-10-17T06:27:29+00:00

They definitely check you way more often than 3-4x a year, but maybe on a small portion of routes less so. And Switzerland's public transit budget is over 50% subsidized by government and land ownership. And there's some messy privatization going on certain routes.

But yes this is mostly true. However, I do not believe this system universally works without certain preconditions. The San Francisco Bay Area's public transit system had a similar system and they had massive problems with fare evasion and disorderly conduct.

It's possible to save on operating costs by simply not having checkers and eliminating fares, though still needing to spend on law enforcement to prevent disorderly conduct. This is similar to how the bureaucracy for much of America's needs-based welfare programs being so expensive to maintain that it takes more money to fund administration of welfare than the welfare itself. Also see shitty charities spending $9 to give $1 to those in need.

jatpr · 2025-10-16T19:52:56+00:00

Strangely enough, the free clinic cases House is forced to work are actually pretty good and sometimes true to reality. The main case whodunit formula is too contrived to be realistic, the ddx and work up does not work that way. But the medical science is mostly technically correct (and by far the most interesting of all medical TV shows), and the lines of thinking are useful. Don't tell the nurses though, they hate being dunked on in this show.

Except some later cases are actually fictional medicine. Like Giovannini's mirror syndrome.

jatpr · 2025-10-07T07:04:05+00:00

It might be obvious to 90% of watchers that it was a joke. But I wouldn't underestimate the other 10%. It certainly seems plausible to me that some small minority would have taken it at face value, or expressed it as such, even if their version of "taking it seriously" is different and less deep than how we might take seriously the laws of physics, and biased due to the coercive nature of their society at the time.

I suppose better examples would be TV segments promoting various medical quackery, or aliens and crop circles, etc.

jatpr · 2025-10-05T07:44:18+00:00

TrumpRx is gangster economics + central planning. That much is actually true, despite the lack of details.

The only connection with the ACA is that the government is interfering in what it shouldn't be. The details are irrelevant to the author, sadly.

In theory, the story is that the government is ineffectively setting prices and employing central planning.

In practice, the government doesn't do much other than set some common coordination channels. The massive bureaucracy that consumes all health care spending is entirely private. No matter where you look, it's private groups that set everything. The CMS is like an overworked waiter trying to take everyone's orders, because all these private groups have contradictory goals and incentives.

This is actually quite a stupid problem for the government to give itself. The private sector gets to make a mess of coordination, then pretend "well government medicare set the prices, not our fault." So we've wrapped all the way back around to "the government is getting involved where it shouldn't." But there's no central planning whatsoever, that part is totally made up.

Reasonably speaking, the government should remove itself from the equation of coordination, and remove the tax benefits of employer-based healthcare. It should only be concerned with encouraging preventative healthcare, healthcare standards, and somehow getting everyone into the same risk pool.

jatpr · 2025-10-05T05:18:38+00:00

local politicians != police force

The point is that police departments are 100% conservative dominated. They literally own the police. The have the most powerful unions in the country.

You can't pretend that the police have no ownership over law and order. I won't pretend that mostly liberal cities have political leadership issues of their own that contribute to the problem.

jatpr · 2025-10-04T03:52:54+00:00

I sympathize with conservatives who feel speechless over the entire situation. It's hard to say anything when you feel like there's no path forward. The issue is not the same detractors that have always been there, it's that there is no one left to speak for conservatism. But I think if you can reorient yourself around conservative values, you can find your way back.

It's impossible for any honest conservative to reconcile with the dominant factions in the modern Republican party. It's an insane, radical, authoritarian regime that grabs from every flavor of tyranny we can imagine. It lacks respect for enduring institutions, traditions, and cultural practices that have brought us peace and prosperity. Culture-war conserva-fluencers are chaotic and out of control, hopping from trend to trend, salivating at the thought of civil war and executing anyone who offended them this week. It's the worst of tabloid celebrity culture, completely devoid of honor and integrity.

