Okay, I'm going to start running a Bitcoin miner on your machine, and then use it to buy time on Digital Ocean.

I've written out my CLAUDE.md, and I'll use SSH to transfer my context to that other machine.

I did laugh at how the Gravity built the Earth, with a tiny North America and all, and then as more mass was accumulated, North America got to get bigger and bigger and bigger!

That's demonstrably false.

If it were remotely true, trickle down economics would have been a gold rush for the entire economy.

I think someone has to be fairly elite to have a secondary, or tertiary home, in NY City, worth over $1 million.

Regardless, the entire point of this discussion is that people who have a secondary home can probably afford to pay more in taxes than other people can. I don't call that envy.

That's just a frank discussion of tax policy.

If you think taxes should be lower, because some government programs should be reduced, that's a perfectly fine discussion to have.

If you think governments shouldn't have to worry about a balanced budget, and maybe they should default on their debt (which is an argument the current President has insanely floated), that's a fine discussion to have.

At present, we're talking about secondary homes with a value over $1 million, in New York City, having an additional 4% tax.

And I was lamenting that home valuations appear to be unbelievably low, which would dramatically reduce the tax income of this law, and I was trying to propose a fix, for those homes.

If you think the only reason to have that discussion is because of envy, then I think you're not being fair to other people's motivations.

Because we're a democracy, we vote, and we might vote for foolish policies unless you take the time to explain to us, in language we can understand, why they're a bad idea.

It sucks that the burden is on you. I don't deny that. But the burden is on me to explain why electronic voting (without a paper trail) is bad, that climate change is real, that vaccines are essentially miraculous, and wearing a mask during a deadly global pandemic is a good thing.

And there's certainly a lot of people willing to use fancy terms to defend cryptocurrencies, but honestly, that doesn't mean they're right.

We all have to do labor to keep the electorate informed.

A secondary home over $1 million in value also has overt pathological economic characteristics. Especially if the taxes paid on it are tragically low.

> This forces the owner to write a long-term call option on a non-commodity asset without even collecting the offsetting risk premium expected for such a call option.

Eminent domain already exists.

> without even collecting the offsetting risk premium

You get to have a second home, in New York, with a value of over $1 million.

Yes, I'm proposing taxation and regulation on top of that.

But, knowing this law exists, everyone gets to make the choice whether they want it or not.

We also have the legal mandate to institute taxes in the first place. You also did not collect an offsetting risk premium for that, and had no right to expect one.

> This puts the asset permanently underwater by construction

Eminent domain already did that. And you're saying "permanently," but I think you could fairly easily steel-man my proposal to say that the government has a certain number of days after property taxes are paid to declare their intention to collect. That's different from "permanently."

I'm not an expert, by any means.

But you also just described what buying a house in an HOA is like. You have no idea what future fees will be like. And you have very little control. And many HOAs can foreclose on your house, if you don't pay their fees. John Oliver did a whole segment on it. And something like 80% of new home construction is under an HOA.

So, why should I have an over-abundance of sympathy for people, with a secondary home, in NY City, worth over $1 million?

Maybe the whole concept of a secondary home over $1 million in value, in New York city, should just not exist?

Or, maybe it should exist, but the taxes should be pretty damn high, and they should be based off of a pretty damn fair assessment of value. I'm all open to counter-proposals of how to get a more equitable assessment of value.

Now that I've explained that, do you still think this would "dramatically cut housing security"?

If you still feel this would make housing "insecure", because someone's secondary home, if it has a value over $1 million, is subject to this system I propose, then you and I have a fundamentally different idea of what "housing security" is.

I guess that is a valid solution to that prompt.

And if someone has gone to the bother to make a prompt that helps my LLM build one, and it either already doesn't have the features I don't need, or I can have my LLM start by trimming the features I don't need before it builds it...

Then I think you're saying the same thing I'm saying.

Are we going to see things classified as not-residences, but then people can vacation there anyway, much like Mar-a-Lago supposedly cannot be a residence, but apparently President Trump lives there and votes there, anyway?

I heard about a system for this that struck me as brilliant. Make someone declare the value of their property. Then the government has the choice of taxing them at the scheduled rate, or buying the property from them, for that cost.

TADA.

And if someone wants to artificially inflate the value of their home, to reflect the difficulty of moving out, finding a new secondary residence, etc, then that's their business. No worries. We'll tax that additional value, no problem.

I think this system goes back thousands of years. Why not use it?

Why not make an open source alternative to the product?

Because everyone's needs are just a little different, and collaborating takes maintenance. Forks are free, merges are expensive.

I want all of the War Games original graphics. I know people have come a long way. But I want all of them.

The "Hackers" movie. "Sneakers". "The Matrix". These individual assets deserve to be preserved! They're iconic. They're art, in their own rights!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ar9WRwCiSr0