post_below's recent activity
-
Comment on What is a value or belief you have that is extremely outside the norm? in ~talk
-
Comment on What is a value or belief you have that is extremely outside the norm? in ~talk
post_below Link ParentRelated to this: no one wants to talk about the topic. It's completely understandable, it's disturbing, hard to understand and no one wants to risk being associated with something so universally...Related to this: no one wants to talk about the topic. It's completely understandable, it's disturbing, hard to understand and no one wants to risk being associated with something so universally loathed.
But it's also one of the biggest problems in society and it appears to have been that way for all of human history. I think it's fair to say that the damage sexual abuse does is on the same level as murder. It's maybe worse as the cycle of abuse can echo for generations.
I imagine everyone has a sense of the statistics, that they're under reported but that about 20% of girls are sexually abused. There's no easy way to quantify how big an impact that has on society, but it's clearly a huge problem.
But what do we actually do about it? That it's illegal doesn't seem to have much impact. We have (under used) support systems for victims and... not much else? No doubt there are resources I'm unaware of but it seems like we could do a lot more. Not only in terms of counseling and mental health but also research. I don't think we understand the problem as well as we should given its prevalence.
As you say, potential offenders need help, but risk ruining their lives if they look for it. Difficult as it may be, I think we should have more compassion for victims of abuse that have had their wiring scrambled. If there was space for anything other than unequivocal condemnation we might be able to figure out how to make sure that less victims become abusers themselves.
One of the reasons I've given the topic some thought is that I briefly knew a man who told me that he had unwanted thoughts about his daughter. That he was willing to say that out loud at all was shocking. He said he'd gone to multiple therapists who told him that there was nothing wrong with him. At the time he was in the process of moving across the country to get away from the situation. I imagine there were a lot of details he didn't share and I didn't ask.
I later heard that he went to prison for abusing his daughter.
So here was someone who knew they had a problem and genuinely wanted to get help before it was too late. What if he had actually been able to get that help? If we actually understood the problem well enough to help him?
I think a part of making that happen is being able to have conversations (on a cultural level) about the issue that aren't only about prohibition and punishment.
-
Comment on Should moderation be more transparent? in ~tildes
post_below LinkThe idea of a moderation log has merit. That said, in my experience it's really easy for meta conversations about moderation to use an increasing amount of bandwidth and thereby shift the vibe in...The idea of a moderation log has merit.
That said, in my experience it's really easy for meta conversations about moderation to use an increasing amount of bandwidth and thereby shift the vibe in the wrong direction.
People start to get precious about comments or threads or users that they were attached to. They carry their disagreements forward into other threads. They start to feel like they need to crusade for what's "right". In short they start to feel like what's happening (or not happening) on the forum is far more important than it actually is... and it goes south from there.
Of course I have no idea if that would happen on Tildes, only that I've seen it happen before more than once.
Personally I'm quite content with everyone (me included) not knowing the details about moderation. Tildes is a nice place to hang out on the internet, it's hard to imagine moderation politics making it better.
If a thread or a comment I like disappears and it bothers me, it's a reminder not to take the site too seriously.
-
Comment on Musi’s free music streaming app is a hit with thrifty teens. The app claims to tap content on YouTube, but some in the music industry question the legitimacy of that model. in ~music
post_below Link ParentIt's an indication that people are fed up enough to migrate in large numbers, markets usually respond to that.It's an indication that people are fed up enough to migrate in large numbers, markets usually respond to that.
-
Comment on Musi’s free music streaming app is a hit with thrifty teens. The app claims to tap content on YouTube, but some in the music industry question the legitimacy of that model. in ~music
post_below Link ParentI don't think this needs to be polarized between the extremes of "you're obligated to watch the ads that make the service free so you don't ruin it for everyone else" and "it's my right to do what...I don't think this needs to be polarized between the extremes of "you're obligated to watch the ads that make the service free so you don't ruin it for everyone else" and "it's my right to do what I want with my devices".
Both things are true of course, but I think between the poles there is this: enshittification causes people to look for alternatives. Which is good.
Bypassing compensation for content is bad for everyone if the scale gets big enough. But a few big players sucking up most of the compensation and increasingly screwing everyone else involved to keep the line going up as they near the limits of available growth is also bad for everyone but them.
