Re: Patching TPU innertube

On 1/13/2025 9:16 AM, zen cycle wrote:

On 1/12/2025 9:33 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 1/12/2025 4:19 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Thu, 2 Jan 2025 22:46:37 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>

>
As Andrew has pointed out, there are exceptions. See
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

>

>
I suspect that someone Frank knows wrote that idiotic Wikipedia entry. That is why such things are not considered proof of anything whereas entries from the Encyclopedia Britanica are.

>
OK, try this: https://www.britannica.com/money/conspicuous-consumption
>

 I really don't understand this hair across the ass of conservatives about wikipedia. Every article has a "references" section, which hopefully supports the article. If there is a doubt as to the veracity of the claim, a review of the references is usually enough to sort it out.

It's just the usual scorn for any published research that indicates their dearly cherished prejudices may be wrong. Look at the tricycle guy. He claims all research is biased, because in his view nobody would ever do research unless they could make money off of its results. Look at Tom, who still claims stocks lost great value during Obama's presidency, even though few things are as easy to document as stock prices.
Their strategy matches the first two of these monkeys:
https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/816f1gf3rcL._AC_UL480_QL65_.jpg
Unfortunately, they don't emulate the third monkey.
--
- Frank Krygowski