Would you mind having a conversation about it? I'm in the same position as your dad (with less homophobia, though) and I would love to be able to know what I could do to be better. It can a...
Would you mind having a conversation about it? I'm in the same position as your dad (with less homophobia, though) and I would love to be able to know what I could do to be better.
Absolutely! I don't mind either way (in the comments or in DMs) and would love to answer any questions you have. 😊 Curiosity is the first step, so you're already way ahead of him 💜
Absolutely! I don't mind either way (in the comments or in DMs) and would love to answer any questions you have. 😊 Curiosity is the first step, so you're already way ahead of him 💜
I know how that feels. I haven't told my family yet, but my significant other and I just broke up because of it. She was very supportive until I actually got on hormones.
I know how that feels.
I haven't told my family yet, but my significant other and I just broke up because of it. She was very supportive until I actually got on hormones.
Are you active on any social media platforms? If so, have you considered unsubscribing from them? If you use their apps on your phone, have you considered not using the apps so spend a more...
Are you active on any social media platforms? If so, have you considered unsubscribing from them? If you use their apps on your phone, have you considered not using the apps so spend a more limited time on these platforms?
I use mostly Reddit and Telegram. I have many friends on the latter and I use it for practicing Spanish, so I don't see myself getting off it but I could diminish my time on it About Reddit, I...
I use mostly Reddit and Telegram. I have many friends on the latter and I use it for practicing Spanish, so I don't see myself getting off it but I could diminish my time on it
About Reddit, I really think I should spend much less time on it, maybe even delete my account. I'm only using it for distraction and end up getting into useless arguments a lot :P
For me, tildes is going to become the focus of my (already limited) time spent online; I’ll be on sites such as reddit a lot less often as more and more people move to this one. On a side note, I...
For me, tildes is going to become the focus of my (already limited) time spent online; I’ll be on sites such as reddit a lot less often as more and more people move to this one.
On a side note, I really hope that tildes is able to maintain a healthy and nontoxic community as its age and prevalence increase. I’m interested to see how that community evolves as more people join...
Those aren't what I'd call "social media", but definitions vary. I was more interested about things like Facebook and Twitter, where people share their lives. Though that can also be done with the...
Those aren't what I'd call "social media", but definitions vary. I was more interested about things like Facebook and Twitter, where people share their lives. Though that can also be done with the platforms you're talking about.
I personally do not use phone apps for any sort of social media (in my defined form), and only use Signal and Plain Ol' SMS for text messaging on my phone, and actual phone calls. I used to have more, but found myself spending way too much time on those and not feeling productive at all at the end of the day.
For actual social media (in my defined form), in my case Facebook, I've given up on it a while ago. I stopped actively using it when I broke up with a previous girlfriend, and only feeling bad whenever I went onto the platform. During that time, I found an article explaining how social media brings more (mental) harm than good, and I tried stopping it for a while. I felt much better about my life in general in a very short time, and eventually just deleted my account since I didn't use it anymore. Semi-recently I've signed up to Mastodon, but I'm still keeping away from phone apps so I am forced to spend less time on it than I used to with other social media platforms.
I still have contact with people, and I still share experiences in life and have interesting discussions, but now they're (almost) all in real life. Real life discussions generally work a lot better in my experience, as you can hear tone and see expressions, which are missing from written discussion. This is especially true on emotional subjects.
Don't be afraid to let go of some platforms if they stress you out or otherwise negatively affect you. You don't have to delete all your accounts at once, but you could try going a week or so without and see if it improves your overal mood.
I deleted facebook, instagram, and (surprisingly) gmail from my phone. Now I don't habitually pull out my phone every time I'm mildly bored, and it's great.
I deleted facebook, instagram, and (surprisingly) gmail from my phone. Now I don't habitually pull out my phone every time I'm mildly bored, and it's great.
I've noticed that more and more people I know have started to go offline more and get rid of social media for periods of time.. I really hope it's a general trend that'll make things better and...
I've noticed that more and more people I know have started to go offline more and get rid of social media for periods of time..
I really hope it's a general trend that'll make things better and make the toxicity a lot smaller....?
It's the same with my friends, I maintain my Facebook account to keep in touch with friends and family at home (since I live a few thousand km away). But when I actually look at it the people I'm...
It's the same with my friends, I maintain my Facebook account to keep in touch with friends and family at home (since I live a few thousand km away). But when I actually look at it the people I'm telling myself I want to stay in touch with are the people who either aren't on Facebook, or whose profiles haven't been updated in a long while.
Facebook has gone to shit in recent years anyway. All the feed manipulation and such that goes on isn't worth the effort. Blocking every stupid meme page that people share rubbish from as soon as it appears has gone a long way to cleaning up my feed. But now I can clearly see that there is very little of interest there. It's kind of interesting to see what all my old school buddies are doing, to a point. But then if I'd wanted to keep in touch with them I would have anyway.
My actual friends and I use a whatsapp group. Yet I still twitch a little every time I consider shutting my Facebook account for some reason! :-D
Yup. I'm tired of politics getting in the way of people interacting in a civil way. Can't we all just agree that we, collectively as humans, can disagree without assuming the other person is a...
Yup. I'm tired of politics getting in the way of people interacting in a civil way. Can't we all just agree that we, collectively as humans, can disagree without assuming the other person is a lesser person until they do something to prove it? I'm sorry but just because someone holds a different view on the current hot-button political issue doesnt make them an awful person.
Let's take something very controversial like abortion. If you're in favour of abortion, you're in favour of murdering babies. If you're against abortion, you're against women's rights. Do you...
just because someone holds a different view on the current hot-button political issue doesnt make them an awful person.
Let's take something very controversial like abortion. If you're in favour of abortion, you're in favour of murdering babies. If you're against abortion, you're against women's rights. Do you respect callous people who want to murder babies? Do you respect sexist people who want to remove women's agency?
This is how it works. If you hold a particular political opinion on an issue, you'll usually hold that opinion for moral reasons. If someone holds a differing political opinion on that issue, they're obviously not moral: a moral person would agree that babies need to be protected from murder or that women need to have control over their own lives.
Political opinions aren't just hypothetical intellectual exercises: they're how we express our morality. That's why they're so important to us, and why it's hard to withhold moral judgement on someone else who holds a differing opinion.
EDIT: I accidentally switched my "againsts" and my "in favours"!
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity Stupidity is a bit of a harsh word but I've started to approach people holding other opinions from myself by starting from...
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
Stupidity is a bit of a harsh word but I've started to approach people holding other opinions from myself by starting from the position that they may not be as informed on a topic as myself.
That person against abortion may have given the topic all of 10 mins of thought before coming to a conclusion, they may not have done all the research into pro-choice arguments that I've done.
This has certainly started to help, what's frustrating is when someone who has given a topic all of 10 mins of thought believe their opinion is as nuanced as an opinion formed after hundreds of hours of research and deliberation; so the issue is two fold.
If those who have given a lot of thought to an issue understand others haven't and if those who haven't given a lot of thought to an issue realized they should be more open minded to arguments made by those who have spent a lot of time on issue it would be easier to have open civilized discussion and coexistence between those of sharply different view points.
I run into this with my father a lot. I have the opportunity to listen to a lot of audio whilst I work, which means most days I listen to 3-6 hours of news/political discussions from a wide range of various sources. My Father watches local news for 30 mins to an hour most days.
So when we debate on a topic it becomes frustrating because to me my father's arguments seem basic and rudimentary (most have been debunked or dismissed ad nauseam) and to my father it seems like i'm dismissing the validity of his opinions. I've tried bringing this up with him but he firmly believes that an opinion formed on nothing more than a rough understanding of a topic and gut intuition is as valid as an opinion based on facts and careful deliberation.
In this situation, it would seem that the most worthwhile way to continue the conversation would be to try to educate the other person / expose them to the information that you’ve been exposed to....
In this situation, it would seem that the most worthwhile way to continue the conversation would be to try to educate the other person / expose them to the information that you’ve been exposed to.
Whether or not they are receptive to this new information is something else entirely...
When I do this, people call me arrogant. And what if they believe that you have not done all the research into pro-life arguments that they have done? Why are you assuming that only your opinion...
I've started to approach people holding other opinions from myself by starting from the position that they may not be as informed on a topic as myself.
When I do this, people call me arrogant.
That person against abortion may have given the topic all of 10 mins of thought before coming to a conclusion, they may not have done all the research into pro-choice arguments that I've done.
And what if they believe that you have not done all the research into pro-life arguments that they have done?
Why are you assuming that only your opinion is supported by research and understanding, and the other opinion is based in ignorance? This is just a different way of dismissing people you disagree with: instead of dismissing them as an awful person, you dismiss them as ignorant.
I think you misunderstood what I was getting at. I'm saying I approach the conversation with the mindset that I should explain my views and opinions as if they had never heard them, instead of...
I think you misunderstood what I was getting at.
I'm saying I approach the conversation with the mindset that I should explain my views and opinions as if they had never heard them, instead of assuming they know those arguments and just dismiss them because they are just horrible immoral people as explained in your comment above.
instead of dismissing them as an awful person, you dismiss them as ignorant.
And...? What if you give them the best possible explanation of your views and opinions - better than every explanation they've ever heard before - and they fully comprehend your explanation, but...
And...? What if you give them the best possible explanation of your views and opinions - better than every explanation they've ever heard before - and they fully comprehend your explanation, but they still disagree with you?
Then our morals are different and depending on the severity it could make me not want to associate with them. For instance if it turns out that person actually is a white supremacist not just...
Then our morals are different and depending on the severity it could make me not want to associate with them.
For instance if it turns out that person actually is a white supremacist not just accidentally agreeing with a white supremacist's position in a single instance; probably not gonna wanna hang out with them.
I've always found Youtube comments particularly interesting. There is a weird self-reinforcing self-selection bias which means most of the comments are awful, and then those people motivated to...
I've always found Youtube comments particularly interesting.
There is a weird self-reinforcing self-selection bias which means most of the comments are awful, and then those people motivated to comment in a thread full of awful are even worse.
Edit: Is it helpful to think that the internet is not representative of reality?
YouTube is really weird to me.. Some comment sections are very wholesome, others are hateful etc.. In the end I think it really depends on the video.. I think the Internet is representative in the...
YouTube is really weird to me.. Some comment sections are very wholesome, others are hateful etc.. In the end I think it really depends on the video..
I think the Internet is representative in the sense that it's a good showcase of polar opposite opinions.. They just get more attention because to a lot of people they stick out.. But what about the opinions of all those people in between?
The world today seems to be a lot about that everything is either black or white and somewhat polarised.. But there's so many more shades and layers to everything, and I try to stay optimistic that most people will realise this and not go crazy at each other all the time..
One thing I kinda realized about youtube is that its reaches are far vaster than that of most other social media sites. Think about it– people of all ages, of all ethnicities around the world,...
One thing I kinda realized about youtube is that its reaches are far vaster than that of most other social media sites. Think about it– people of all ages, of all ethnicities around the world, spanning both sexes and many religions, political affiliations, and beliefs, use youtube– a 67 year old redneck from Georgia could be having a weird discussion with an 8 year old from Bosnia. That, in combination with your idea that the social "climate" on youtube is self-reinforcing and the fact that a billion unique visitors come to the site every month, leads to a lot of horrible, ugly "discussion" that is hard to escape. That kind of stuff just doesn't happen as much on other social media sites. The only one I can think of that's even comparable in that regard is facebook.
This. But I wonder why things tend to become toxic as more people come into contact with each other... Why is it that vastly different demographics interacting with each other on one site cause as...
This.
But I wonder why things tend to become toxic as more people come into contact with each other... Why is it that vastly different demographics interacting with each other on one site cause as much tension as they do? Hypothetically, how could a site encourage / maintain a certain level of civility while still accepting disagreement and conflicts of worldview?
Moderation certainly helps. Youtube is practically unmoderated, and the borderline unhelpful tools they provide creators rarely get used– if at all. Another is an established mode of conduct from...
Moderation certainly helps. Youtube is practically unmoderated, and the borderline unhelpful tools they provide creators rarely get used– if at all.
Another is an established mode of conduct from the getgo, much like tildes or reddit or many other hobby-specific forums (albeit reddit has sort of lost that in recent years due to the shift in focus from link aggregation to pseudo-social media).
