Thread - omnibus, CRs

-Continuing Resolution (CR) is a mechanism to address a budgetary “gap”
Under @senatemajldr (not) awesome leadership CRs have become the norm, which is maddening because that’s NOT what CRs are meant for
-pocket veto
-veto
-President versus Congress

CHRIST ALMIGHTY I think most of us knew we’d end up here
👇🏻and HERE WE ARE👇🏻

U.S. says Capitol rioters meant to 'capture and assassinate' officials-filing ... intended “to capture and assassinate elected

the Orange Hate Goblin is RAGING like an unhinged lunatic about the #FY21NDAA
it‘s a 4,517 page bill
Why is @realDonaldTrump threatening to veto it?
-no CDA230 (LOLs)
-renaming bases

Turns out that @POTUS NEVER respected our Military or our

@POTUS if reading 4K plus pages isn’t your thing (I am not judging you I tapped out at page 389)
the Conference pushed a 15 page aka cliff notes
remember Trump is threatening to veto
“confront current & future
security challenges from China, Russia, transnational terrorism, and beyond”

@POTUS The forceful disclosure of Companies that are actually owned by China - is a really BFD (Wall St impact) prohibition of supply chain too but this is BIG
“Establishes mandatory sanctions on Turkey for its acquisition of the Russian S-400 air missile defense system”
Skyborg program

@POTUS Oh you have my attention:

“Setting up a pilot program on the use of speed-based metrics to evaluate the effectiveness of cybersecurity providers, products and technologies”
See pages 11 & 12 cyber security sections
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Policy -PAS

@POTUS LOL literally the last page

“commission to study and provide recommendations,
within three years, concerning the removal of names, symbols, displays, monuments, and
paraphernalia that honor or commemorate the Confederate States of America”
See next tweet re GPS

stacks are eating the world

business used to be easiest to comprehend via a) market-based logic of horizontal vs. vertical STRUCTURE, b) professionalization/specialization based FUNCTION c) core competencies based BEHAVIORS

this has pretty much collapsed in the last decade

Structure = sclerosis
Functional specialization = bureaucracy
competencies = inertial habits

"Stack" thinking instead lets technology structure (rather than market structure) drive business org logic

Companies seem to do well when they identify an entire stack of technologies they are good at (not just point bits) and organize to conform to its logic. There is a "full-stack" dimension of technical specialization that is the spine of the org

It feels buzzwordy, but it really is getting to be that way. AI stack, decarbonization stack, mobility stack, electrification stack... some end-to-end pathway of turning physics into economics via layers of tech artistically baked together like a cake

Would anyone like to admit why he cc'd himself in an email Wei Dai would see at ibiblio's host address? I have a few ideas.

was the .ae ccTLD a nod to Tim Berners-Lee/registries that issue top level country code domains? Is that why Tel Aviv is a place I commonly find OTC/Bitcoin related companies and DAC/dev protocols and operations based? Why UAE/Israel have opened commerce bilaterally in 2020?

Bitcoin is worldwide P2P software and growing into a network of the same ilk, what it can send without interference we can't even grasp yet. Even if you don't like another person, or their religious beliefs, bitcoin doesn't care. I lived through 9/11, my friends died in war.

But even I don't want Bitcoin just for the people I am more likely to have similarities too. And in working with the @_Devcoin guys for a few years now, officially since 2020 - I realized people from all spots on this globe and I share much more in common than everyday Americans.

And I haven't turned my back or spurned Americans either. I'm just saying we need to change our mindset. We want things but we won't admit it takes a whole world to pull off what it is we seek. The media is to blame for this but I also think we're at the point for grownups to act

1) Dreaded thread on why I think the response to postcritique is so vitriolic. Short version: Because literary studies is a discipline in search of an application.

2) Before I go on, I'll say from the outset that many in lit studies explicitly reject the idea that the field *should* have an application. My opinion is that's fine if you want to do book clubs, but if you want an institution you can't ignore that difficult issue. But anyway...

3) The evidence by this point is overwhelming that when lit scholars talk about 'method' we're actually just talking about ourselves: 'ways of reading,' 'how we argue,' 'phenomenology of reading,' etc. etc.

4) David Kurnick nicely illustrates this phenomenon:

5) But none of this is method discussion. Talking about ourselves, how we approach our objects of study, our motives and objectives, our commitments, etc. would be the *beginning* of a method convo in every other discipline. In lit studies it's the *end*, or the whole convo!

As a scholar who has researched and written quite a bit about the Anabaptists, can we set a few things straight?

1. Baptists are not Anabaptists. Their history is theirs; ours is ours. We have similarities, but we are not them. We honor them by not using them for our purposes.

2. Not all Anabaptists were in Münster, and many if not most Anabaptists at the time were just as appalled as we are by the Münsterites. So please drop the tropes equating all Anabaptists with Münster. Informed and honest scholars are known by their right retelling of history.

3. The same truth applies to the other types of Reformation Radicals. There is a great difference between those who have become known as Evangelical Anabaptists on the one hand and Spiritualists, Rationalists, etc. on the other hand. Respect them as you also wish to be respected.

4. Yes, there were Anabaptists who toyed with various heresies, including Arianism, Socinianism, and Celestial Flesh Christology. But there were also many Anabaptists who affirmed, commented upon, and used the traditional Apostles’ Creed, Nicene Creed, and Athanasian Creed.

And if you want to do the honest research, you can also find a few heretical Roman Catholic Popes and more than a few heretical Anglicans, Presbyterians, Lutherans. and whomever else you want to talk about. Good historical theology doesn’t play favorites; it speaks the truth.