miscsubs

This was an act carried within the borders of an allied nation (even though Saudi consulate is technically Saudi soil). We have seen a hostile nation kill someone on foreign soil (Russia, NK carried such attacks recently). That is bad but sort of not outside of how things are expected to go. We have seen an allied nation kill a notable criminal or terrorist within the borders of an ally (Bin Laden in Pakistan for example, or Israel with the 1972 attackers). The host country wouldn't be happy but at least the people killed had committed heinous crimes.

A nation carrying a political murder of a civilian within an ally is very very rare. It crosses an unspoken line.

In a logical world, we would be talking way more about the other 99 percent.

Why would that be logical? Most of the public is not suicidal, and most of the public is not in a gang, or hang out where gangs hang out. So they're immune (so to speak) from that 90+% of gun violence. However, these random mass shootings, however rare, scare us a lot more because all it takes it to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. And as you said, it's unlikely that my neighbor committing a suicide would increase the chances of me getting killed or gang violence spreading to quiet suburbs, but the copy cat mass shootings do spread to previously-thought-safe areas.

Maybe it's selfish but the mass shootings, even though rare, are a much bigger scare for most of us (and our kids) than suicides or gang violence.

Not sure if you're still answering questions but I listened to the podcast this morning and thought it was great.

Anything you hoped they would have covered but didn't ? Also why was your dad (a doctor) against you quitting football?

In addition to what /u/mjbmitch wrote, increasingly cyberattacks are coordinated or mounted by sophisticated entities like nation-states. Most companies (especially the ones that are not in the business of technology themselves) do not have the means to investigate or get to the bottom of these attacks themselves, but they cannot open their data to NSA's expertise due to the current restrictions.

I'm glad EFF and its friends are against mass surveillance and government spying, but I think they would be a lot more efficient if they wrote their own version of the bill that can fix the issues without giving the government any power to conduct mass surveillance.

Also the link they have in the text here showing "why this is a bad idea" reads more like a conspiracy theory than a sound legal argument which is disappointing IMO.

Hi Elliott,

Three questions:

1. Approval polls: they are definitely a good signal but do they amplify the existing signals (polls) or do they complement them and provide new information? How did you decide to include it in your projections? Do you think it would be similarly useful in other elections like senate, house, governor etc.?

2. In one tweet it reply you said the economist hasn’t paid you a dime yet. Uhm, why?

3. You’re pretty opinionated when it comes to politics. Do you worry it could colloid your judgement or introduce bias to your forecasts?