Lastly I think that a site that focuses on pushing content where appealing to the lowest common denominator is rewarded, the majority of those consumers will be... Kinda shitty. Not that there isn't good content on youtube, because I follow some truly fantastic creators, but think of how much youtube promotes the Paul brothers despite them being genuinely awful people. When a site promotes civil discussion that prides itself on being as unbiased as possible it will naturally attract people of that caliber who seek good discussion like that.
The mess that youtube is in is a whole mixed bag of shitty circumstances leading to shitty people coming out in droves IMHO.
The problem with Youtube comments is that the downvote button doesn't work, meaning that all the people responding to a rude or false comment drive it up.
The problem with Youtube comments is that the downvote button doesn't work, meaning that all the people responding to a rude or false comment drive it up.
It's an interesting dynamic. On the internet, if we disagree with something, we spend lengthy time arguing about it. https://xkcd.com/386/ More often, we silently agrees. The upvotes means we...
It's an interesting dynamic.
On the internet, if we disagree with something, we spend lengthy time arguing about it. https://xkcd.com/386/
More often, we silently agrees.
The upvotes means we really get along, however the toxic arguing on the majority of the page is what you saw.
Damn; hi pal! It's a bit tough, but definitivly improving. I just deleted her from Facebook. Also, I met another cool girl and we're having fun. Thanks for checking up on me :))
Damn; hi pal! It's a bit tough, but definitivly improving. I just deleted her from Facebook. Also, I met another cool girl and we're having fun. Thanks for checking up on me :))
I can't decide on my future. I just finished my bachelor's (compsci) and I'm looking for a masters. Can't decide between it security, AI and also where to go. I'm 25 and I would like to work (to...
I can't decide on my future. I just finished my bachelor's (compsci) and I'm looking for a masters.
Can't decide between it security, AI and also where to go. I'm 25 and I would like to work (to make some money) but I'm afraid I won't have the time next to my masters.
Oh and I want to create educational YouTube videos, but I have no idea where to start. (if anyone wants me to explain something let me know haha)
Oh man, I am in similar situation, I am finishing my very generic business management education but want to get into programming. I don't know if that relates to your specialization at all, but it...
Oh man, I am in similar situation, I am finishing my very generic business management education but want to get into programming. I don't know if that relates to your specialization at all, but it would be interesting to hear from you how would one get into CS or maybe what language to learn first
From my limited knowledge, AI sounds like the most demanded career path at the moment
Do you want to do a masters? There's compsci masters for people from different fields. For starters you have to decide what you want to develop: Literally just Apps? Learn kotlin/Java (better...
Do you want to do a masters? There's compsci masters for people from different fields.
For starters you have to decide what you want to develop:
Literally just Apps? Learn kotlin/Java (better documented) or swift
Web development? check out freecodecamp
General programming, which in my opinion is the best way to go, since you should first learn how to program and then just think about the language: Python or Java which are both used around the world to teach programming concepts. Then you should learn about algorithms and data structures.
This book is free and is supposed to be a pretty good intro to programming (in Python): https://automatetheboringstuff.com/ It seems to focus on teaching through more practical tasks, instead of...
It seems to focus on teaching through more practical tasks, instead of the contrived, useless "toy" tasks that most programming books tend to use, so it might actually teach you some things that come in handy.
Al is a super nice guy, he is active on reddit as well and gave the course for free even though I missed the free period. I learned quite a bit from him. He has a course on udemy which is not...
Al is a super nice guy, he is active on reddit as well and gave the course for free even though I missed the free period. I learned quite a bit from him. He has a course on udemy which is not priced like most '200 bucks but on sale for 10'. It's actually 30 but I think udemy offers them cheaper sometimes and he might have a coupon on reddit if I remember right
I finished my bachelor's with a 3.7 GPA and want to see if I can hold it through the masters. Also I'm in Germany so pretty much everyone I study with or went to school with is doing a masters. I...
I finished my bachelor's with a 3.7 GPA and want to see if I can hold it through the masters. Also I'm in Germany so pretty much everyone I study with or went to school with is doing a masters. I can see it's external pressure though. I have applied for a job at a big4 company and I got invited to an interview (which is one of like 10) so if I could get in there I would postpone my masters for now
I see. I only ask because after being in the industry several years, I've met several people with masters degrees who have conflicting feelings about its usefulness. I don't know what the German...
I see. I only ask because after being in the industry several years, I've met several people with masters degrees who have conflicting feelings about its usefulness. I don't know what the German education and employment systems are like though, nor do I have a masters myself, so I can't speak definitively about it.
A lot of companies offer programs for employees pursuing a graduate degree to help pay tuition and accommodate their schedules, so that could be worth looking into as you look for jobs.
If you go into AI (in specific predictive via ML) you'll be making so much money after you get out that you won't be worried about making no money for a few more years. Some companies (like...
I'm 25 and I would like to work (to make some money) but I'm afraid I won't have the time next to my masters.
If you go into AI (in specific predictive via ML) you'll be making so much money after you get out that you won't be worried about making no money for a few more years. Some companies (like Google) are paying the top people in this field 500k+/yr (I've heard of some 7 figure jobs out there too).
If you're antsy to get a job, I'm not sure how it's like in health care over there, but it's very expensive in America so there are a ton of jobs for people who can marry to the two. Often times the people in data analytics have close to zero clinical experience or knowledge, so it's not too hard to get a job if you can do some basic data analysis.
To play devil's advocate, security work will pretty much always be in demand in essentially its current form and also pays well (perhaps not quite as well as the AI superstars, but mid 6-figures...
To play devil's advocate, security work will pretty much always be in demand in essentially its current form and also pays well (perhaps not quite as well as the AI superstars, but mid 6-figures is definitely possible if you climb the tree of certifications), while in AI you could well find yourself having to jump between doing different things over the course of a career as stuff evolves, with the potential outcome of either being out of work because the field has moved on or else ending up in an area you don't enjoy.
That is a very good point. While ML itself probably isn't a flash in the pan, its methods will likely evolve very rapidly and irrelevance is quite possible.
That is a very good point. While ML itself probably isn't a flash in the pan, its methods will likely evolve very rapidly and irrelevance is quite possible.
As someone who's been in data science for a while and does ML, the concepts haven't moved in a long time, and we're nowhere near it becoming irrelevant. There are so many fields out there...
As someone who's been in data science for a while and does ML, the concepts haven't moved in a long time, and we're nowhere near it becoming irrelevant. There are so many fields out there (medicine especially) where we've barely scratched the surface of data analysis.
At it's core, ML is just statistics. Take a look at extremely statistics heavy subjects, like economics, and you'll find that jobs aren't going anywhere.
You’re the first familiar face I’ve seen here! Didn’t realize you were in data science or did ML. I’ve got some very basic questions I need help with if you have time to nudge me in the right...
You’re the first familiar face I’ve seen here! Didn’t realize you were in data science or did ML. I’ve got some very basic questions I need help with if you have time to nudge me in the right direction. I’ll PM you later on Reddit.
I actually did my bachelor's in medical computer science. I guess you are right about not worrying about money. I just want to work some years, get some money and take a year off to travel the...
I actually did my bachelor's in medical computer science. I guess you are right about not worrying about money. I just want to work some years, get some money and take a year off to travel the world. I traveled Australia when I was 19 and that's one of the happiest memories in my life
Then as someone in the health field I would highly recommend health IT, especially data analysis. It's in high demand, pays well, and doesn't require health experience (at least in America). It's...
Then as someone in the health field I would highly recommend health IT, especially data analysis. It's in high demand, pays well, and doesn't require health experience (at least in America). It's going to be a huge field soon (with pop health demands growing) so it's a very secure job.
Just be sure you learn the basics of statistics, some sql, databases, and ETL. If you have some time for medical terminology it helps, but it's really not required. You can learn a bit about data...
Just be sure you learn the basics of statistics, some sql, databases, and ETL. If you have some time for medical terminology it helps, but it's really not required. You can learn a bit about data visualization pretty quickly and tableau has a free version you can start building stuff with and publishing online.
Ooo what kind of videos are you looking to make? Like, screen cap with audio overlay for doing software demos, or sitting at a desk explaining stuff, or something else? I'd love to help you figure...
Ooo what kind of videos are you looking to make? Like, screen cap with audio overlay for doing software demos, or sitting at a desk explaining stuff, or something else? I'd love to help you figure out ideas, if I can.
I am actually currently not sure which direction I want to go to. Help is appreciated lol. I do a lot of volunteering in which I teach mostly young students about how programming works, but also...
I am actually currently not sure which direction I want to go to. Help is appreciated lol. I do a lot of volunteering in which I teach mostly young students about how programming works, but also teaching about encryption, security, privacy. Sort of digital education
I just wanna say that people like you who teach stuff online are fricken saints. There were a couple 3/4000 level engineering classes I only passed because people like you decided to make videos...
I just wanna say that people like you who teach stuff online are fricken saints. There were a couple 3/4000 level engineering classes I only passed because people like you decided to make videos teaching the topic.
Since you already do face to face teaching, I'd take the approach of using video as a means to add to your normal curriculum. There are a lot of things you can do in video, things that wouldn't be...
Since you already do face to face teaching, I'd take the approach of using video as a means to add to your normal curriculum. There are a lot of things you can do in video, things that wouldn't be feasible in a live lecture format, that can really help to streamline the explanation of concepts.
Right off the bat, video allows for a much higher degree of scripting and planning. You can ad lib as much as you want and slice it up in the edit, or have every shot and every word planned out beforehand.
You can use visual aids much more effectively than if you were using a powerpoint in the background during a lecture. I always got distracted by projectors during lectures because I tend to fixate on visuals. Visual aids can help a lot for people like me who tend to learn more readily through tactile experience and visual cues, but they can also be a detriment and distract from what's being said. But in video, it's much easier to dial-in the timing and presence of visual aids.
It can be fairly difficult to get comfortable with speaking to a camera as if it's your audience. It gets more natural with practice. But there is the question of whether that format works for your material or not. For some, visual cues from facial expressions can add a depth of meaning to what's being said, but others can be very bothered by the seemingly endless eye contact. You'll have to make the call as to whether you think the material is better presented with just a voice-over, or if you think a more personal presentation works better.
That will help you also figure out what kind of equipment would be best suited for the job. For example, if you're going to use real world video footage for your projects, you'll want a decent camera, boom or shotgun mic, and maybe some lighting. If you plan on doing mostly screen caps with voiceovers, you'll still want to grab a decent mic.
So the things to consider mostly boil down to what kind of content you feel could really add to the reception of the material. What sort of things have been helpful the most to you personally? When you volunteer, it might be useful to try and get some feedback afterwards on what worked well and what needed additional clarification. What do your students think would help? You can start to put together a much better idea of what form the videos could take. Could they be useful more as supplemental material? Could they function as standalone pieces? Maybe they could serve well as introductions to concepts, followed up in-class with practice.
I'm kinda winging my advice here because I don't know the specifics of your situation, so I may be offering suggestions that will be far afield from what your intentions are. I'm not trying to influence your plans one way or another, just trying to give you some ideas for what to consider in fleshing out a general idea.
I'm kinda in a similar situation. I want to do a master's (still getting my bachelor's) in the future and I don't know what I should focus on. Security concepts really interest me, but I also like...
I'm kinda in a similar situation. I want to do a master's (still getting my bachelor's) in the future and I don't know what I should focus on. Security concepts really interest me, but I also like AI and computer vision. And I still don't know what kind of job I want to have.
I have interned previously but it was regular software engineering. So I am currently trying to get the requisite background for the fields I am interested in
I have interned previously but it was regular software engineering. So I am currently trying to get the requisite background for the fields I am interested in
I feel like I did, but I'm starting to question it.. It's been my dream for several years and after applying several times until I finally got accepted, it was a dream that finally came true. I...
I feel like I did, but I'm starting to question it..
It's been my dream for several years and after applying several times until I finally got accepted, it was a dream that finally came true.
I knew it was going to be though. But this just keeps on piling on and on.. And after two years (with four more to go), I'm starting to question if I'm smart enough to do this when I'm struggling this much for so long now.
