dagmanVoice #1

Only if a reasonable expectation of ridership would justify the cost (considering also its impact on congestion and environment). In California, I'm concerned that both ridership expectations and cost estimates are overly optimistic.

Silly question. Can't imagine anyone would vote yes here.

Absolutely. Already feels like a weight has been lifted. I suspect much of the world feels the same. Would be ironic if our response to Trump-inspired division brought us a bit closer together. Probably wishful thinking, but one can hope.

Depends. If an Apple, Google, or Microsoft, maybe. They'd also need the same FDIC protections as the major banks. I want significant capital and an established brand behind my bank.

For a guy obsessed with election fraud, he's remarkably comfortable abusing his power to influence election outcomes. Let's hope it backfires on Nov 3.

Agree that both are bad. At least under the FEMA case, the individual responsible was fired: https://abc7.com/post/fema-employee-removed-role-after-telling-team-skip-houses-trump-signs-post-hurricane-milton-florida/15530823/ I don't see this as a partisan issue, but rather a Trump issue.

I'm sure tools to remove those watermarks will follow shortly, but it's worth a shot. My guess is that it'll remain hard to detect AI generated content with any certainty.

Touchscreens in cars have gone a bit too far, I think. Great for display, not for control. I prefer being able to control most functions without taking my eyes off the road.

I'd likely feel differently about it under any other president. No more vanity projects.

Feel like she put her personal differences ahead of the party in a very important election. Don't think it'll matter much in the end, but bad for both her political career and the party.

Scamming is getting more sophisticated by the day with AI. We're going to have to be hypervigilant / borderline paranoid to avoid scams in the future.

Don't think they had much choice if they want to sell iPhones in China.

Rubio is actually one of the few people in this administration I have some respect for. I don't like that he carries Trump's positions, but that's a requirement to have influence in the administration. He manages to put the sanest narrative possible on the chaos without getting exiled by Trump. I see him as a fairly thoughtful pragmatist navigating a tricky path through tumultuous times.

I'm not defending everything he does, or advocating military intervention in Cuba. I just think he's a more pragmatic voice in an admin where that's in very short supply.

Worry? Yes. Change course? I don't think so. There's great risk in choosing the winners and losers but collectively I think the bets are warranted.

Some might argue it's a slippery slope, but would we really not want to prevent a serious disease if we could?

There should be an agreed statute of limitations on apologies for historical wrongs. At some point they become our collective history rather than our collective responsibility.

Enough already. I think the impact of this type of pressure will be waning soon. I can't image support for this type of vengeance justice goes far beyond Trump.

You think it's justified? Why?

Security failures for sure, but with the rapid advancement of AI, there's much more to come, unfortunately.

Hegseth needs to go. If the blue wave is realized next week, change is a-comin'

We shouldn't have to. Would rather the businesses find better ways to compete.

I do think the chocolate tastes different now. Not a fan of the change.

Better they be transparent and provide us time to build defenses than have us be surprised later when bad actors get their hands on it.

Who gave this a thumbs down? Why?

Two fun size, kids' choice

Spend or get left behind. High risk, but with significant downside/upside.

If the shoe were on the other foot, how would the Dems feel? This is over the line, for sure, and unfortunately undermines their claim to the moral high ground over Trump and his supporters.

Unfortunately that guarantee would likely be on a best-effort basis. Scary to think of your brain getting hacked, for sure.

Means they do the best they can, no guarantees. Not exactly reassuring.

So much more. Advice I've taken: Keep challenging the AI tools with problems you think are beyond their capabilities and see what happens. If you're like me, more often than not you'll be surprised.

Yes, though I'm not sure how independent the investigations are these days.

Another step backwards.

Robot dogs replacing human-to-human engagement in immigration enforcement is a recipe for disaster and a big step toward dystopian society. Of course, if the alternative is belligerent, callous ICE agents, maybe it's not such a leap.

Getting a flurry of political texts now. Looking forward to Nov 4 when spam texts will subside, I'm sure.

