thatβs why itβs so ridiculous that even just the βdoomerβ the βAI Expertβ opinions basically occupy 99% of the possible outcomes!
honestly, she somehow managed to to say absolutely nothing about her role here and it β¦somehowβ¦makes me believe Holmes / Billy here that she misremembered the quote she never recorded.
"Where is the nanny?" I guess someone calculated that it wouldn't help the image rehab campaign... nytimes.com/2026/10/30/opiniβ¦
but Liz Cheney endorsed Harris at a rally and people lost their GOT DANG minds
El-Sayed is running a ad showing Carlson praising him jewishinsider.com/2026/10/neβ¦
i am sorry, but this professional jealous of computers is lame and unbecomingβ¦.and itβs really disappointing to see a hard field of study such as mathematics get so caught up in this. You donβt see computer scientists acting like this over advancements in their field, do you?
plenty of people vote for who their friends vote for. My wife is constantly asking our lawyer friends what no-name judge* to vote for (or, and here you have it, seeing whoβs sign is in their yard!). I presume this is the real value in yard signs
* Good luck finding any sort of information on these lower level candidates, that isnβt actually put out by the candidates themselves, and tells you something meaningful about them
Apple already made an iPhone Mini because @verge bullshitted tons of Very Important People into thinking βweβ needed oneβ¦.then they doomed it with the most obvious βmehβ review ever:
βthe battery doesnβt last as long as the big oneβ¦β
π
Pavel Bure walked so others could runβ¦
think an undiscussed aspect of this is that there have always been people who craved βattentionβ and typically those folks found themselves drawn to segments of media that had monocultural appeal in the era (books, music, TV, movies, etc)β¦ but now that more and more contemporary players in those media verticals are stuck subscale, just being βnicheβ, there is more incentive than ever to transition their attention to one of the remaining monocultural verticals (namely sports β¦and federal politics).
the free family glamour shots provided by the NYT in 2023 was when i first realized the media was basically gonna re-elevate her again as part of this odd symbiosis relationship. and *gestures* look at us now!
excuse me, sirβ¦. but *I* only talk about them as if they are the most insufferableβ¦.
too bad they didnβt internalize this gotcha in 2024 when all a certain segment of folks could talk about was Kamala Harris, Gaza, and how she was the WW3 candidateβ¦
how did all that turn out for us?
Me: "Do you know how many times you've tweeted about Piker since you wrote that tweet [about not tweeting about him] on August 30th?"
@mattyglesias: "Probably more than I intended to."
Me: "8 times.... you tweeted about Mike Rogers 6 times. So you're tweeting about the streamer you didn't want to talk about more than the Republican candidate you say you want to defeat."
Yglesias: "Yeah, that's fair."
Me: "Why?"
Yglesias: "What do you want me to say? You got me."
From my new Zeteo interview with the top centrist pundit - on the left, Michigan, Gaza, immigration, polls, electability, and more:
zeteo.com/p/matt-yglesias-meβ¦
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Yglesias's posts since Aug 30 include ~5 mentioning Piker and at least 9 mentioning Rogers/Rodgers, not 8 and 6. Hasan posted about Piker ~35 times in the period.
x.com/mehdirhasan/stβ¦
x.com/ThomasVLinge/sβ¦
zeteo.com/p/matt-yglesiaβ¦
x.com/mattyglesias/sβ¦
x.com/mattyglesias/sβ¦
x.com/mattyglesias/sβ¦
x.com/mattyglesias/sβ¦
x.com/mattyglesias/sβ¦
x.com/augustcohen4/sβ¦
lol, OFC it was Amy Chozick who is at the center of this controversyβ¦
Amy Chozick speaks with Patrick Healy of @NYTimes on Elizabeth Holmes' claim that Ms. Chozick misquoted her in her Times profile:
AC: "As we walked, I told Holmes that I heard Jennifer Lawrence had recently pulled out of portraying her in a movie. She looked over at me, and said: βTheyβre not playing me. Theyβre playing a character I created.β As she walked a couple of steps ahead, I wrote down her exact words in my notebook.
"Every night when Iβve been out reporting, I go through my notebook and put a star next to anything I think is a particularly important moment or quote and I highlight it and flag that page with a Post-it note. This quote was highlighted and the page had a Post-it."
PH: "You didnβt record that specific conversation. Many journalists donβt record every interview while taking notes, but you no longer have your notebook either. Why?"
AC: "A lot of peopleβs most honest, on-the-record reflections come when I turn off my recorder and just take notes. I wasnβt going to put a recorder in Holmesβs face as we walked on the beach. I take notes constantly, to jot down important quotes and details and to incorporate my impressions in real time. I generally keep my reporterβs notebooks for a couple of years before getting rid of them. My editors confirmed the quote with me in 2023, and I thought the matter was resolved. I didnβt anticipate that the quote would become a part of a documentary years later. Of course, now I really wish Iβd kept that notebook.
"In You Can See Everything,' Evans says he recorded all of our conversations, but this is not accurate. I spent several days with Holmes and Evans, always on the record. We did several formal interviews at the kitchen table and on the couch when we both recorded the conversations. But a lot of the most revealing moments came when the recorders were turned off. For example, when they were loading the babies into the Tesla or when we went to the San Diego Zoo and got tacos at the Lucha Libre Taco Shop in Mission Hills. I wrote down quotes and details as the conversations unfolded."
the entire reason I felt anxious about the vitality of the Fielder / Holmes doc is that, ever since that one viral NYT profile with glow-up pictures, I have sense that the Media was erasing itself from the center of / role in the Theranos story and just trying to leave βBig Techβ and βSilicon Valleyβ alone in the central roleβ¦
And I can already see that bait and switch working. Holmes is looking for her own Casey Anthony moment (a person who deserves no sympathy for her actions somehow finding a narrow angle that provides her just thatβ¦).
In 2016, as Theranos collapsed, Elizabeth Holmesβs team asked a journalist to make a film rebutting the accusations against her. He spent two days inside the company. The film quickly fell apart. airmail.news/sh/z5hjq6
Some of us rememberβ¦
vox.com/2016/5/21/11724298/bβ¦
the Stratton book has *so much* more information than the Lecatski book on whatβs essentially the same program / anecdote (the whole βgetting inside the craftβ with Lockheed anecdote) my biggest question is just *how* he seemingly got so much more through DOPSA?
Was the DOPSA process *that* different? Would Trump vs. Biden have that big of a impact? Was Strattonβs DOPSA review even done post 2024?
I'd like to see the information submitted for approval to the DoD, which went through either DOPSR, or similar processes, to ensure that him talking about this isn't classified.
It's a standard thing we've seen before. Grusch won't show his. Why? I find them important. Will Stratton? I don't know. But FACTS about classified matters (as displayed by the UAP SCG) are spelled out and can be inherently classified. I would think, if what he says is true, that the FACT of that would be a classified FACT, and he would not be able to talk about it.
But, he is. So, I'd start with tracking down the papertrail that led to his approval to do so. Again, I tried it with Grusch. He won't release it. And the government, sadly, exempts it as personal information. Also sadly, I understand that exemption. So, why isn't any of it offered up to the general public?