HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » joshcryer » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next »


Profile Information

Name: Josh Cryer
Gender: Male
Hometown: Colorado
Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 53,419

Journal Archives

The Autonomous Winter Is Coming

Winter is coming for car manufacturers. An Autonomous Winter, without end. If you’ve seen what Tesla is doing with Autopilot, and all they plan to do with it, you’ve already seen the future. Now it’s up to automakers to figure out what they want to be in this new world as quickly as possible.

Don’t think so? It’s because no one can remember anything that happened before the VW emissions scandal. While everyone is talking about the future of diesel and the consequences for VW, two big announcements were made around the Frankfurt Auto Show have been mostly forgotten: Google’s hiring of former head of Hyundai Motors America John Krafcik as CEO of their Self-Driving Car Project, and Daimler CEO Dieter Zetsche’s claim that “we do not plan to become the Foxconn of Apple.”

No matter how cataclysmic the fallout of the VW scandal, trust me, these two items are bigger long-term. We’re talking about setting the scene for things that are decades into the future, not just years.


This is a long but good read and makes a convincing case as to why autonomous vehicles are going to change everything. It's written by the same guy who just road a Tesla, autonomously, from LA to NY: http://www.cnet.com/news/alex-roy-tesla-autopilot-record-57-hours-48-minutes/

Did you know you can support Sanders and BLM at the same time?

Because you can.

You can support Sanders' civil rights activism all his life and support his legislative efforts to those ends. You can support Sanders marching with MLK, doing sit ins, getting arrested for civil rights causes, and that's great. You can support and even champion Sanders economic message.

But you can also support the movement that points out that 7 times more unarmed black men are killed than any other peoples, you can support the movement that points out the fact that incarnation rates overwhelmingly target black men, you can support the movement that points out the fact that black people have higher incidents of poverty.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

I live in a visceral pain in my gut, politically, like I did when Dean lost the nomination, when I hear that Sanders is somehow against this sort of thing, and people arguing against BLM, for whatever reason. Granted, a lot of it is emotional. A lot of people are trying to split up BLM to different groups. The pro-Sanders or anti-Sanders groups.

As far as I see it Sanders was only targeted because, unlike every other Democratic candidate, he makes himself readily available, he's there, you can see him in public speeches or rallies relatively easy. This makes him, and I know its controversial to other Sanders supporters, a prime target. This doesn't bother me. It encourages me, because Sanders puts himself out there.

Clinton hides behind either $2,700 fundraisers or very specifically defined talks in high schools or middile schools or whatever, where no one, not a freaking single non-vetted soul is going to be within 20 feet of her. With the secret service not far behind. (And our pathetic media doesn't talk about this nature of her public appearances one iota.)

I wholeheartedly disagree with the actions of Seatle BLM members, and am on record saying their actions disgusted me, but that is over with, it's done. What happened happened, and what followed followed. Sanders had tens of thousands show up to the next events (online and in person). Sanders isn't going away. BLM didn't crash him nor was its intent. It wanted to make the news, that's all. That's really all militant action can do.

I'm left in complete disarray, because I'm not in the bubble, I know Sanders' campaign is doing extremely well. I believe Sanders has a better shot than any (I won't lie or be disillusioned and say he's a shoe in but I will repudiate anyone who says he can't win).

I'm telling you now, from someone who supports Sanders and BLM at the same time, it sucks to be of this mindset. Would it be that I could bash BLM because of some militant actions by a few (which were not denounced by BLM leaders). I can't.

BLM matters just like Occupy. And BLM isn't solely against Sanders. BLM is against not being heard by the establishment which they overwhelmingly support in elections. That's it. Accept that BLM wants its voice heard by the party which it feels has left them behind despite their votes, and you'll truly feel what they are about.

Experiment: Hide DU names CSS script:

I've been trying an experiment recently whereby I hide almost all identifying information about DU posters.

I downloaded the Stylish plugin for Firefox (there's also one for Chrome), and added the following code:

@namespace url(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml);

@-moz-document domain("http://democraticunderground.com") {


table.default-table .author {
display: none;

table.reply-table td.author {
display: none;

p.post-author2 a.author2 {
display: none;

p.post-replyto {
display: none;

.post-sig {
display: none;

p.post-author {
margin: 0px;
display: none;

p.post-avatar {
display: none;

div.content-container {
padding: 17px 0px;
margin: 0px 13px 0px 20px;
min-height: 34px;

table.input-form-table tr:nth-child(1) {
display: none;

h2.usersection {
display: none;

a.mp-author {
display: none;

This code will remove all usernames of all posters except on their profile pages (because that uses a common CSS code that the rest of the site uses and I couldn't figure out how to fix it). This includes in PMs, in My Posts, in the main forum author pages, everywhere I can find on the site. This code will also remove all signatures and avatar pictures (and make a bit more space for the forum display so it's not ugly when removing the avatars).

I literally don't know who is replying to me or who I am replying to without going to the effort of figuring out who it is. So far I have found myself doing it twice when I felt attacked (just by turning off the style or by going to the profile page).

Try it out, it can be quite refreshing. And telling about some others. And before anyone asks, yeah, it's actually pretty hard to differentiate posters by writing style, only a few ones stand out, so I really don't know who I'm responding to.

Ted Cruz will be the Republican nominee.

He will slaughter any Republican candidate because of his "great debate skills." This will not, of course, win him the Presidency, but he will win the nomination because no one comes close to his level of rhetorical flourish.

Bookmark this. The dude was #1 in the country as far as a debater. The media has nothing else but "debates" to measure a candidacy.