I already tried engineering and some IT, as that has always been a side interest of me, but in the end I kept on applying for med school because that was "the dream" and what "felt right".. Plus it checked most boxes in what I want.. And I can see myself in the job on the other side, even though I'm not sure about my specific direction..
Absolutely this. My wife was told that people just opened up to her, she was a great listener, she was fabulous at helping people so she went and got a masters in psych. My wife HATES people. She...
Absolutely this.
My wife was told that people just opened up to her, she was a great listener, she was fabulous at helping people so she went and got a masters in psych.
My wife HATES people.
She likes helping or listening to people she knows or cares about but the general populace can fuck right off.
Dont get a career just because you think you should or because it pays a lot.
Especially a medical career because
a) if you hate your job its going to affect the people you treat
and
b) that shit is EXPENSIVE.
You have a really good point! I've started to question my real reasons for going into this field, because the above is definitely something I want to avoid.
You have a really good point!
I've started to question my real reasons for going into this field, because the above is definitely something I want to avoid.
I agree with @Eva about needing to enjoy such a long and work intensive path as medical school. Being a medical professional necessitates a massive amount of effort, but if you think that it’ll...
I agree with @Eva about needing to enjoy such a long and work intensive path as medical school. Being a medical professional necessitates a massive amount of effort, but if you think that it’ll ultimately be worthwhile, keep at it and see where it takes you!
You and me both my man. There was an earlier point in history where total destruction of life was possible - the cold war - but everyone just needed to not make the decision to launch nukes. This...
You and me both my man. There was an earlier point in history where total destruction of life was possible - the cold war - but everyone just needed to not make the decision to launch nukes. This time we have to massively change our economies and cultures. It's scary to think what an environmentally sustainable world looks like - no more AC, no more international shipping, drastically reduced meat consumption, no more fossil fuel extraction, extreme reduction in military actions just to start with. Any one of these would be incredibly hard to get widespread buy-in on. All of them, together, and things still wouldn't noticably improve for potentially decades? I don't have a lot of hope. Baby boomers really fucked us.
I know that. It's just that I look at human history, not just recorded history but the past 2 million years, all of our progress. In just 100 or so years, an eyeblink in time, our technological...
I know that.
It's just that I look at human history, not just recorded history but the past 2 million years, all of our progress. In just 100 or so years, an eyeblink in time, our technological prowess so far outpaces our collective wisdom and we do so much damage that our environment can no longer support us. And we do this just before we start migrating out into space, where separating ourselves into multiple biospheres would all but guarantee our survival as a species.
I've come to similar conclusions and all I can really say as far as coping is... well, we've had a good run of it. Sure, I'd like it if the species continued into perpetuity, but we might not....
I've come to similar conclusions and all I can really say as far as coping is... well, we've had a good run of it. Sure, I'd like it if the species continued into perpetuity, but we might not.
However, the instinct to survive is a strong one, and necessity is the mother of innovation. We've engineered the biggest threat to our own survival that the species has gone through in history. If we can overcome that, just think of the advances we'll have made because we fucking had to
There are things that give me hope. The fact that we're working on technologies that not just reduce CO2 emissions, but actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Along with the massive amount of...
There are things that give me hope. The fact that we're working on technologies that not just reduce CO2 emissions, but actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Along with the massive amount of pushback the public is generating against Trump's idiotic policies, both environmental and otherwise.
We should research NETs (Negative Emissions Technologies), but we can't rely on them, since they probably will not work soon enough or at scale. You might enjoy Kevin Anderson's latest talk...
We should research NETs (Negative Emissions Technologies), but we can't rely on them, since they probably will not work soon enough or at scale. You might enjoy Kevin Anderson's latest talk regarding IPCC projections. He's very informed and comments on them specifically.
Out of interest, are you working towards making humans an interplanetary species? It's something that's interested me for a while, though I doubt I'll end up working in the space industry.
Out of interest, are you working towards making humans an interplanetary species? It's something that's interested me for a while, though I doubt I'll end up working in the space industry.
NASA hires software engineers sometimes! It's not the most direct sort of way to achieve your goal, but you might have a bit of a better time with it! (Plus, it's a government job; when they say...
NASA hires software engineers sometimes! It's not the most direct sort of way to achieve your goal, but you might have a bit of a better time with it! (Plus, it's a government job; when they say permanent they really mean permanent if desired.) Might be a bit of a pay dock though.
I'm not entirely sure. I'd like to see some sort of global organization that holds several specific goals with a major one becoming a two-planet species. The idea would be to solicit donations and...
I'm not entirely sure. I'd like to see some sort of global organization that holds several specific goals with a major one becoming a two-planet species. The idea would be to solicit donations and then use that $ to support groups and political candidates that would drive policy change.
I feel like we just need to hold out long enough to spread out away from Earth, which will be filled with dooms-day scenarios coming to life. With our species advancing so quickly, and the...
I feel like we just need to hold out long enough to spread out away from Earth, which will be filled with dooms-day scenarios coming to life. With our species advancing so quickly, and the technological singularity approaching, I feel like there should be much more alarm among us to make sure we can survive ever more complicated and advanced threats. As we become smarter, more serious existential threats can be created by smaller groups of people. A few scientists with the knowledge of pathogens can create designer super bugs that would be next to impossible to stop with our current technology. A physicist could be held at gunpoint to create a black hole generator, or a drug that can take over people's thoughts and actions, or an arsenal of nuclear weapons. The knowledge to create these things will be available to everybody as we become smarter and more advanced, especially when we start to merge with machines to enhance our own intelligence. Most people don't even realize that they probably have made the longevity escape velocity (if they're under 50 years old), so they don't think that these problems will affect them. If we can educate the masses of these problems then we might have a slight chance, but I highly doubt it. Excuse the rambling. :p
While I agree that we as a species will have to branch out to other planets and prepare for a diverse onslaught of existential threats, I think that it’s important to make every effort to preserve...
While I agree that we as a species will have to branch out to other planets and prepare for a diverse onslaught of existential threats, I think that it’s important to make every effort to preserve Earth (for a long time).
From a practical perspective, Earth is the only place that is guaranteed to support us right now and we have yet to actually develop and prove the viability of technologies that could make extraterrestrial living possible.
Even if / when we do develop those technologies, Earth is where all our history and culture are. It would be terrible to lose everything that we’ve managed to build on this planet and be reduced to desperately fleeing to other places for survival.
Lately I’ve been reading about all the irreversible damage the human race has done to the rainforest in South America, and it makes me really angry. This is happening all over the planet, and as...
Lately I’ve been reading about all the irreversible damage the human race has done to the rainforest in South America, and it makes me really angry. This is happening all over the planet, and as we’re becoming ever more resource hungry, we will continue the destruction. Worried about the human race? Worry about our planet!
Life is pretty resilient, I'd worry more about the human race. If we kill ourselves off, life will take back over and biodiversity will soar. That's not to say we shouldn't care about the planet,...
Life is pretty resilient, I'd worry more about the human race. If we kill ourselves off, life will take back over and biodiversity will soar.
That's not to say we shouldn't care about the planet, it's just that she's a tough motherfucker who will kill us long before we kill her.
You’re correct; “nature finds a way”! I guess I was just feeling a bit fatalistic about the how stupid and short sighted some people can be when it comes to valuing profit over environment.
You’re correct; “nature finds a way”! I guess I was just feeling a bit fatalistic about the how stupid and short sighted some people can be when it comes to valuing profit over environment.
The most important thing we can do to preserve the environment and all these amazing natural locations is institute environmental regulations to keep corporations in check. If they are left to...
The most important thing we can do to preserve the environment and all these amazing natural locations is institute environmental regulations to keep corporations in check. If they are left to their own devices, corporations will happily destroy their natural surroundings to drive profit...
Sometimes I get caught up in that worry, but other times... I dunno. Do I care? Does it matter if humanity ends? Everything ends. Every story, every song. Endings can be sad, but that's fine....
Sometimes I get caught up in that worry, but other times... I dunno. Do I care?
Does it matter if humanity ends? Everything ends. Every story, every song. Endings can be sad, but that's fine. Afterwards new things will begin. We wouldn't be here had the dinosaurs not died, and our solar system only exists because of the death of some long-forgotten star. One wave must ebb before the next can rise.
If humanity lasted forever, would it even have a purpose? What is the point of a thing that lasts forever? We best find meaning in a piece of art once we see it complete and whole. You need to read the novel to its final word before you can draw from it its ultimate message. Humanity until now has been incomplete, and it will remain incomplete until its over. When its over, whoever comes next can look back upon us and know the answer to that question that has troubled us from the start: why are we here?
We have a future indeed, and amid all the rest, that future contains within it our ending. And that's fine.
I work a couple jobs, one is in a theater, although I have no aspirations of acting. The theater's upcoming production was having a bitch and a half's time casting a role, which demographically, I...
I work a couple jobs, one is in a theater, although I have no aspirations of acting. The theater's upcoming production was having a bitch and a half's time casting a role, which demographically, I fit. So the director asks to audition me. I say, what the heck, I like these people, and they're in a spot, why not see if I can help them out. It's the artistic equivalent of signing up to be a bone marrow donor, in my mind.
The audition goes great, it's a lot of fun, save for an awkward moment where the director asks me an inappropriate question about my background. We talk about scheduling, and if I can get it cleared with my other job, and arrange for more consistent transportation than the bus, I've got the part. So I start calling in favors, I get a vehicle to borrow, I get my boss at my non-art job to rework my schedule so I can do it, I let the director now, and he just needs to clear the casting with the Executive Artistic Director, who's my boss at the theater. They then proceed to not talk for a week. I nudge both of them, to try and figure out what's happening, and then 18 hours before the first rehearsal is due to start, I get a text from the artistic director saying that the director has decided to go in another direction with the casting. Five minutes later, I get a call from the director, who tells me that the artistic director forbid him from casting me. So, one of them is lying to me, and I'm going to be working closely with both of them in the upcoming months as the theater moves forward with the production.
The artistic director has been someone that I could count on to at least be honest about how the vampiric nature of an arts non profit was going to fuck me at any given moment, for instance, I haven't gotten paid in the last month because they screwed up their budget and we're trying to limp into our big annual fundraiser. However, my gut tells me that the director's emotional arc has been more predictable. But I have no history with the director. The only event I worked that he directed during my tenure at the theater was his improv troupe, which had a couple members who made similarly disparaging remarks of another individual who shares my background. So it's entirely possible that the director's an asshole who likes to jerk people like me around, because he associates himself with those kind of people, and if he's the one who pulled the plug on me, then I have to consider that as a possibility.
On the other hand, if it was the artistic director who took me off the table in favor of bringing in a professional actor from across the state, who's going to require pay and housing when they can't even afford to pay me right now, well, that's just insulting. Especially after I bent over backwards to accommodate them when they asked me.
So, we've got our weekly production meeting today, and it'll be the first time the three of us are in the same room since all this went down, and I'm not sure how I'm going to handle it. All I know is that the more I think about it, the angrier I get.
My unasked-for .02. Assume positive intent. Write out before hand what you want to ask about, and then re-write that several times until you don't sound upset, then bring that in with you. Oh, and...
My unasked-for .02. Assume positive intent. Write out before hand what you want to ask about, and then re-write that several times until you don't sound upset, then bring that in with you. Oh, and I'd start exploring something else in general because you don't sound too happy.
It's been somewhat resolved. I went to a trusted friend who knew all parties involved, and she told me a lot of things I didn't know about both the artistic director and the director, and while...
It's been somewhat resolved. I went to a trusted friend who knew all parties involved, and she told me a lot of things I didn't know about both the artistic director and the director, and while the stuff about the artistic director was nothing that I hadn't seen some variation of, the stuff about the director was pretty eye opening. It turns out he's one of those self-centered "woker than thou" liberals who uses his progressive cred to put himself in a position where he's beyond criticism for his bad behavior. I suspect what I was sensing from him in terms of emotional authenticity was actually manipulation. One of the shitty things he was known for in his last stint directing for the theater was doing exactly what he did to me to another local actor who was a mutual friend of ours. Up until now, the only people who knew what really went down then were the director and artistic director.