Musi, and other alternative clients, are gonna get killed by the big guys, but they provide an unintentional service by showing us that the marketplace wants new options. Hopefully more sustainable options will fill the demand.
information wants to be free
Information doesn't want anything. People want information to be free.
Isn't the idea behind "information wants to be free" that it's hard to control and therefore its tendency is to disseminate? Rather than being a literal description?
-
Comment on Macklemore - Hind's Hall (2024) in ~music
post_below Link ParentI know it's a rhetorical question but: Because the Biden camp is anxious about the young vote. If they think changing course on Gaza is necessary politically, then maybe. Probably it would be a...I know it's a rhetorical question but: Because the Biden camp is anxious about the young vote.
If they think changing course on Gaza is necessary politically, then maybe. Probably it would be a token change, but that's better than nothing.
The actual act of voting for anyone but Biden is objectively worse for Gaza (Trump will support Israel) but votes are the only leverage most people have.
I disagree with the strategy but the logic is sound.
-
Comment on Google lays off hundreds of ‘Core’ employees, moves some positions to India and Mexico in ~tech
post_below Link ParentWhy wouldn't we blame capitalism for the failures of government when government is so clearly controlled (to a significant degree) by capital? Lawmakers aren't failing because they're earnestly...Why wouldn't we blame capitalism for the failures of government when government is so clearly controlled (to a significant degree) by capital?
Lawmakers aren't failing because they're earnestly trying and in their incompetence they just can't make it work. They're failing because they're part of a system that, over time, has become an apparatus to serve capital. It won't let them control it.
That said it's not binary, lawmakers haven't completely lost their ability to reign in companies, as the current administration has shown. It's also shown, though, that there are some industries you don't touch, and on the whole the money keeps getting sucked to the top, where it can further influence lawmakers.
I'm ok with not labeling capitalism as the core problem. It's the best economic system we have. We could blame the founders for failing to create a system less susceptible to capture. Or we could blame any number of people along the way who could have pushed for changes before it was too late.
But either way, when you have free markets and you don't regulate them aggressively enough, this is what you eventually get.
IMO it's important to be clear about the problem if you hope to fix it.
-
Comment on AI, automation, and inequality — how do we reach utopia? in ~talk
post_below Link ParentYou're right, or at least that seems like the most likely outcome as things stand now. Things like AI and automation making better standards of living possible for the masses isn't on the horizon,...You're right, or at least that seems like the most likely outcome as things stand now.
Things like AI and automation making better standards of living possible for the masses isn't on the horizon, it's already in progress, automation has been creating (relative) surplus for a very long time.
Every major technological advance from farming and the wheel to the industrial revolution has increased the baseline standard of living. And in every case the majority of the surplus went to the top. The same has been true so far of the digital revolution.
The biggest difference now is that the big players in the economy have gotten better at capturing the surplus created by advances before it can benefit the majority of the population.
The answer, though, isn't to give in to the seemingly inevitable dytopia this implies. Some western countries have succeeded, through government, in carving out a larger part of pie for the general population (single payer, education, childcare, etc..). It's not on the level of UBI but it's evidence that it's possible in the modern world.
-
Comment on ‘The science isn’t there’: do dating apps really help us find our soulmate? in ~life
post_below Link ParentI agree that the original concept of soulmates is essentially mythology. But isn't the term more frequently used these days to just mean "the person I fell in love with"?I agree that the original concept of soulmates is essentially mythology. But isn't the term more frequently used these days to just mean "the person I fell in love with"?
-
Comment on ‘The science isn’t there’: do dating apps really help us find our soulmate? in ~life
post_below LinkFrom the article: So, yes, evidently dating apps can/do help you find your soulmate. If over half of people met their person online, it's working. The frustrating thing isn't dating apps, it's...From the article:
In the US, where uptake has been greatest since their advent, first as websites, about 30 years ago, more than half of all heterosexual couples – and an even higher proportion of gay couples – now meet online, according to Stanford University sociologist Michael Rosenfeld.
So, yes, evidently dating apps can/do help you find your soulmate. If over half of people met their person online, it's working.
The frustrating thing isn't dating apps, it's just dating. Apps have their own set of pros and cons but at the end of the day it's two people, steeped in chemicals, trying to figure out if they fit. It's messy by definition.
