yes! just don't forget to `RUN echo '{"hasCompletedOnboarding": true}' > /home/user/.claude.json` otherwise your claude will ask how to authenticate on startup, ignoring the OAUTH token
IMO it's because there's both benefit and waste/corruption in these kinds of social benefit structures. some people choose to only see one or the other:
"these benefit everyone including those who don't use them directly! how could you be against it?"
"this money that I'm having to pay is either overpaid to corrupt vendors, or just straight wasted, why would we ever want to increase how much we're paying into this system?"
in reality you can't have one without the other. it's up to each person to decide whether they can take the bad with the good
They had this during spring training and it was fantastic. The challenge limit meant it was used rarely, but when it was used it added a fun dramatic element. Players getting to stick it to umpires when they got it wrong, and umpires getting to smirk at players when they got it right.
And at the end of it all, some missed calls get to be corrected.
Agreed - Plenty of hitters have experience with it as well, since it's been around the minors for even longer than this season.
I saw it in practice a few times this year during spring training games, and it was _fast_. Add to that the fact that only pitchers, catchers, and hitters can request one (no managers holding the game up while the replay room checks on it), and it really won't slow the game down at all.
The fun part will be seeing how teams learn to game the system. The batter can call it, but I think it would be hard to stifle any kind of communication from the dugout.
/something higher tech than banging a garbage can obviously.
It will be fun to see if teams prefer batters or catchers use the system. Or if they will coach either side to use it situationally. I think, so far, catchers have better challenge success rates?
yup. traitors tend to keep dumb-presenting faithful around because they give the impression of both not being a traitor as well as being unsavvy and easy to manipulate
interesting that the company that has the most viewed ads for 2024[1] ("FORCE VECTOR COMMUNICATIONS") has a total of 3 matches when you search for them[2]
The obscuring seems to be unnecessary these days. I don't know how many people are still fooled by names like "Americans for America" who would actually change their vote after finding out it's just a group of real estate speculators or whatever.
I think it's the other way round. You're a respectable individual, you're buying some low-brow ads - and you don't want a newspaper to publish an expose about you, your employees throwing a hissy-fit, or a neighbor getting upset.
I understand that mentality but it's clearly not how people behave. People who buy into bullshit do so as a core personality behavior. It's like how doomsday cult members double down when the predictions don't come to pass.
I mean https://www.heavensgate.com/ is still around. Being discredited has the opposite effect as the intended. It instead concretizes the delusions. Exposing charlatans seems to only increase the fanaticism of their adherents.
You are thinking of a completely different situation. No one is thinking of some real estate guy who wants the dems or republicans to win as their cult leader when seeing those ads.
At least in the US, political partisanship I think is operationally pretty similar to a cult. It certainly doesn't have to exist like this but right now I think it is which is why I brought up the observation in the first place.
I feel like that's an impression caused by the current political media environment but it's not reality. Voter turnout is less than 50% of voting age population in the US and a significant portion of the voters are independents. Silent majority or whatever.
Maybe it's because there's too much sensationalism and story-telling? People realized you get better ratings through theatrical emotionally charged fictions sitting adjacent to reality and they're cheaper to produce than careful and cautious journalism? That's kind of Juvenal's bread and circuses theory.
Maybe it's a natural consequence of the vast diversity of information channels and online communities so not only do classically oppressed groups have homes but also those committed to hate or messianic cults?
Maybe there's some increased isolationism of industrial society so people end up severing the in person community ties that help to keep them better attached to reality?
Maybe it's all of these?
My observation of the current state is Republicans are pining for a dictator, Democrats are trying to be a 2002 era George W Bush knockoff and most people are thinking "what is up with these lousy options?"
It's the problem you see in almost all organizations: when you focus on the fans, you alienate the base by deluding yourself into imagining a phantom majority a few steps away from loving you but which in reality wants nothing to do with you.
You noticed how you labeled the alternative to your choice as a dictator? I did.
The solution is to remove parties and make people think for themselves. But I do agree focusing on the extremists is counterproductive. That’s why I’m an independent, to forcefully remove bias.
I voted for some third party candidate just like I have every other time.
I do attend Trump events almost weekly however. There's people who want to get rid of elections entirely. This is a strong belief among many of his supporters. They didn't think elections can be trusted - the "wrong" people are voting, the counting is corrupt, etc. They want no voting or only voting by an extremely vetted group that only agree with them.
The few Democrat events I've gone to, their supporters are completely hallucinating reality. I got constantly blindsided by the irrelevant issues they think are front and center.
I spoke with one recently who thinks the personal religious convictions of the candidates will make evangelicals switch their allegiances to the Dems. Mickey mouse is more likely to pop out of a movie screen. Total whackjobs.
Anyways, simply distancing oneself from a party is part of the problem. It requires the cult of the individual as an insitutional necessity.