So after a very cordial production meeting where I avoided talking with the director, I pulled the artistic director aside and explained my anger about the situation. She then told me that the director had never told her that he had offered the role to me, and they had been in regular contact during the week that they took to make a decision, but they hadn't talked about me until the final day, all their other conversations were about finding other actors to fill the role. I talked about his inappropriate question, and she also admitted that it was a recurring problem with him, he uses his credibility derived from his work with disadvantaged populations to act uncomfortably familiar with a lot of people in our theater community, like it's ok for him to ask that, because he's someone who's trusted by so many. She counselled him about when she brought him back for the production. She's livid about how things went, but at this point, we both agree that we're in too precarious of a position, and too far down the road to do anything drastic, but I told her that once I'm done with this production, I don't want to work with him in any capacity again. She understood.
I've decided against trying to seek out any closure with the director. If he wants to have a come to jesus moment with me, he'll have to seek it out. Otherwise, I'm going to get through this production, and hopefully he'll never work here again.
Rant incoming... Fucking politics and political discourse on the internet. It's so extremely frustrating to read, let alone participate in, political discussion anywhere on the internet. Politics...
Rant incoming...
Fucking politics and political discourse on the internet. It's so extremely frustrating to read, let alone participate in, political discussion anywhere on the internet.
Politics today is a team sport. People either support team blue or team red. They are very similar though they are not identical. Now, I expect that last statement to be contested so I'll explain what I mean.
Let's take Bill A, for example, that would bring about socialized healthcare in the US. Immediately, we think that Dems will support this while the GOP will be against it. The truth of the matter is that Insurance companies, Hospital conglomerates, and the Pharmaceutical industry are all against this bill and as such will donate large sums of money to BOTH parties to ensure it doesn't happen. So, now that the initial bill was proposed, 1 of 2 things will happen.
The bill will get shredded by amendments, probably written by lobbists for the aforementioned industries, that turn it into a bill that requires all Americans to buy insurance, ban foreign pharmaceuticals, and do nothing to help the average american pay for healthcare
The bill will be written as a great solution for the american people, lowering costs, providing access to cheap medication, and reduce the need for health insurance.
Assuming 1 happens, the bill will likely pass as it will do nothing but show voters that their congressional representatives care. Now, if 2 happens, the vote will depend on which party controls the majority. If the GOP is in power, they all vote against and Dems all vote for. This makes the dems look good to their base and the GOP look good to their base. If the Dems are in power, the GOP votes against and just enough Dems vote against to ensure the bill doesn't pass but it still makes the Dems look like they were for the bill.
This is the crux of the problem. Both the GOP and Dems are making laws based on corporate interests, not the will of the people. They vote in such a way to appear as if they are working for the people but, as we've seen, very few laws get passed that actually help the people.
Finally, trying to discuss any political topic on most sites on the internet is impossible. Many people are not willing to consider another perspective, so if you don't agree with them you are just plain wrong. Being a centrist makes this even worse. Centrists are considered nazis by the left and communist by the right. It's really frustrating.
I try to do that quite a bit, but still see this stuff everywhere. I see people bringing up politics on posts every where from video games to movies and sports to programming. To add, it's not...
I try to do that quite a bit, but still see this stuff everywhere. I see people bringing up politics on posts every where from video games to movies and sports to programming.
To add, it's not that I dislike political discourse, I have great conversations with friends about politics almost daily. It's the tone and general attitude of your average commenter. That said, Tildes hasn't seen too much of this rabidness... yet.
Meaningful political discourse is pretty much impossible to find in the vast majority of places on the internet. That being said, I have really high hopes for tildes and am eager to see if...
Meaningful political discourse is pretty much impossible to find in the vast majority of places on the internet. That being said, I have really high hopes for tildes and am eager to see if successful discussions surrounding difficult and controversial issues will continue to flourish as the site grows.
My wife lost her $40k/year job of nine years in a re-org last year, and hasn't been able to find any position anywhere since. Submits resumes and applications every day, hasn't had a single...
My wife lost her $40k/year job of nine years in a re-org last year, and hasn't been able to find any position anywhere since. Submits resumes and applications every day, hasn't had a single interview. Not even as a barista or cashier or third-shift call-center thing. I'd been working a lot of overtime to make ends meet, and now overtime's canceled indefinitely as business is slowing amid political uncertainty. We no longer have a car or cable, we don't eat out, we don't drink or smoke... our grocery budget is now 100% dependent on what we sell on eBay and how much we get for it. We own a house that's worth less than the mortgage, so just picking up and moving is non-trivial and we frankly don't have the money, anyway.
Has she had someone look over her resume? Has she done research about how to write effective resumes/cover letters? Maybe she already has, which is great, but if she isn't getting calls back, it...
Has she had someone look over her resume? Has she done research about how to write effective resumes/cover letters? Maybe she already has, which is great, but if she isn't getting calls back, it might be time to give it another go. Dumb question... is her contact information correct on the resumes she's sending out?
That's a tough situation, friend. Good luck to you both.
Yeah, she's been to a couple of job fairs, talked to folks at a couple of temp agencies, had people go over her resume with her. Everyone agrees it's perfectly fine. And yeah, the contact info is...
Yeah, she's been to a couple of job fairs, talked to folks at a couple of temp agencies, had people go over her resume with her. Everyone agrees it's perfectly fine. And yeah, the contact info is correct. Just... nobody wants to hire her.
And now lately it's leading to a seemingly endless depression about being either under-qualified or over-qualified for everything. And I can't really blame her. Target won't even give her an interview, and no offense to Target, but they'll hire just about anyone, FFS.
That is so frustrating! I'm really sorry to hear that. More unsolicited advice coming up: so don't read if you don't want it! What is her field in? If she's looking to change careers, she should...
That is so frustrating! I'm really sorry to hear that.
More unsolicited advice coming up: so don't read if you don't want it!
What is her field in? If she's looking to change careers, she should look into functional resumes if she hasn't already. That's what I did when nothing was working and I was trying to break into a new field. It's all about focusing on your skills and experience vs your actual career path. So "Customer service gave me the people skills I need to be an orderly at this hospital," etc. Obviously you wouldn't write that on a resume, but it's an example of the mindset.
I'm sure she's tried everything, so I hope I'm not being annoying. I've been in her shoes where nothing is working and sometimes it's frustrating when people assume you haven't tried things you tried months ago.
She was a financial something-or-other at a mid-sized bank. I forget the exact term just now. Series Six license. It was all a bunch of acronyms to me, lol. Supervised a shift in a service center...
She was a financial something-or-other at a mid-sized bank. I forget the exact term just now. Series Six license. It was all a bunch of acronyms to me, lol. Supervised a shift in a service center for escalated complaints/inquiries involving brokerage accounts. Spent a year and a half helping train call-center staff overseas. Really heavy customer-service credentials, basically, with a lot of banking-industry knowledge (spotting money laundering, etc) and a lot of multicultural supervisory experience. All the obligatory Office/Excel/Powerpoint/blah blah blah experience.
And so far, completely unsuccessful at translating any of that into a job, anywhere.
She's tried the functional resume thing. You'd think that years of customer-service experience might qualify one to, say, be a cashier, or a dispatcher, or whatever... evidently not. :(
I say this because Ive done it in the past when a job fell through that we moved across the country for. Have her look at call centers. Its a complete shit job and it makes you want to kill...
I say this because Ive done it in the past when a job fell through that we moved across the country for.
Have her look at call centers.
Its a complete shit job and it makes you want to kill yourself some days but its a paycheck.
Make an alternate resume where she downplays any management or leadership stuff and plays up the customer service and office suite stuff.
Leave off any higher education.
Again it will be a shit job but $10/hour is better than $0/hour.
That's...really not good. Maybe try retraining yourself/her to a different skillset? A career change sounds like it'd be really helpful for both of you.
That's...really not good. Maybe try retraining yourself/her to a different skillset? A career change sounds like it'd be really helpful for both of you.
It's actually the current state of Tildes. If I look at the homepage, all I see is people hating on whatever a certain person is doing, no matter what it is. Enforce rules? He's literally Hitler....
It's actually the current state of Tildes. If I look at the homepage, all I see is people hating on whatever a certain person is doing, no matter what it is. Enforce rules? He's literally Hitler. Use his powers to change those rules, he's still Hitler.
I've seen people try to argue for "diversity invites". I don't think there's anything more hateful than giving certain people an advantage (or disadvantage, depending on how you view it) based on how they were born.
People call "bad faith" on others simply for disagreeing with them, refusing to enter into a discussion. There's people trying to argue that using any word uttered by the Wrong Person implies agreement with Wrong Person's complete world view.
I came to Tildes to find a new place for civil discussion, not hating on everything that disagrees with the wishes of the regressive ideology. Lately, Tildes is not doing great in that regard.
If you want civil discussion, you'll benefit from not framing the people you disagree with so disingenuously. Trump's ICE is not merely "enforcing the rules", and no one cares if these are rules....
If you want civil discussion, you'll benefit from not framing the people you disagree with so disingenuously.
Trump's ICE is not merely "enforcing the rules", and no one cares if these are rules. He had them change their policy and do terrible things. His executive order didn't simply "undo" everything, so pretending the people you disagree with simply can not be happy is just ignoring what they're actually saying.
How on earth can you compare inviting diverse people to a website to hate and discrimination? Claiming anything that involves changing behavior based on a person's identity is exactly the same is such a convenient and, yes, bad faith argument to make. You can't seriously compare it to lynchings, oppression, and genocide. And ignoring identity is not anti-bigotry, it's allowing the status-quo bigotry to prevail. There's a reason people make fun of those who say they "can't see race".
Referring to progressivism as "the regressive ideology" is just being disrespectful.
I explicitly did not name anything directly because I don't want to devolve into something every other thread is already doing. Great job of showing what I'm talking about, though. You just need...
you'll benefit from not framing the people you disagree with so disingenuously.
I explicitly did not name anything directly because I don't want to devolve into something every other thread is already doing. Great job of showing what I'm talking about, though. You just need to spew hatred and talk negatively about Trump on every occasion, even when he's (intentionally) not explicitly mentioned.
How on earth can you compare inviting diverse people to a website to hate and discrimination?
Because it is. Inviting people based on their genitals or skin color is sexism and racism, even if you can't comprehend it. I liked one of the comments in one of said threads that said to invite diverse viewpoints, not diverse people. You're literally in favour of discriminating based on the way someone is born.
You can't seriously compare it to lynchings, oppression, and genocide.
I never mentioned any of this. Nice strawman.
Referring to progressivism as "the regressive ideology" is just being disrespectful.
Maybe if the ideology wasn't actually regressing society, I wouldn't have to call it that.
Your comment was obviously about Trump's ICE. Keeping it nonspecific only serves to prevent arguing while giving a clear nod to people who agree with you. But more to the point. In your prior...
Your comment was obviously about Trump's ICE. Keeping it nonspecific only serves to prevent arguing while giving a clear nod to people who agree with you.
But more to the point. In your prior comment you called for civil discussion, yet in this comment, you've accused me of spewing hatred, supporting sexism, racism, and discrimination, and being apparently too stupid to comprehend sexism and racism. Do you see any of that as civil?
Yes, it serves to prevent off-topic arguing. You still seem to be interested more in making everything off topic just so you can push your narrative. Probably not. But I also explicitly tried to...
Keeping it nonspecific only serves to prevent arguing
Yes, it serves to prevent off-topic arguing. You still seem to be interested more in making everything off topic just so you can push your narrative.
Do you see any of that as civil?
Probably not. But I also explicitly tried to avoid this off-topic arguing that you so desperately wanted to start. I also did not go out of my way to put words in your mouth that were never mentioned at all.
How is it off topic? If you're bringing up a problem you have with the users of this website, then the way you frame that problem and what it actually is is a natural way to follow that....
How is it off topic? If you're bringing up a problem you have with the users of this website, then the way you frame that problem and what it actually is is a natural way to follow that.
Regardless of the argument at hand, which I have no interest hopping onto, you can't just call someone out like that (especially in a way that they feel misrepresents them) and call any response pointing that out "off topic".
I really sympathize here. I don't think people realize how exhausting it is to get back into the old fights of another thread. You seemed to be trying to bring up what is, to you, a troubling...
I really sympathize here. I don't think people realize how exhausting it is to get back into the old fights of another thread. You seemed to be trying to bring up what is, to you, a troubling intolerance for alternative views without trying to rehash this particular immigration debate. But I also think you were just unfair enough to those other fights that it would invite them to comment on what is, to them, a misrepresentation of those discussions.