I thought dating apps were great, but not as great as deleting them. I guess that particular feeling you get when things don't go as planned and you end up downloading them again is unique to the digital age.
-
Comment on Zendaya-Palooza box office weekend pushes ‘Dune: Part Two’ to $700M WW; ‘Godzilla x Kong’ to half billion as Legendary Warner pics count $1.2B WW in ~movies
post_below Link ParentI would say that the original Chani character's devoted support does a better job of emphasizing the tragedy later in the story by subverting expectations for the central love arc. It's a fine...I would say that the original Chani character's devoted support does a better job of emphasizing the tragedy later in the story by subverting expectations for the central love arc.
It's a fine movie btw, not an easy series to bring to the screen. I just don't love major character changes that don't seem necessary or even particularly useful.
-
Comment on Zendaya-Palooza box office weekend pushes ‘Dune: Part Two’ to $700M WW; ‘Godzilla x Kong’ to half billion as Legendary Warner pics count $1.2B WW in ~movies
post_below Link ParentIt's one thing to cut/combine parts, change ordering, simplify elements, sometimes you have to make compromises for the screen. It's something else entirely to rewrite the characters from scratch....It's one thing to cut/combine parts, change ordering, simplify elements, sometimes you have to make compromises for the screen. It's something else entirely to rewrite the characters from scratch.
I suppose they just wanted to convert the IP into cash and figured it would work better as a more vanilla hollywood story.
How much you want to bet they tone down the tragic cautionary tale Paul in later installments? Too ambiguous for mass market.
-
Comment on Ten times as much of this toxic pesticide could end up on your tomatoes and celery under a new US EPA proposal in ~health
post_below Link ParentAgreed, and it's an easy take to support. Most of Europe is far quicker to ban or restrict toxic substances when the science is there. And we know from decades of science that culture results fail...Agreed, and it's an easy take to support. Most of Europe is far quicker to ban or restrict toxic substances when the science is there.
And we know from decades of science that culture results fail to translate to human results more often than they don't. You can learn a lot that way but it's a transparent industry ploy to claim it's a reasonable test of safety.
I think we should go a step farther and err in favor of restricting unstudied substances until there is solid independent science demonstrating safety.
Just a dream of course, since half the industries on earth would rally to kill that initiative.
-
Comment on Ten times as much of this toxic pesticide could end up on your tomatoes and celery under a new US EPA proposal in ~health
post_below LinkThank you Propublica. Things like this happen pretty regularly in the US, but they normally fly under the radar. This case is particularly egregious both because of the methodology and because as...Against the guidance of scientific advisory panels, the EPA is relying on industry-backed tests to relax regulations on acephate, which has been linked to neurodevelopmental disorders.
[...]
But rather than banning the pesticide, as the European Union did more than 20 years ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency recently proposed easing restrictions on acephate.
[...]
“It’s exactly what we recommended against,” Veena Singla, a member of the children’s committee who also teaches at Columbia University, said of the EPA’s acephate proposal. “Children’s development is exquisitely sensitive to toxicants. … It’s disappointing they’re not following the science.”Thank you Propublica. Things like this happen pretty regularly in the US, but they normally fly under the radar. This case is particularly egregious both because of the methodology and because as they're ignoring so much clear advice from groups they reached out to for input.
Hopefully this article and others that follow will draw enough attention in the public comment phase to make them rethink. And also discourage them from relying on this kind of bad science going forward. Not because they'll realize their mistake, this appears intentionally corrupt rather than just stupid, but because it will communicate that the public is watching.
-
Ten times as much of this toxic pesticide could end up on your tomatoes and celery under a new US EPA proposal
29 votes -
Comment on US FCC to vote to restore net neutrality rules years after the agency voted to repeal them in ~tech
post_below Link ParentIndeed, and a pile of wins (from a progressive perspective) over the last three years. Perhaps if we imagine businesses as small to medium organizations that are concerned with long term goals...Pretty good string of successes coming out of this administration this past week.
Indeed, and a pile of wins (from a progressive perspective) over the last three years.
You'd think businesses, even if they are primarily the ones who fight are fighting these, would want stability more than anything.