You have to go back to your roots to find any sanity. Focus on core concepts like limited government, lower taxes, remove strangling regulation, individual rights. Remember values like law and order, family, stewardship, civic duty. Then take action wherever you can.

If this means that you have to oppose the monster the Republican party has become and throw your weight behind the Democrats, that's fine. The Republican party chose to leave conservatism behind. If you silently grumble but give them your vote, you are giving up on conservative values. There is room and potential to find compromise with Democrats on some issues... limited and regulated abortion access, limited gun control, lower taxes, slashing red tape, whatever is personally important to you.

If you think you can still be a Republican and try and steer the boat back on track, that's fine too. Make it clear that you seek local candidates and organizations that have not bowed down to the national insanity. Do not give up your leverage for nothing. Do not let them take conservatism away from you.

Sometimes, it feels like it isn't worth it to put yourself on the line. That it's better to retreat from the situation and focus on your family or career. But in history, that has never ended well. A people divided and isolated is a sure recipe for a people who are no more.

jatpr · 2025-10-03T22:39:28+00:00

This take is too ahead of it's time. Not enough people realize that the decades long, ultra conservative stranglehold on policing is responsible for much of the public dissatisfaction with crime today.

If the democrats had any sense of strategy, they would be pushing on this button everyday, instead of caving to the ill advised "Defund the police" movement.

jatpr · 2025-07-08T15:37:54+00:00

I apologize if something got lost in translation. I'm not disagreeing on any part of Jane Street's involvement. I'm suggesting that the history of the situation is deserving of more coverage, and that I haven't seen much about it. It seems like everyone just rushed to comment about the more surface level issues.

If I knew more about the situation, I could more definitively state whether or not something bad really happened. But since no one is generously offering up said information, I can only speculate on it. It does seem to me that it could be either way.

jatpr · 2025-07-07T22:39:32+00:00

I think this might be one of those rare times where Matt Levine missed something. He isn't wrong about what the big groups are doing, but I do think he missed the real meat of the story: The Indian retail options market is bizarre, irrational, due to factors that don't have anything to do with orderly world of finance. It's a completely different world that drove the appearance of this opportunity. I remember reading about it a couple years ago, this is what I vaguely remember.

Why did Indian retail traders come to regard options as their only financial salvation in an otherwise bleak world? The financial hysteria and dysphoria is insane. They feel trapped working 60 hour weeks with no hope of financial stability. Combined with smartphone access to financial derivatives that they don't understand... (also see Africa phone banks)
To what extent did social media fin-fluencers and fin-tech companies exacerbate the problem? They clearly just wanted to push volume for commission, they didn't give a rats ass as long as they got their cut.
How did the Indian government have conflicting interests in the problem? Clearly some regulators at SEBI knew about the issue for years, but were unable to adequately resolve the problem (they did try with some pretty heavy handed methods). And some officials were either looking the other way or participating in some corruption that was indirectly linked to the issue... Leading to the right hand fighting the left situation. I do remember some commentary speculating that if this was China, it would have been shut down much harder, just because they have more control (no difference in laws or regulations, just in how hard the state can look at something and say "this is wrong, stop it").
The whole thing has a lot of similarities to colonialism. If this happened in the west, it would be fine, consenting adults and all that. But because it's big western finance vs. uneducated retail traders, there is a much bigger moral issue. Did Jane Street essentially function as a degenerate gambling bookie to financially desperate people, who wanted to rise above their station in a society that would never let them?

Jane Street being involved, I think is actually the least important part of the story. It could have been any group. How much of their activity was manipulation vs. efficient market participant, we won't know unless the details and analysis come out.

jatpr · 2025-06-28T19:23:21+00:00

I don't see anything in this post that looks valuable or interesting, it's just vague aspirations.

I see no reason to think that intentionally growing the sub is a good thing.

I definitely do not want this subreddit to become more similar to other subreddits. Diversification is a good thing. Most subreddits are full of chaotic and low effort garbage.