It's tough. I don't think there are easy ways forward here. But I think we would all do better to remember the humans behind the words we read.
This could be true. I tried to explain in abstract terms what I was talking about, because just saying "people are doing bad things" isn't really bringing forward the point. I wanted to bring some...
But I also think you were just unfair enough [...]
This could be true. I tried to explain in abstract terms what I was talking about, because just saying "people are doing bad things" isn't really bringing forward the point. I wanted to bring some example to show what I mean, but keep it vague enough not to slip into off-topic arguing. It seems I failed in that regard, though.
Yeah, I clearly don't have a good answer or suggestion here. The only time I tried to do something similar we got lost on exactly the same sort merits-based, kind of ranty, rehashing discussion...
Yeah, I clearly don't have a good answer or suggestion here. The only time I tried to do something similar we got lost on exactly the same sort merits-based, kind of ranty, rehashing discussion that you were trying to avoid here (though that did seem to end on a much better note at least, as you and I used that opportunity to understand where the other was coming from--well, I know I did; I can't speak for you but it seems like you did too).
I will say that for my part, I've been feeling dread hang over me since I posted a poll on people's ability to separate fact from opinion. The reaction was, uh, not grappling with much other than the first page and headline, and it left me feeling like people weren't really reading the whole thing (and incidentally were proving the poll's point about media literacy more generally).
One fuzzy term does not make the base claim completely unproveable (especially considering how they defined fact, you can prove losses or gains in territory even if "how much" is a fuzzier...
One fuzzy term does not make the base claim completely unproveable (especially considering how they defined fact, you can prove losses or gains in territory even if "how much" is a fuzzier metric), nor does that one fuzzy classification of fact undermine all the other 11 statements being measured.
I don't really know how you consider that one criticism enough to call a poll like that "incorrect."
I figure them getting it wrong even once in an article whose point is to get that specific thing right is enough to discredit them, or at least make me wary of anything else they say. True, the...
I figure them getting it wrong even once in an article whose point is to get that specific thing right is enough to discredit them, or at least make me wary of anything else they say.
True, the base claim that they gained or lost territory can be proven, but they're the ones who said "significantly," not me.
No, the point of that article was not to get facts right. The explicit definition of a fact was "can be proven wrong regardless of actual truth." I said that elsewhere in the thread and it was on...
No, the point of that article was not to get facts right. The explicit definition of a fact was "can be proven wrong regardless of actual truth." I said that elsewhere in the thread and it was on the very first linked page.
This is exactly the sort of reaction that made me so disheartened and filled with dread.
Does it? You looked for any reason at all to totally discount the entire poll. That’s not a fair approach to anything. It’s hard to see why your point, that “the poll is incorrect anyway”, when it...
Does it? You looked for any reason at all to totally discount the entire poll. That’s not a fair approach to anything. It’s hard to see why your point, that “the poll is incorrect anyway”, when it isn’t as you admit the line labeled as a fact can be proven or disproved at a clear point, invalidates an entire poll.
It’s that lazy unfairness that fills me with dread. You were not alone, nor were you the worst. And that’s the problem
No, I didn't. That inaccuracy was very obvious; it didn't require any searching to notice. And you're still missing the point that they said "significant," not me. That is why their "fact" is not...
You looked for any reason at all to totally discount the entire poll.
No, I didn't. That inaccuracy was very obvious; it didn't require any searching to notice.
And you're still missing the point that they said "significant," not me. That is why their "fact" is not a fact.
“Significant” losses can be argued to be within a possible spectrum, but there is a very clear point at which it can be disproved. At worst you can say the inclusion of that word makes proving it...
“Significant” losses can be argued to be within a possible spectrum, but there is a very clear point at which it can be disproved. At worst you can say the inclusion of that word makes proving it require more clarification, but it can still be proved, making it a fact (regardless of its truth).
What is so obvious to you is not at all obvious to me.
Careful with your hyperbole. "Significant" isn't just "2% decrease from their peak land holdings." It would have to be argued to be meaningful, which means there is a point at which it can be...
Careful with your hyperbole. "Significant" isn't just "2% decrease from their peak land holdings." It would have to be argued to be meaningful, which means there is a point at which it can be arguably proven. I think if the real losses were 60% from peak values, we would all agree that those losses are "significant." Maybe not enough, but very real, very proven, and not very subjective (though the end point might have a small bit of wiggle room).
But that doesn't prove anything. Even if every human on Earth agrees that it's significant, the concept of significance is entirely subjective. You can "prove" it by convincing people, I suppose,...
But that doesn't prove anything. Even if every human on Earth agrees that it's significant, the concept of significance is entirely subjective.
You can "prove" it by convincing people, I suppose, but that's an inappropriate usage of the word, I think.
Are you sure that "60% losses from peak values" would prove nothing about the claim "ISIS has had significant losses"? Because if you are that sure, and if you think the same is true for literally...
Are you sure that "60% losses from peak values" would prove nothing about the claim "ISIS has had significant losses"? Because if you are that sure, and if you think the same is true for literally all four of the other facts, and that none of the 5 opinions are facts, then I'm even more distressed than the feeling of dread I had before. The reason that would make me more distressed is because the fundamental difference between us on what is "proven enough" would be so large that there would never be anything I could say to you that would prove anything to be true.
And that's grounds for deep disagreement, a disagreement where the participants so disagree on the rules for resolving things like issues of fact that there can be no shared understanding.
First of all, it would prove nothing regarding "significance," because again, that is subjective. It cannot be proven, by definition. It's like how you can't objectively prove that chocolate...
First of all, it would prove nothing regarding "significance," because again, that is subjective. It cannot be proven, by definition. It's like how you can't objectively prove that chocolate tastes good, because it's a matter of opinion.
Did ISIS have losses? Yes. Were they significant? It's up for debate.
Secondly, where did I suggest anything about the other facts listed? Why do you assume that I think they're also incorrect?
Hi, uh, I'm not really involved in this discussion, but the inner pedantic in me saw this particular thread. When you refer to something as "regressive", it specifically means reverting to the way...
Maybe if the ideology wasn't actually regressing society, I wouldn't have to call it that.
Hi, uh, I'm not really involved in this discussion, but the inner pedantic in me saw this particular thread. When you refer to something as "regressive", it specifically means reverting to the way it was before. Assuming that's what you mean, I'd be interested in hearing this...?
I do mean "regressive", yes. Because that's what they're going for, especially the "diversity" and social justice crowds. They cry the hardest about stopping racism, sexism, and every other word...
I do mean "regressive", yes. Because that's what they're going for, especially the "diversity" and social justice crowds.
They cry the hardest about stopping racism, sexism, and every other word they can find that ends in -ism. Yet, their proposed solution is to apply racism, sexism and every other -ism to counter it. Fighting fire with fire isn't going to help. All it will accomplish is more hate between groups, and the actual problem only becoming bigger.
Things like safe-spaces, or black-only events are exactly what happened during the era of segregation. You'd think people are happy that those things have passed, but instead the SJW crowd applauds it. Same goes for women-only events. I was hoping we could see eachother as equals and not try to divide or segregate based on physical conditions.
Then there's the anti-Trump crowd, that just really hates Trump no matter what is happening. They don't want any actual progression. They simply wish for Their Enemy to disappear, even though he was democratically elected. Sure, you can argue USA democracy is broken, but it has been like that for a while now. It's petty to only make a big deal out if when "your side" loses. If you're unironically arguing for Trump to be removed from presidency for not doing what you want, you're against democracy, and want to regress to times before we had such things in place.
If you truly wish to be "progressive", accept that he is currently the president and try to make the best out of it. Learn from the mistakes that got Trump into power and deal with it in a mature manner. Don't try to bring back segregation and blatant racism and sexism, not even for the sake of supposedly fighting racism and sexism.
See man, I didn't even want to get into this, but I'm really not buying your case that you're looking for a place for civil discussion. Let's look at your response: Who is "they"? What is "their...
See man, I didn't even want to get into this, but I'm really not buying your case that you're looking for a place for civil discussion. Let's look at your response:
They cry the hardest about stopping racism, sexism, and every other word they can find that ends in -ism. Yet, their proposed solution is to apply racism, sexism and every other -ism to counter it. Fighting fire with fire isn't going to help. All it will accomplish is more hate between groups, and the actual problem only becoming bigger.
Who is "they"? What is "their proposed solution"? How are they applying "racism, sexism", and especially, "every other -ism"? What even is an "-ism?" There are some assumptions that are safe to make, but you should try to outline the specifics of what you're talking about. What's a specific example of progressive ideology that you disagree with, and think is inherent to the belief? What makes it racist or sexist, in your eyes? How would you instead prefer to deal with the issue, or instead, why do you think the issue isn't one at all?
Things like safe-spaces, or black-only events are exactly what happened during the era of segregation. You'd think people are happy that those things have passed, but instead the SJW crowd applauds it. Same goes for women-only events. I was hoping we could see eachother as equals and not try to divide or segregate based on physical conditions.
All right, that's a... well, I guess it's a mostly substantive paragraph. You're outlining a somewhat clear example of what you're talking about (safe spaces), and you outline what your motivation is, or rather, why you don't like it (hoping to see each other as equals). Your jab of "the SJW crowd applauds it" adds nothing of value to this paragraph, and you don't provide any examples of what you think an unacceptable woman-only event is, but alright, it's a start.
Then there's the anti-Trump crowd, that just really hates Trump no matter what is happening. They don't want any actual progression. They simply wish for Their Enemy to disappear, even though he was democratically elected. Sure, you can argue USA democracy is broken, but it has been like that for a while now. It's petty to only make a big deal out if when "your side" loses. If you're unironically arguing for Trump to be removed from presidency for not doing what you want, you're against democracy, and want to regress to times before we had such things in place.
This entire paragraph adds nothing, pal. We have no idea who you're even talking about, and yet you're already certain of who this extremely vague audience is saying and what they believe in. It's a textbook definition of a strawman, and not just a single sentence, but the entire paragraph. What does wanting Trump impeached have to do with the historical impact or connections of progressivism? I'm not saying it's wrong, but you need to build a case for how you think this goes together. Do you think wanting Trump impeached is equivalent to, for example, Teddy's attempt a third term, or something like that? This is the point where I really felt like you're no longer even interested in what I asked you about, you're just looking for a platform to rant and have me agree with you. And that's precisely what this website is not about.
If you truly wish to be "progressive", accept that he is currently the president and try to make the best out of it. Learn from the mistakes that got Trump into power and deal with it in a mature manner. Don't try to bring back segregation and blatant racism and sexism, not even for the sake of supposedly fighting racism and sexism.
Okay man, your concluding paragraph to your argument. The question is; "how is progressivism a regressionist ideology?", and your reply is "If you truly wish to be "progressive", accept that he is currently the president and try to make the best out of it." Your final sentence does a little better, at least it... well, vaguely brings back that you think progressive policies are racist / sexist. But you still haven't provided any examples of why you think that is, you haven't said a word of how this ties into history (how it's regressive), and you haven't even attempted to try to engage with my question. All I've gotten from you is a completely off topic and angry rant :/
Your answer is literally one sentence before that. Taking things out of context and then pretending there's no context whatsoever is not a great way to start a discussion. "They" refers to the...
Who is "they"?
Your answer is literally one sentence before that. Taking things out of context and then pretending there's no context whatsoever is not a great way to start a discussion. "They" refers to the "regressive" people, specifically those who favour "diversity" and "social justice" above all.a
What is "their proposed solution"?
Discrimination. Give people additional benefits based on how "oppressed" they are in their eyes. In practice this usually comes to events where only a specific group of people are allowed, such as women-only events. Affirmative action is what they prefer to call it.
What's a specific example of progressive ideology that you disagree with, and think is inherent to the belief?
Affirmative action is a big one which hurts both sides in the long term. People who get in to a certain job based on affirmative action will never be able to feel like they've succeeded because of their own qualities, and others will see them as lesser peers since they did get in based on a quota, not skill.
What makes it racist or sexist, in your eyes?
Not specifically my eyes, but by the very definition of the words. Treating people differently based on their race or gender is racism or sexism.
Do you think wanting Trump impeached is equivalent to, for example, Teddy's attempt a third term, or something like that?