One can hope for at least a short reprieve. I suspect you're right, though.

I'm convinced there'll always be demand for watching movies on a giant screen, with great sound, and with other people. Very different experience.

What's old is new again! Love it.

Of course not. Way wrong on both sentiment and language.

Purists will say no. I tend to agree.

I trust them as much as anyone (by them I mean Dario Amodi, Demis Hassabis, and Sam Altman). Trust and confidence are two different things, though. I trust them to do the best they can to protect sensitive data, but in such a competitive, fast-moving space, I’m not confident they’ll always succeed.

I like my smartwatch, but nothing I couldn't live without. Maybe when they get more AI capabilities, possibly even in combination with smart glasses, I could see them becoming more essential.

Required to? No. Encouraged to? Yes. Employee ownership / profit sharing goes a long way.

We had virtually eradicated measles until this admin / RFK Jr. came along. We're backsliding into last century.

It's up to them, of course, though if I had to pick sides based on supporting musicians I'd be with the Dems.

From an investment standpoint, low-cost index funds will generally perform better than residential real estate over the long term when all costs are considered (property tax, maintenance, insurance, realtor costs, etc.). That said, it's a good way for most to build wealth. Where else can you borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars to support purchase of an appreciating asset?

Of course. Let the data centers make the case to those they'll most directly impact. Two possible outcomes: 1) they'll make a deal that sufficiently benefits the local community or 2) they'll go elsewhere and avoid landing where they're not wanted.

Loyal companion vs. judgmental roommate. At least that's the way it feels.

All true, but ya gotta love em. I'll admit, if I had grown up with cats I might feel differently.

Cat tolerant :)

Completely agree. I think Zelenskyy knows who he's dealing with by now. I suspect his real audience is Congress and our allies, not Trump.

Let's just stick to the Constitution: they “shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour”. We should never deviate from that foundational guidance lightly.

Very long terms is an interesting idea. It looks like the average tenure of a Supreme Court justice over the last 50 years is about 26 years, so the impact of a 20-year term might not be that great. Is it worth deviating from the Constitution for that?

Definitely some of both. AI is driving real efficiency gains for sure, especially in tech, but it's also providing convenient ground cover for ordinary cost cutting.

I thought Starshield was controlled by the US government, not Musk. Decisions like this (ally and national security) should sit with elected leaders.

I used to think former presidents should step back and leave the stage to their successors. The past 10 years has changed my mind. Democrats are struggling for a cohesive voice, and if Obama can articulate what millions are feeling and champion needed change, I'm all for it.

People dying suggests not.

Their debt is already ~120% of GDP. They can't spend their way out of every problem, but education seems like a reasonable priority. Money's gotta come from somewhere though. Higher taxes? Cuts elsewhere? More debt doesn't seem like a great answer (btw, their debt ratio is still less than ours).

Please do. Ingredients on me.

They definitely need guardrails, but a ban goes too far. I do think social media has a role to play in kids' development. We need digitally capable kids, not digitally sheltered ones.

If it saves lives, why not? A genuine humanitarian effort. More power to her.

I'll admit I'm immediately skeptical when a poll starts "Was President Trump right to..."

I'm a strong free press advocate, but I admit the BBC editing was a major mistake. Trump has a legitimate case here, I think. That said, a $10B ask feels a bit like a shakedown.

Agree big numbers do more for deterrence, but they still need to be proportional.

Agreed. Age isn't a proxy for judgment. I'd rather have someone 80 and sharp than 40 and clueless. Though I'd take either over 80 and clueless.

They're not quite ready for prime time yet, but progressing fast. Humanoid robots today remind me of ChatGPT in 2022 - impressive but imperfect, and easy to underestimate. Give em a few years.

His lawsuit. His deposition. Don't like it? Drop the case.