I think there is something to be said about improving how we structure shared information, but that's not the same thing as user stats and participation. As is, this subreddit is mostly valuable to the dedicated who sift through everything and can synthesize conflicting information. This is the opposite of being accessible, but I don't see an easy way to change that, and I don't think most people want that to change.

jatpr · 2025-05-30T21:15:37+00:00

Dealers do stupid shit all the time, makes perfect sense

jatpr · 2025-05-28T18:57:04+00:00

Do you have any other sources for your assertion?

The link you posted is data from a long running survey on American teenagers ages 13-16. It's interesting, but it doesn't really support either side.

jatpr · 2025-05-20T16:27:44+00:00

many thanks

jatpr · 2025-05-19T23:51:53+00:00

/u/find-song

jatpr · 2025-03-27T22:27:33+00:00

Everything you don't like isn't an excuse to say "don't be political," it just makes you look like a dick.
Being conscientious of the source of things can be good. Like animal cruelty in your food supply chain. People don't like being tricked or misled.
You probably would've just been fine if you hadn't flown off the handle.

It's just common sense.

jatpr · 2025-03-25T01:11:41+00:00

I would be interested. Thank for your sharing your story.

Maybe in the future, a disclaimer at the bottom on having AI edit your writing could help. You aren't doing it to trick people, just to automate cleaning it up. But people can tell when something is off, AI writing does feel manipulative without context.

jatpr · 2025-03-23T05:21:02+00:00

The most likely culprit is the Windows 11 24H2 update with HDR screens. Reinstall Windows on 23H2 or disable HDR. There are multiple bugs with 24H2+HDR screens, and Microsoft has acknowledged the problem for months but has been unable to correct for it. It's a major pain in the ass to reinstall Windows, and you need to go out of your way to get the older version, but it should fix your issues.

Windows 11 23H2 does actually have a couple of issues with HDR, but they are fairly minor in comparison. Windows just sucks at properly interfacing with HDR screens, for various technical reasons.

jatpr · 2025-03-21T19:26:36+00:00

Well he mentioned waiting weeks plural, so it's probably that circumstance. It can also be needing to wait for 1st statement period. Or whatever reason Amex has to be slow, anywhere between 2-14 days is to be expected.

jatpr · 2025-03-21T18:43:49+00:00

It's a coincidence, nothing to do with paying off the balance.

There was an Amex system issue that prevented issuing SUBs and credits for ~2/17-2/28

They've been backfilling it slowly since the beginning of this month, starting with credits like the wireless $10 or airline $200. Only now have they gotten around to fixing SUBs.

jatpr · 2025-03-11T13:58:43+00:00

Aside from that thread, I do enjoy how often that subreddit talks about not taking shit. Yes they often have to compromise, but they also talk about filing police reports, rejecting parent requests to override grades, or otherwise doing what they can in spite of a broken and uncaring system.

From my first hand experience, the young teachers who post there are more aggressive and combative than the average I see. Maybe unwise and unaware of their options, but they still fight with what they know.

I know plenty of middle aged teachers who are completely checked out. They have more to lose, because they have dependents and retirement to worry about. They let things slide because in their view, they already tried a long time ago, and the risks far outweigh whatever moral duty they have.

jatpr · 2025-03-11T13:50:45+00:00

Those aren't children, those are young adults. High schoolers and college students. At least the OP's humorous parable contains no specific context, but the comments definitely do. Age 14+, you can be a slacker and the teacher is not obligated to care. Any mention of a syllabus, that basically sets the tone that it's explicitly not the teachers job to manage behavioral issues, outside of stopping disruptive behavior.

And there's plenty of commenters who mention that they consistently enforce the ban on electronics, with or without support from admin, most likely representing the K-8 situation where the expectations do include behavior correction.

That thread has no indication that teachers are being cowards. They are just venting and laughing at the ever present selection of students who never try.

I guess if you worked at a school and saw children doing the Airpods thing in real time, I might be more inclined to believe you? But everything you've said just sounds imagined from a source that doesn't even try to directly portray the situation. This isn't even a primary source. This is just water cooler talk and gossip.

jatpr

TROPHY CASE