I'm not exactly familiar with all of the presidents and their wrongdoings, I'm also not from the USA. Generally, when I see people talking about impeaching Trump it's mostly out of spite because they just really don't like Trump. And I can certainly understand disliking Trump, he's not the most upstanding person in my mind. But constantly talking about how bad he is, or wanting to get rid of him as a president isn't helping anyone.
you're just looking for a platform to rant and have me agree with you
That's exactly what I see happening with Tildes right now, and is exactly what I want to avoid. In this particular topic, I might come off as ranty I guess. I'm not particularly interested to talk about Trump in here because it's off topic. I want to present my side in an abstract manner so that we can discuss the problem, not the symptoms.
how it's regressive
But I did explain that. Specifically I hinted at segregation and the basis of democracy.
you haven't even attempted to try to engage with my question
That's quite dismissive to say. I tried to explain my point, which is why I commented on you in the first place. To say I don't even attempt to engage is quite a low blow. What reason do I have to put down this comment if you're just going to ignore context and then tell me I'm not trying to engage in discussion at all?
All I've gotten from you is a completely off topic and angry rant :/
Feelings are subjective, I guess? I explained my reasoning for calling it regressive. I can't really help that you consider it being angry, let alone off topic as it was literally what you asked for.
Alright, that's good. You should always mention the subject that you're talking about before you start using pronouns like they or it, because otherwise it's hard to follow what you're actually...
"They" refers to the "regressive" people, specifically those who favour "diversity" and "social justice" above all.
Alright, that's good. You should always mention the subject that you're talking about before you start using pronouns like they or it, because otherwise it's hard to follow what you're actually talking about; furthermore, otherwise it sounds like you're just lumping everyone you dislike under "they".
Discrimination. Give people additional benefits based on how "oppressed" they are in their eyes. In practice this usually comes to events where only a specific group of people are allowed, such as women-only events. Affirmative action is what they prefer to call it.
Nice, alright, we have a specific point; affirmative action. And you disagree with affirmative action because you think it's racist, correct? If so, what do you think would be some non-racist ways to accomplish the same goals affirmative action does? Or, why do you think that the goals themselves are wrong? (just as an example, if you believe everyone is already perfectly equal, what makes you think so?)
I'm not exactly familiar with all of the presidents and their wrongdoings, I'm also not from the USA. Generally, when I see people talking about impeaching Trump it's mostly out of spite because they just really don't like Trump. And I can certainly understand disliking Trump, he's not the most upstanding person in my mind. But constantly talking about how bad he is, or wanting to get rid of him as a president isn't helping anyone.
Well, let's take a look at a common progressive argument for impeaching Trump, specifically, that he violates what's known as the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. Specifically, the clause states as follows: "no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State". Their argument is that since Trump routinely accepts the payments and gifts of foreign leaders and diplomats who stay in his hotels, which he thereby receives profits from, and since Congress hasn't authorized or is likely to authorize this, that he's violating an explicitly stated section of the Constitution, and therefore can't be president, since the president is required to uphold the Constitution, and can't hold power without it. What is your opinion on this?
That's exactly what I see happening with Tildes right now, and is exactly what I want to avoid. In this particular topic, I might come off as ranty I guess. I'm not particularly interested to talk about Trump in here because it's off topic. I want to present my side in an abstract manner so that we can discuss the problem, not the symptoms.
You didn't want to avoid it man, you dived in headfirst, lol. No part of my question required you to mention Trump at all, and yet you did, 4 separate times. You don't just come off as ranty, you were ranty, it's nearly the entirety of your comment....
But I did explain that. Specifically I hinted at segregation and the basis of democracy.
Hinting is not explaining, it never is. Hinting is when you tell a little to suggest what you're thinking, but you're purposefully leaving room for ambiguity. Explaining is talking precisely so that you remove as much ambiguity or unclarity as you can, you see. You talk about segregation and democracy, that's interesting. You think that in order for a state to be considered a democracy, there can't be any segregation, correct? In this case, imagine that someone's handed you a country that is suffering from segregation as is. What do you think would be the best way to fix it?
That's quite dismissive to say. I tried to explain my point, which is why I commented on you in the first place. To say I don't even attempt to engage is quite a low blow. What reason do I have to put down this comment if you're just going to ignore context and then tell me I'm not trying to engage in discussion at all?
Because, bluntly, you didn't. Nowhere in your post did you ever talk about progressivism as a political belief system or why you think it's regressive; in other words, why you think it's a step back, why it's a traditionalistic belief. All you told me was how much you dislike people who always criticize Trump and "SJWs" (which itself is a reductionist term that doesn't lend anything to an argument, just like "conservitard").
Feelings are subjective, I guess? I explained my reasoning for calling it regressive. I can't really help that you consider it being angry, let alone off topic as it was literally what you asked for.
Man, there is no reasoning in your post. What does this have to do with the history of progressivism?
They simply wish for Their Enemy to disappear, even though he was democratically elected.
or this?
Yet, their proposed solution is to apply racism, sexism and every other -ism to counter it.
or this?
Learn from the mistakes that got Trump into power and deal with it in a mature manner.
None of this has anything to do with the history of progressivism and previous historical situations. It's literally just insults directed at people you don't like, and your post most certainly does read as quite angry. Even my Aspberger's afflicted social skills can tell that much. If you didn't mean it that way, you should be very careful when using emotionally charged, and especially insulting, language.
They are wrong in my opinion, indeed. They go for equal outcome, not for equal opportunity. That's not something to strive for in a society, in my opinion. I'm pretty sure we already have laws...
Or, why do you think that the goals themselves are wrong? (just as an example, if you believe everyone is already perfectly equal, what makes you think so?)
They are wrong in my opinion, indeed. They go for equal outcome, not for equal opportunity. That's not something to strive for in a society, in my opinion. I'm pretty sure we already have laws that ensure people should be treated equally, giving them the same chances to reach something as others. For instance, if you are a woman and you are actually being paid less for the exact same job, you can sue your boss for it.
Their argument is that since Trump routinely accepts the payments and gifts of foreign leaders and diplomats who stay in his hotels, which he thereby receives profits from
Does he accept gifts in addition to their stay in his hotels, or is they stay itself the gift? In the former, one could argue that this is wrong and he should be held accountable. If it's the latter, he can't really force people to stay in different hotels. I also thought he handed over his business to other people.
You think that in order for a state to be considered a democracy, there can't be any segregation, correct?
Incorrect. One can have a democracy and a segregated community.
You didn't want to avoid it man, you dived in headfirst, lol.
I did not, but thanks to explain my own reasoning to me.
Hinting is not explaining, it never is.
Maybe hinting was the wrong word to use there. I gave examples using democracy and segregation.
why you think it's a step back
Because it's regressing back to the times of segregation, and a time where democracy isn't a thing. I mentioned this multiple times now. I'm not sure why you ignore this.
my Aspberger's afflicted social skills
It's actually spelled Asperger's.
If you didn't mean it that way, you should be very careful when using emotionally charged, and especially insulting, language.
Insult is not given, an insult is taken. If you feel like I was insulting to you, it would be best to just point it out and not try to act like it was my intent all along.
I'm sorry, but this is the entire crux of your issue and you're doing your best to avoid responsibility for it. You have come across as insulting quite a bit, take some responsibility for it and...
Insult is not given, an insult is taken. If you feel like I was insulting to you, it would be best to just point it out and not try to act like it was my intent all along.
I'm sorry, but this is the entire crux of your issue and you're doing your best to avoid responsibility for it. You have come across as insulting quite a bit, take some responsibility for it and seek to make sure that doesn't happen again.
It's kind of how ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break the law. Ignorance of tone is not an excuse for your bad tone.
If you want this to be a place of good discussion, it starts with you. Not other people. Watching your tone is exactly where it starts.
My advice: stop with the reddit-esque quotemining argumentation style, where one quotes one line at a time out of context that they want to reply to. It encourages ignoring the true message of the other person in favour of picking at little details and arguing something else entirely.
I thought I was having reddit flashbacks haha. This quotemining style argument can be a good way to dissect a person's comment to make it easier to understand why they disagree. Unfortunately, I...
I thought I was having reddit flashbacks haha. This quotemining style argument can be a good way to dissect a person's comment to make it easier to understand why they disagree. Unfortunately, I agree that it is very easy to take things out of context to help your argument. I feel that Silbern did a good job getting their point across without purposefully taking quotes out of context.
That's true, discrimination on race, gender, religion etc. are disallowed. However, how would you go about proving it? Imagine if you are you, and you apply to a company, and get turned down for a...
They are wrong in my opinion, indeed. They go for equal outcome, not for equal opportunity. That's not something to strive for in a society, in my opinion. I'm pretty sure we already have laws that ensure people should be treated equally, giving them the same chances to reach something as others. For instance, if you are a woman and you are actually being paid less for the exact same job, you can sue your boss for it.
That's true, discrimination on race, gender, religion etc. are disallowed. However, how would you go about proving it? Imagine if you are you, and you apply to a company, and get turned down for a vague reason. You believe that it's related to your race, as the employer seemed to express interest until you came in for the interview, and didn't explain very well why they turned you down. How would you go about proving this in a court of law? Furthermore, given the time and money involved, do you think you could afford to sue in the first place?
Does he accept gifts in addition to their stay in his hotels, or is they stay itself the gift? In the former, one could argue that this is wrong and he should be held accountable. If it's the latter, he can't really force people to stay in different hotels. I also thought he handed over his business to other people.
It's mostly the latter, as I understand it. And I would disagree; he certainly can ask people to stay elsewhere, there are tons of hotels in the DC area, and it's a conflict of interest. If you're a paying customer of mine, I'm going to be less likely to negotiate against you after all. And it's not just the money they pay at the intentionally inflated rates (prices at Mar-A-Lago for example, often spike by up to to 3x their value when foreign dignitaries or Donald Trump is visiting, and this the rate the US government and foreign governments pay to stay here), but they also provide free and extensive advertising, both in their appearance themselves, and in all the news coverage of the events. And he didn't hand over his businesses; he was supposed to, all previous presidents did, but he refused to do so.
Because it's regressing back to the times of segregation, and a time where democracy isn't a thing. I mentioned this multiple times now. I'm not sure why you ignore this.
But you're not explaining why. What about progressivism makes you think it's a return to segregation? What's an example you can think of where it's intentionally dividing and cutting communities off from each other?
It's actually spelled Asperger's.
Good that you still understand what I mean though. It's a word I often mispell.
Insult is not given, an insult is taken. If you feel like I was insulting to you, it would be best to just point it out and not try to act like it was my intent all along
I don't think that you've insulted me, but you most certainly did intentionally insult everyone you think is a progressive. For example:
They cry the hardest about stopping racism, sexism, and every other word they can find that ends in -ism. Yet, their proposed solution is to apply racism, sexism and every other -ism to counter it.
Why not just say "They may think they're righting racism and sexism, but their attempts are simply making more of the issue"?
Things like safe-spaces, or black-only events are exactly what happened during the era of segregation. You'd think people are happy that those things have passed, but instead the SJW crowd applauds it. Same goes for women-only events. I was hoping we could see eachother as equals and not try to divide or segregate based on physical conditions.
Why not just say, "I think it's hypocritical that they seek to encourage unity, but use divisive techniques like safe spaces or events only for people of a certain status?" Why even use a term like SJW, which was invented specifically to be offensive, and doesn't add anything else to the conversation?
Just wanted to jump in on this one because I used to be against affirmative action for similar reasons. You might want to check out this study on the subject. In case you don't have time to read...
Affirmative action is a big one which hurts both sides in the long term. People who get in to a certain job based on affirmative action will never be able to feel like they've succeeded because of their own qualities, and others will see them as lesser peers since they did get in based on a quota, not skill.
Just wanted to jump in on this one because I used to be against affirmative action for similar reasons. You might want to check out this study on the subject.
In case you don't have time to read through it (it's a good read if you do), I'll highlight 2 quotes from the discussion section.
Our estimates provided no evidence whatsoever for the mismatch hypothesis. In no case did we find that having an SAT score below the institutional average undermined the performance or well being of individual minority students. If anything minority students who benefited from affirmative action earned higher grades and left school at lower rates than others, and they expressed neither greater nor less satisfaction with college life in general.
