I wouldn’t say that. The Trump campaign hammered on Clinton’s emails relentlessly, because they knew keeping the story in the media hurt her. Russia gave them new ammunition with which to keep the story in the media. The fact that the DNC was hacked legitimately is news; and creating a new story adjacent to Clinton’s…

One more reason I can’t wait until we get autonomous cars

Your analogy isn’t very well aligned. It would be more like if:

Hillary Clinton openly asked China to hack into servers and get dirt on Trump. Then Clinton openly praised Xi Jinping while having considerable personal business investments in China. Then, after getting elected, tried to discredit intelligence agencies…

As a liberal, I genuinely do NOT object to Wikileaks publishing the information that Russia leaked them. I do object to Assange trying to claim that a company who’s entire existence is predicated on facilitating anonymous leaking someone knows who didn’t leak the information.

I think we should amend our libel laws such that content that is not marked with the meta-tag of ‘satire’ would leave the author vulnerable to lawsuits. That would put an end to fake news like this.

There’s a deep and bitter irony in the fact that Trump is going to drive the Republican party to the position where they are no longer the party of a strong national defense. We’ve scene two important salvos fired by nation state actors on the digital battlefield: the first was Stuxnet, which I think most people agree…

Interesting, but I wonder: if you took ANY two people in England, how distantly related would you statistically expect them to be?

Does it technically weigh less than a pound though? I mean, if you’re going to subtract the buoyancy off when it’s in air, couldn’t you argue that Battleships are weightless when in water? Or at least that hot air balloons are weightless?

I know, I’m being terribly pedantic.

I love this comment; it’s a prefect expression of partisanship over national interests. If you’re a Republican first, and an American second like Troy here; or a Democrat first and an American second for that matter, you need only find the closest mirror to answer the question of how America got in the trouble it’s…

Maybe Uber should implement a ‘unsafe driver’ feature on their app. Activate the feature and your GPS/Uber information (which includes things like the make and model of the vehicle that picked you up) is silently relayed to local law enforcement. They will then pull the vehicle over, and you will get out. If…

I hereby announce that all the things I decide NOT to Tweet shall remain protected and private; not by any legal mechanisms, but by the fact that I kept them the fuck to myself!

(pretty sure this is legit)

Probably not $1.2B, but some non-negligible amount of money really does LEAVE the economy when Trump has little Twitter Tantrums like these.

How is that not hacking the election? It’s not like they are claiming that Russia hacked the polls.

I don’t know that I believe that. It’s not like $1.2 billion worth of shares left the market and that capital got re-invested. $1.2 billion is the amount that existing shares depreciated because of eroded investor confidence. If it was a closed system where value is never created or destroyed, we wouldn’t have a value…

Quite right of course I should not have included the army in that list, just the Air force.

No, my point was that Trumps tweets are not about making money, they are about punishing companies who defy him. If you didn’t get that, your reading comprehension is as shit as your understanding of market dynamics.

It’s not a false dichotomy at all. I said that Trumps actions removed value from the market. You claimed they did not because of short sells; which isn’t true since the value of shorts sells is unlikely to even be on the same order as the drop in the stock.

If you’d made the claim that people who pulled money out of…

For your argument to make sense, you would have to believe that someone made $1.2 billion off shorting Lockheed Martin stock. Is that what you think?

I would argue that would be the clearest case of insider trading in history; but now that I think about it, that probably wouldn’t make a difference for Trump. No one would care at this point.

I sure do, but first off, there is no way that anyone had secured against $1.2 billion of losses, so even if a few people made some money off this, there was still a huge amount of net wealth that was actually destroyed.

Second, arguing that short selling means that wealth ISN’T destroyed is like arguing that…