And, importantly, Ted Cruz would allow the last dying breath of the far right to get their ideology heard. Religious indoctrination is literally his platform. They will vote for him in droves. He will win the nomination with ease.

Any contenders?

Womens rights, immigration rights, education, and weed.

In that order.

Bank on it.

Young people don't vote when the people they would vote for are continually bashed.

It's rather simple, you hear it on the news, you see it on blogs, websites, why would you go out and vote for people that are bashed on a continual basis? By the left, no less? It doesn't help that the people they would vote for are running against lying Republicans who pretend to be what they're not.

This is the Republican strategy, cause divisive infighting within the Democratic Party, cause discord, and make sure that we eat our own. And, of course, it works, because yet again we're seeing the failure for young people to vote being placed on "poor leadership."

Then you get calls for purges, within the party, no less, and calls for creating a new party, it's all so perfectly designed to assure that young people (and minorities) don't vote when it matters most. Young people have a lot to fight for, but they're not fighting for it because they're disillusioned in the political process.

When you have Republicans like Mitch McConnell actually bashing Warren for not reigning in the banks, you know that Orwell has to be spinning in his grave. Just like what Gardner did in Colorado (top 10 most conservative person on choice, ran as a moderate). The Republicans are liars.

And the only way they win is to suppress the vote, by any means necessary. College kids having to vote off campus. Voter ID laws. False voter roles disqualifying thousands. Highly illegal mailers telling people wrong information about voting.

The loss in 2014 was not a lack of leadership, it was not because too many Democrats are "third way," it was not because "Democrats are too conservative." It was primarily due to Republican voter suppression tactics, and the best tactic that they have at their disposal is causing infighting through ratfucking.

I miss RainDog.

Yeah, I'm sad about Robin Williams, too, but RainDog was my friend, I didn't know them very much but on DU we both spent a lot of time talking about marijuana legalization. They were my friend. I only have a few here who really agree with me on important issues. It's just sad, and I miss them, and I hope, hope, things get better on that issues we both most agreed upon. If only in their memory.

Sorry for the sad post, if you take it that way, but me and RainDog, we really spread the message (just google me and RainDog, we were on top of it). I like to think RainDog was instrumental on my activist efforts to get it legalized in Colorado. I hope they knew that, because I never told them how much they meant to me and how they influenced me. They did it. I worked a lot to get it legalized in 2012, and I don't know if I would have were it not for RainDog's posts here. They gave me hope.

RIP RainDog, my friend, and influence. We had spats on other issues but this was one issue we really connected.

Not really.

My beef is that we're attacking the symptom as opposed to the cause.

And when Democrats do talk about attacking the cause (in one case it's the corporate tax rate which has way too many loopholes) it's sort of ignored or deflected. Democrats say "we need to close the loopholes and lower the rate," everyone focuses on "lowering the rate." Why? The high end is higher than Germany. So why not adjust it down to Germany's rate, and then close the loopholes? It's a win win.

Now you'd call be a pragmatist for saying that, I think it's just common darn sense.

Additionally, give tax incentives to companies which do keep their manufacturing here and who do hire American employees.

Of course, that wouldn't stop something like TPP from being created, but it could probably be made public at that point, because it wouldn't have the kind of economic subterfuge that is necessary to maintain our import economy while at the same time marginalizing our biggest global threats (China and Russia). Slave manufactured goods and oil are unsustainable, and the US knows it.

Automation is going to take over slave labor and renewables are going to take over oil. The question is whether we get off the import economy before it happens or if we strangle the rest of the world while we do it. It appears that we are doing the latter. And the latter will take a lot longer because it means letting the almighty "markets" bring forth renewable energy and automation as opposed to a grand bargain which could bring it about decades sooner.

Lest I ramble on further about how a living wage is going to be absolutely necessary in this new world.

Here's his missive on unions:


Dude is seriously out of touch, but I think he comes from an uber-capitalist background.

We agree on many things, he believes in climate change, as do I. He believes the US rocket industry is contained by pork / cost-plus / crony contracts, as do I.

But his views as unions as a "two class system" is shit, especially since he, of all people, has advocated 95% in house manufacturing. I might be able to buy his argument if much else was developed outside of the factory, but he owns or controls 95% of production, thus, to me, a union in his company would be the best thing to happen.

Still, again, he justifies his shitty position by pointing out that he pays way more than anyone else, and it's why he retains so many workers, they get paid. Go to ULA, do the same amount of work, you're not getting paid nearly as much, no question.

It's all true, of course, but applied wrong. Think of "sonder."

Sonder n. the realization that each random passerby is living a life as vivid and complex as your own—populated with their own ambitions, friends, routines, worries and inherited craziness—an epic story that continues invisibly around you like an anthill sprawling deep underground, with elaborate passageways to thousands of other lives that you’ll never know existed, in which you might appear only once, as an extra sipping coffee in the background, as a blur of traffic passing on the highway, as a lighted window at dusk.

How can we possibly think that an interconnected world such as ours with all of its glorious industrial magic, stuff so beyond each one of us but applied through the efforts of many, is anything but a truly connected and truly integrated society?

The whole alienation thing only applies to someone from a pre-industrial society watching as industry comes up around them and trying to make sense of it all. The reality is that we as a species are probably more social, more connected, less alienated than any other species on the planet.

Also, to get back to what you were saying, that (buying what we use, buying what we thinkg) is actually one of the critiques of Marx's theory of alienation and commodity fetishism. What if Marxism itself becomes a commodity fetish to the point of alienating others. Think about that one for a bit (yeah, once a philosophy becomes a caricature of its critique it sort of invalidates itself).
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 Next »