Given the mix of effects observed in our sample, in sum, affirmative action will yield more minority college graduates at roughly the same level of grade achievement they would have achieved were not affirmative action implemented. It should also be noted that these minority students will be graduating from top institutions, which prior research has shown to be positively related to higher earnings
I'm off topic, but anyhow. Having just shown Ferris Bueller's Day Off to a friend, as soon as I read that, my mind flashed back directly to the Isms scene.
I'm off topic, but anyhow.
What even is an "-ism?"
Having just shown Ferris Bueller's Day Off to a friend, as soon as I read that, my mind flashed back directly to the Isms scene.
I don't think inviting diverse people is discrimination, I think it's a good thing. If it meant blocking non-diverse people from joining that would suck, but I really doubt that's happening
I don't think inviting diverse people is discrimination, I think it's a good thing. If it meant blocking non-diverse people from joining that would suck, but I really doubt that's happening
Excuse me, but how is only recruiting from sources that are 80% male and 80% white not giving people an advantage because of how they were born? I don't think @Deimos has intentionally tried to...
I've seen people try to argue for "diversity invites". I don't think there's anything more hateful than giving certain people an advantage (or disadvantage, depending on how you view it) based on how they were born.
Excuse me, but how is only recruiting from sources that are 80% male and 80% white not giving people an advantage because of how they were born? I don't think @Deimos has intentionally tried to exclude anyone, and you have to build a userbase somehow so leveraging existing relationships makes sense and nobody has done anything wrong. I was merely suggesting a more intentional approach to the next stage of recruitment so that nobody is excluded.
The only way this argument makes sense is if you view membership of Tildes as a zero-sum game, but afaik there is no limit on the number of users, so recruiting one person doesn't mean someone else is denied membership.
White men would be getting an advantage if Reddit prohibited other genders/races from joining it. But it doesn't. The fact that the userbase happens to fall that way is not relevant. Would you be...
Excuse me, but how is only recruiting from sources that are 80% male and 80% white not giving people an advantage because of how they were born?
White men would be getting an advantage if Reddit prohibited other genders/races from joining it. But it doesn't. The fact that the userbase happens to fall that way is not relevant.
Would you be making similar calls for diversity if Reddit were 80% black and 80% women?
That's just not true, because Reddit policy is not the only thing at play here. I know for a fact that the toxic culture on Reddit has caused minority folks to leave because they were tired of...
White men would be getting an advantage if Reddit prohibited other genders/races from joining it. But it doesn't. The fact that the userbase happens to fall that way is not relevant.
That's just not true, because Reddit policy is not the only thing at play here. I know for a fact that the toxic culture on Reddit has caused minority folks to leave because they were tired of seeing and fighting back against the ignorance. That itself is a barrier to entry. That's not even getting into the issues with race and gender in tech, which is relevant because Reddit started as a website focused on programmers. The mistake they made that let this toxic culture form, is letting it start in the first place.
But before I go off on too much of a tangent, what you've said is frankly irrelevant.
Take all the emotion out of it.
If you have a bag with 80 blue balls and 20 red balls, if you draw randomly from that bag your chances of ending up with a more diverse array of balls are exceedingly slim. If 80/20 is not your ideal ending mixture, it doesn't make sense to only draw from that bag.
What you've said has also been ruled against as policy - time after time as the legislature and the courts have reaffirmed affirmative action. Some people have the mistaken idea that AA is basing decisions on race. Really what it means is making an effort to recruit from a diverse candidate pool. Time after time this has been considered the fair way to do things.
Would you be making similar calls for diversity if Reddit were 80% black and 80% women?
Well you see, Reddit doesn't exist in a vacuum. The popular culture is mainly white, and mainly male. So spaces go counter to that trend serve to add more diversity to the wider culture. Honestly I think Reddit would be a more interesting and less toxic place if there were more of a diversity of people, leading to more diversity of viewpoints, that made it unacceptable to express casual racism and misogyny. I'm not sure what that magical number is, but let's keep pushing until we find it.
So the most important thing is to try to stay receptive to other peoples’ statements. I think that if we manage to respectfully present differing viewpoints and have civil discussions about those...
So the most important thing is to try to stay receptive to other peoples’ statements. I think that if we manage to respectfully present differing viewpoints and have civil discussions about those viewpoints, every party involved will end up having benefitted from an interesting and meaningful conversation.
You seem to be assuming "bad faith" for most people disagreeing with you in this thread and engaging in unnecessary name-calling. If all you see around you is hating, perhaps you are part of the...
People call "bad faith" on others simply for disagreeing with them, refusing to enter into a discussion.
You seem to be assuming "bad faith" for most people disagreeing with you in this thread and engaging in unnecessary name-calling. If all you see around you is hating, perhaps you are part of the common denominator. You point out straw men and off-topic derailings from other people, but fail to see it in your own comments.
I'm trying to make no assumptions, but I admit that I might fail at it from time to time. Can you point these instances out? Feel free to point them out. Just saying someone is doing something bad...
You seem to be assuming "bad faith" for most people disagreeing with you in this thread
I'm trying to make no assumptions, but I admit that I might fail at it from time to time.
engaging in unnecessary name-calling
Can you point these instances out?
You point out straw men and off-topic derailings from other people, but fail to see it in your own comments.
Feel free to point them out. Just saying someone is doing something bad but not explaining what exactly or why is not going to teach anyone to improve.
First off I want to say that I do sympathize with you in regards to some of the unfounded accusations people have throwing at you. I don't believe you are a Troll or operating in bad faith......
First off I want to say that I do sympathize with you in regards to some of the unfounded accusations people have throwing at you. I don't believe you are a Troll or operating in bad faith... However...
engaging in unnecessary name-calling
Can you point these instances out?
I have seen you use "regressives" on dozens of occasions in reference to Progressive and Liberal ideology, which is undeniably a pejorative term. If you're genuinely interested in engaging in productive dialogue rather than starting fights, you really need to stop doing that. If I was to refer to Conservatives as "backwards" in nearly every paragraph I made on this site, you would have every right to call me out for it, because it would be deserved.
I use that term because the term "progressive" is actually wrong. I don't want to use a term that is (at least to me) completely incorrect in describing the group. The term "conservative" does...
I have seen you use "regressives" on dozens of occasions in reference to Progressive and Liberal ideology, which is undeniably a pejorative term.
I use that term because the term "progressive" is actually wrong. I don't want to use a term that is (at least to me) completely incorrect in describing the group. The term "conservative" does apply and is correct to their ideology.
What other term could I use that would be less pejorative, but also correct?
In Canada we have a major political party called the Progressive Conservatives. In my personal opinion they are anything but progressive but my personal opinion doesn't matter because that is...
In Canada we have a major political party called the Progressive Conservatives. In my personal opinion they are anything but progressive but my personal opinion doesn't matter because that is their party name. When speaking of the party and especially when talking to people who support that party, I still refer to them as the Progressive Conservative (or PC) party because to do otherwise would be asking for a fight. Were I to constantly call them the "Regressive" Conservative party, I would rightly be called out for being an asshole.
So what do you call progressives despite not agreeing that what they believe in is progressive? For the sake of civility, you call them progressives because that's what they identify as. If you can't stomach to do that, then at the very least you could refer to them as Democrats or Liberals.
I'm not in the camp of people who think I should just change the meaning of words because someone "identifies" as a different meaning of an existing word. The word "progressive" has a meaning, and...
you call them progressives because that's what they identify as
I'm not in the camp of people who think I should just change the meaning of words because someone "identifies" as a different meaning of an existing word. The word "progressive" has a meaning, and so does "regressive". To change the meaning of the word "progressive" to mean "regressive" in some contexts sounds silly to me, and would make sane discussion harder for everyone involved.
you could refer to them as Democrats or Liberals.
But then I'd refer to a much larger group that doesn't necessarily prescribe to the regressive ideals. I'd also miss out on some other groups that also prescribe to regressive ideals.
I've tried calling the group I'm talking about "progressives", with quotes, to denote that it's not something I agree on, but that too receives a lot of flak.
In general, my stance on this is that if you don't want to be called "regressive", you shouldn't promote regressive ideology.
This view can be interpreted as undermining one of the more time-honored principles of good faith discussion. That principle? Can you describe a view in a way that the person holding the view can...
I'm not in the camp of people who think I should just change the meaning of words because someone "identifies" as a different meaning of an existing word.
This view can be interpreted as undermining one of the more time-honored principles of good faith discussion. That principle? Can you describe a view in a way that the person holding the view can agree with? Words have no meaning on their own. Their meaning is in their shared usage between the participants using them.
So in other words, what you're doing by saying "I refuse to use your definition of this term," is saying "I refuse to engage with your view." If you were to couple that with a statement criticizing that other view, it's very easy to see why people would become frustrated with your approach. It would be not only rude to approach discussions that way, but it would undermine the possibility of coming to a shared understanding.
In general, my stance on this is that if you don't want to be called "regressive", you shouldn't promote regressive ideology.
To flip the ideological tactic here, so maybe you can see it more easily, "My stance on this is that you don't want to be called 'a racist white nationalist,' you shouldn't promote racist white nationalist ideology."
Hopefully that clearly demonstrates why you shouldn't do that.
What I'm saying is that words have definitions, and warping definitions just so you can use certain words isn't a good basis to start communication. You're just going to make it harder for...
So in other words, what you're doing by saying "I refuse to use your definition of this term," is saying "I refuse to engage with your view."
What I'm saying is that words have definitions, and warping definitions just so you can use certain words isn't a good basis to start communication. You're just going to make it harder for everyone to follow whatever you're trying to say.
To flip the ideological tactic here, so maybe you can see it more easily, "My stance on this is that you don't want to be called 'a racist white nationalist,' you shouldn't promote racist white nationalist ideology."
The words "racist", "white" and "nationalist" all have definitions, just like the word "regressive". If I were to adhere to those three definitions, one would be correct in calling me that. But I don't adhere to those. This is what you get when you warp the meaning of a word like "racist". Once someone warps that word, they start using it in contexts where it isn't appropriate. Other people will hear the word "racist" and be angry even though there was no racism by what the rest of the world thinks the word means. But the damage has already been done at that point.
I don't identify as a "racist white nationalist" because those terms (well, other than "white") don't apply to me. It would be silly if I were to say that the meaning of "racist" and "nationalist" have to change just so I can identify with it.
Words do have definitions, but what makes you the arbiter of someone else's definition? Dictionaries are intentionally trying to create the vaguest application of a word that still retains a...
Words do have definitions, but what makes you the arbiter of someone else's definition? Dictionaries are intentionally trying to create the vaguest application of a word that still retains a shared meaning as its generally understood, so you miss out on a lot of nuance when you're dealing with specialized terms. So dictionaries are often a very ... unreliable authority to appeal to here, when we're dealing with terms that each come with unique histories to the specific political contexts in which they're used.
You say that the problem comes when these words are "warped," but how did they come to have any meaning in the first place? Prescriptivism and descriptivism within linguistics is a debate worth having all to its own (and despite what I'm saying here, I do typically fall harder on the prescriptivist side than you might think). The general gist that any linguist worth their salt will tell you is that words are dependent, exclusively, on their users. You are only ever one half of any attempt to communicate. So how do you resolve these definitional disputes if you can't reliably run to a dictionary or wikipedia? How do you know what the ideal definition for a word is?
Insisting you are that arbiter who decides the meaning of all important terms is arrogant and puts you in a position where you cannot demonstrate you understand someone else's view in terms they would agree is fair. If you can't see that, it seems clear why you're befuddled when other people interpret your behavior as rude.
It is fair easier, and better for discussion, for you to keep the definition that you understand a word to have separate from the definition that someone else is using. My understanding of the word "Progressive" is very likely based on different facts, history, and experienced usage than your understanding of the word "progressive." That is not to say you aren't basing your understanding on facts, history, or experienced usage, but that our different understandings (and the reasons why we have those different understandings) might cause serious conflict if we pretend to each be the arbiter of the term.
To put the problem more bluntly: if everyone insisted that only they had the true definition for a word, there would never be any good discussions. That behavior, if applied generally, would make meaningful discussion virtually impossible.
The words "racist", "white" and "nationalist" all have definitions, just like the word "regressive". If I were to adhere to those three definitions, one would be correct in calling me that. But I don't adhere to those.