Perhaps if we imagine businesses as small to medium organizations that are concerned with long term goals informed by legacy, taking care of their employees and doing their small part to make their country a better place to live.
But we're talking about big listed companies that are concerned with shareholder value. To them repealing net neutrality is the best thing ever... they spend a relatively small amount of money on lobbying, campaign contributions and PR and if it works their existing systems can start making (a lot) more money, no investment or significant upgrades needed. It's like a free money button. What self respecting corporation is going to pass that up?
It doesn't even require a major budget change, they're deeply invested in politics by default and have been for decades. Not only to control regulation so they can continue to charge some of the highest prices in the world, but also to get those sweet sweet subsidies and suppress community broadband projects.
Four years of free money (give or take) is worth a lot of bonuses and stock price increases. And they get a shot at repealing it again if things go right in the next election. It may not be stability but there's no downside.
-
Comment on For those involved / interested in Web3, what do you make of the near and long term future for it? in ~tech
post_below LinkI won't add to the already well articulated practical criticisms of Web3 in the thread. Instead I have a philosophical one: You can't have it. Not you personally, the crypto bros. It's the world...I won't add to the already well articulated practical criticisms of Web3 in the thread.
Instead I have a philosophical one: You can't have it. Not you personally, the crypto bros. It's the world wide web we're talking about. It's a huge part of the digital age and human progress in general. If sanity prevails Web3 will be looked back on as a failed attempt by speculators to co-opt something that is so much bigger than them it's comical.
Web 2 was already just marketing, a term for technologies that had existed for years before it was coined. But at least in that case the technologies were useful and the term had some utility in describing important trends.
Web3 is a joke, not a new major version of the internet.
-
Comment on Fellow hardline materialists, how do you "enchant" the world? in ~talk
post_below LinkI answered this in a slightly different context not long ago in this comment. Short answer: Making meaning and connection. I'd also add nature. The complex, nuanced relationships between...I answered this in a slightly different context not long ago in this comment.
Short answer: Making meaning and connection.
I'd also add nature. The complex, nuanced relationships between everything alive and the surrounding evironment that arise from millions of years of co-evolution make this planet home in much more than a literal sense. We're made for and of this place.
We've only scratched the surface of what that looks like and already it's clear that there's more depth and connection in that story than you'll find in any metaphysical belief system.
In that way I don't see the underlying laws of the universe as cold. Our genomes have been informed by those laws for a longer span of time than we can really comprehend. They are more intimate and familiar than any lover.
You may have read that, by some estimates, bacterial cells in and on our bodies outnumber our own cells. The more we learn, the more the line between inside and outside blurs into nonexistence.
Which is to say that lack of metaphysical meaning does nothing to take away from the profoundly connected nature of being a living thing, even if we aren't consciously aware of it.
-
Comment on NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism in ~news
post_below Link ParentTo clarify, I'm not the "jumped to the top of the ladder" poster. I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with what he did, ethically speaking. Maybe a dick move, but that's for the people...To clarify, I'm not the "jumped to the top of the ladder" poster. I don't think there's anything terribly wrong with what he did, ethically speaking. Maybe a dick move, but that's for the people at NPR to judge.
I completely agree that we'd all benefit from expanding the umbrella to make space for near right conservative views. There's not really a place for them in the current republican party, and the left doesn't seem to want them either.
-
Comment on NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism in ~news
post_below Link ParentHe definitely seems to have tried, in good faith, to bring up the issues internally. I think that justifies his actions to some extent. But we don't know what the conversations actually were. I...He definitely seems to have tried, in good faith, to bring up the issues internally. I think that justifies his actions to some extent.
But we don't know what the conversations actually were. I imagine it's a hard topic at NPR where the consensus is likely that the majority of the republican party has lost its mind. To the degree that giving them representation is more problematic than the lack thereof.
It's not surprising that there aren't any (open) republicans at NPR. Ten years ago, before the republican party became the party of Trump, it might have been different, but these days it's really hard for anyone who's paying attention to be a republican. And of course everyone at NPR is paying attention.
I mean what is the answer to "there aren't enough republicans and NPR?" Hiring based on political affiliation?
I can imagine a meeting where everyone considered that rabbit hole a waste of time.
I'm not sure chemically castrating children should be among our options.