Good article today on this topic. AI now correctly diagnosing difficult cases at better than twice the rate of doctors: https://techcrunch.com/2026/10/22/microsofts-mustafa-suleyman-says-its-ai-outperforms-doctors-on-hard-cases-as-he-chases-medical-superintelligence/

Agree with the sentiment, but the stockholders own the company, so they're the ones ultimately paying.

Prices seem to be dropping. High interest rates are keeping buyers on the sidelines and those with low mortgage rates aren't moving. Good time to be a cash buyer, for those fortunate enough.

Why would this make you trust AI development more?

If I could be close to the stage, big stadiums would be fine, but these days its $1K+ to get those seats. Out of control.

Musk says their humanoid robots will be on the market in 2028. His track record says it'll probably be later, but I do think that could be a huge market for them. And their biggest competitors are from China so will probably be restricted from selling in US.

I think it's probably warranted. What they're doing with Muse makes sense - bringing AI to the masses by helping across our everyday lives. That said, I don't really trust Meta enough to give it access to everything that would make Muse helpful. Apple, on the other hand... It was theirs to lose.

Probably needed, but I lack trust under the current administration.

AI will soon progress beyond our ability to understand it, so I do agree that AI will be the best defense against rogue AI (whether self- or human-directed). It's unsettling to think about, but the genie is out of the bottle now and we need to deal with it.

Only if it were cost competitive. It's not. Many have done the analysis (see, for example, https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/11/heres-how-much-a-made-in-the-usa-iphone-would-cost.html)

Paper for an immutable backup, counted electronically.

Amen.

It's one of the few levers we have to pull to maintain AI leadership.

Loved this from Richard Branson this week. Wish more of our political leaders spoke this plainly. https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7516554243710058497/

The Trump playbook: undermine trust in the process and then claim to be restoring that trust. Good grief. Is anyone still buying this?

Yes, employers should be allowed to as long as they let employees know they're doing it. Then it's up to the employees to decide if that's the kind of place they want to work.

They're not mutually exclusive. Either way, at ~$150 a share, it's not a bad gift. Musk gets publicity. Kids get SpaceX stock. Win-win. And for those who don't like Musk or SpaceX, sell it.

Could be good to redevelop the course, provided two conditions are met: 1) it's done with the proper public approvals and 2) it remains a reasonably priced public course. Unfortunately, I expect neither with Trump.

I could support many of these projects if they went through proper approval channels, had appropriate congressional oversight, and served the public interest rather than personal legacy building. Unfortunately, that's not how Trump operates.

In today's world, strength in numbers. It's up to them, of course, but I hope it remains one Canada.

If you consider making the bed flipping the covers up.

Almost always. I'll give almost any movie a try if its Rotten Tomatoes critics score is >90%. And if it's below 70%, I'll generally pass.

While purists say subtitles are best, it's hard to enjoy the full visual experience when you're trying to keep up with the dialogue.

Classic hypothetical. I'd say minimize total deaths, but would you want to get into one that didn't have your own safety as priority?

To a point. Considering trimming one or two.

Sit-down service is one thing. My favorite is when I'm asked to tip for counter service at a bagel shop and I'm offered 15%/20%/25% default tip options. Nothing says tipping culture is broken quite like being asked for a 25% tip on a bagel handed across a counter.

Depends on the source, of course. Wide spread between Newsmax and CNN. As far as my sources of choice, I trust them quite a bit.

We need the power, we don't want more fossil fuel plants, and solar/wind + batteries won't fill the gap completely. Nuclear is a clean, cost-effective, around-the-clock option. And it's much safer than it was 40 years ago thanks to advances in safety systems and operating standards. (I'm admittedly a bit biased, as my dad was a nuclear engineer.)

At least the expectation of tipping.

If Palestinians did the same against Israeli civilians, I don't think most would hesitate to call it terrorism.

She fits the Trump pattern, for sure. Look the part, praise the boss, struggle in execution

I'll admit I now check in advance whether there'll be post-credit scenes. If yes, stay, if not, I leave it up to the people I'm watching with.