Ah, so you don't support Donald Trump? Under the (fictitious) true meaning of each of those terms, to be a racist white nationalist is to support Donald Trump. That would seem to me that you adhere to them, and calling yourself anything else is just wrong.
Also only I have the true understanding of these words, so sorry about your luck there. The un-warped definitions of these words (as defined in some implied process that must necessarily mean I have chosen the true definition) prove that you are a racist white nationalist for supporting Donald Trump.
Also you can't debate those definitions because they're the true definitions. Just look them each up in the dictionary.
I'm modelling horrible behavior, but hopefully it's more clear why it's really, really bad to engage in this behavior. I will call this behavior out regardless of where I see it, because I see it as so destructive to meaningful debate.
So to be clear, I'm not saying that you're a racist white nationalist. I think anyone who did say that is due for a light ass-kicking when it comes to good faith debate. But don't you go on doing the same thing with different terms! The very nature of all these political terms is to be vague and weirdly history-laden with all sorts of messy implications that usually no one is very clear about.
This entire sentence is contradictory. If words have set definitions, there is no such thing as "my definition" or "your definition." There is just the definition. If "my definition" is a thing...
Words do have definitions, but what makes you the arbiter of someone else's definition?
This entire sentence is contradictory. If words have set definitions, there is no such thing as "my definition" or "your definition." There is just the definition.
If "my definition" is a thing that makes sense, then words do not have set definitions. You cannot have both.
EDIT: Unless, of course, I misunderstand what you mean. I suppose it would be better to ask for clarification instead of assuming a contradiction!
Yeah, I think it might help if I say that I never said that words had set definitions. All languages change over time. There is a reason Shakespeare is a big deal. Languages evolve, and words...
Yeah, I think it might help if I say that I never said that words had set definitions. All languages change over time. There is a reason Shakespeare is a big deal. Languages evolve, and words shift in meaning. The point that a good descriptivist in linguistics makes, I think, is that different groups learn words in new contexts, and that is largely what changes the meaning of those words, causes some words to fall out of favor, creates openings for new words to enter the mainstream.
Words have definitions because they are, by definition (haha), symbols that must reflect some meaning. To be a word is to have a definition. At least to someone. Now whether that definition is set depends on who the authority is we consider to have set it.
While your opinion is perfectly acceptable and welcomed on this site, it does not entitle you to lessening the validity of other people’s opinions before a meaningful conversation has even...
While your opinion is perfectly acceptable and welcomed on this site, it does not entitle you to lessening the validity of other people’s opinions before a meaningful conversation has even started.
I agree with you about not wanting to make claims (in this case, call a certain demographic beneficial to the advancement of society) that you don’t personally believe, but if you are willing to start a conversation involving people with different perspectives, you should imply in your comments that you are open to those differing perspectives instead of shutting them down right from the get-go.
Saying that a certain political ideology is regressive to society degrades that ideology instead of fostering an environment for a meaningful discussion on conservatism in relation to progressivism, liberalism in contemporary society, etc.
As someone who called you out for rude behavior that I interpreted as "bad faith," I can't help but be curious if anyone else but me has done this to you (or someone else that you've seen), or for...
As someone who called you out for rude behavior that I interpreted as "bad faith," I can't help but be curious if anyone else but me has done this to you (or someone else that you've seen), or for a reason different than the one I gave for why I accused you of this. The way you've worded this comment makes me think you see it as more common than I've seen, so maybe you have had other experiences along those lines. Or maybe you're still not over our scuffle and think I called your participation "bad faith" simply because I disagreed with you (which I can't imagine is a sustainable view if you read my comment in the now-closed thread).
But I do sympathize with your being exasperated with the, uh, overwhelming focus on le immigration fiasco. Some threads have been framed in overtly hostile and context-blind ways to the worst elements of the fiasco, and initially in a place that didn't seem obviously suited for that type of discussion. But for the most part, even that thread worked itself out surprisingly civilly, with no mentions of bad faith discussion that I saw.
Yes, it has happened on multiple occasions. And not just to me, also to others, and that is still not acceptable in my view. It's nothing I hold personal to you. I'm not arguing that I see it in...
I can't help but be curious if anyone else but me has done this to you
Yes, it has happened on multiple occasions. And not just to me, also to others, and that is still not acceptable in my view. It's nothing I hold personal to you.
I'm not arguing that I see it in every other thread, but it's common enough for me to have noticed it (and I certainly don't read every comment here). Most threads on the immigration issue I have not read, I've been active in one and don't recall anyone calling me out on supposed bad faith in that one. Luckily it's not that common, but I'd also like it to still be a little less common altogether.
Yeah that sucks. I'm not sure there is a good solution here. I just try to treat people's arguments as fairly as I can before criticizing them, and hope that others will do the same for me. It's...
Yeah that sucks. I'm not sure there is a good solution here. I just try to treat people's arguments as fairly as I can before criticizing them, and hope that others will do the same for me. It's likely easier for me though because I'm pretty neutral about, well, everything. Growing up in an ideologically split household in suburban, midwest America will do that.
I've been trying to use my "diversity invites" to find some more dissenting voices. No luck so far. The Wrong Person is incredibly polarizing, and there is a distinct trend towards disagreeing...
I've been trying to use my "diversity invites" to find some more dissenting voices. No luck so far.
The Wrong Person is incredibly polarizing, and there is a distinct trend towards disagreeing with him in the type of person who shows up on Tildes. I wish that such discussions didn't get so emotional, since it only worsens the divide. For what it's worth, I don't think I've seen you argue in bad faith (though "the regressive ideology" is a bit on the baity side). And, reading through some comment threads, I understand your frustration. The points you're arguing are in the minority here, and it's frankly marginalized. While personally I'm of the opinion that there are certain actions, positions, and people that are indefensible, dissent from people who see it differently helps strengthen the discussion and keeps it honest.
I strongly oppose him and even I find some of the post on the front page rather emotional. That being said that only accounts for the articles that were posted. The discussions seem civil. (At...
I strongly oppose him and even I find some of the post on the front page rather emotional. That being said that only accounts for the articles that were posted. The discussions seem civil. (At lease those I skimmed through)
Either way maybe take a break from tildes for a day or two. If a discussion is getting heated don't be afraid to just walk away from it.
I'm not in a brilliant way at the moment. Got an exam tomorrow which I'm going to fail, meaning I'll go to my second choice university which is a bit of a bummer. I'll be going travelling soon so...
I'm not in a brilliant way at the moment. Got an exam tomorrow which I'm going to fail, meaning I'll go to my second choice university which is a bit of a bummer. I'll be going travelling soon so hopefully I can use that to clear my head a little.
No one likes to fail, but it's also a really important thing to do from time to time. Adam Savage has a really interesting talk on failure that's worth watching. The most valuable things I've...
No one likes to fail, but it's also a really important thing to do from time to time. Adam Savage has a really interesting talk on failure that's worth watching. The most valuable things I've learned about myself haven't come from the times when I've been successful. The most valuable things I've learned about myself have come from the instances when I've absolutely bombed a presentation, a paper, a test, an interview, etc... While those experiences were painful at the time, I'm really glad they happened.
Pure Mathematics. I'm retaking this one since I didn't do brilliantly last year. I'll probably end up with an A instead of an A* (+) which isn't exactly bad but I've underperformed academically...
Pure Mathematics. I'm retaking this one since I didn't do brilliantly last year. I'll probably end up with an A instead of an A* (+) which isn't exactly bad but I've underperformed academically for basically all of school and I've got no one to blame except me. I despise how lazy and weak I am. It's just getting a bit much tbh. I have large amounts of both narcissism and self loathing which means I'm not satisfied with myself unless I achieve the best possible result so I'm always disappointed in myself.
I realize that no words will change that sort of feeling, but try not to worry about it so much. Beating yourself up over it doesn't help anyone. I am what one would define as a slacker. All of my...
I realize that no words will change that sort of feeling, but try not to worry about it so much. Beating yourself up over it doesn't help anyone.
I am what one would define as a slacker. All of my teachers from elementary school up until I graduated high school talked about how I'd be getting As if I would just do my damn homework. I couldn't be bothered (I already proved that I get it by taking the test, right?) and ended up graduating with like a B+ average.
College continued the trend, but now nobody was forcing me to go to class. So I ended up failing about a class a semester because I couldn't be fucked to go to it. This, in retrospect, was a mistake. I graduated with a 2.75 overall (3.5 in-major).
I moved out of my parents' house by getting a 20-hour a week job that paid like garbage. I was eating off of the dollar menu at McDonalds every day and pretty much only paid for a share of the rent / bills, gas for my car, and weed.
Eventually I got a job working tech support (definitely not the field in which I have my degree), which gave me the opportunity to get my current job as a systems administrator.
Now, you may be wondering why the fuck I'm rambling about my life story. It's something of a narcissistic tendency of age that you feel like your experiences can help someone younger go through theirs.
I don't know exactly what got me to stop hating myself for being lazy. Finding things I actually care about (rather than simply trying to perform in the structures outlined by the educational system) helped. A handful of acid trips gave me a bit of perspective. Eventually I kicked my own ass into gear and just started fixing things I didn't like. This has had mixed results, but a net positive from what I can tell.
This too shall pass, and in the grand scheme of things nothing much matters. Trying your best doesn't mean that you're always going to be perfect, it just means that you gave it a shot with the resources you had available.
Nationalism and how engrained it is into the collective mind of the people. Both sides of the political spectrum are nationalistic, it just becomes more overt as you tend to the right. (most)...
Nationalism and how engrained it is into the collective mind of the people. Both sides of the political spectrum are nationalistic, it just becomes more overt as you tend to the right. (most) Nations are spooks.
People who think that by giving them information, that you are being condescending. That by being in a field longer that you've picked up some things about how things run in a particular place,...
People who think that by giving them information, that you are being condescending. That by being in a field longer that you've picked up some things about how things run in a particular place, and will share insight.
People who completely ignore written workplace policy, and can't take feedback.
I want to participate more on tildes, but I don't have the time :( I didn't usually have a lot down time at work, and I seem to always have stuff happening at home. Sometimes I just want to sit...
I want to participate more on tildes, but I don't have the time :(
I didn't usually have a lot down time at work, and I seem to always have stuff happening at home. Sometimes I just want to sit around and do nothing all day...
The current state of the farming economy. Low grain prices, razor-thin margins, and an unreasonably high price of land make me very nervous about the future.
The current state of the farming economy. Low grain prices, razor-thin margins, and an unreasonably high price of land make me very nervous about the future.
If I may, you sound like you have an interest in the farming economy? As someone who knows about it, what do you think of the various counter-tariffs that have been in the news recently? I've read...
If I may, you sound like you have an interest in the farming economy? As someone who knows about it, what do you think of the various counter-tariffs that have been in the news recently? I've read about them myself, but I'd be fascinated to see what someone with actual knowledge thinks.
I'm a farmer, not an economic analyst. I'm not remotely equipped to predict the long-term impacts of international policy. But the tariffs have already hurt my bottom line, and the atmosphere of...
I'm a farmer, not an economic analyst. I'm not remotely equipped to predict the long-term impacts of international policy. But the tariffs have already hurt my bottom line, and the atmosphere of uncertainty they create is even worse. Farm economics by necessity stretch into planning decades ahead (it will take me ~30 years to pay off a new farmland purchase), and uncertainty can be disastrous.
I don't know about upset. But recently I've found it hard to be enthusiastic or happy about anything. I'm sure I'll be better once holidays start though.
I don't know about upset. But recently I've found it hard to be enthusiastic or happy about anything. I'm sure I'll be better once holidays start though.
I'd recommend talking to your doctor about getting a blood test; it's definitely not guaranteed, but it sounds like you might have a vitamin deficiency, maybe?
I'd recommend talking to your doctor about getting a blood test; it's definitely not guaranteed, but it sounds like you might have a vitamin deficiency, maybe?
I'm leaving for college on the other side of the country in less than two months and I'll be leaving basically everything I know behind. I'm excited but I don't think I'm ready for such a huge change.
I'm leaving for college on the other side of the country in less than two months and I'll be leaving basically everything I know behind. I'm excited but I don't think I'm ready for such a huge change.
That freedom is actually what forced me to start giving a shit. I bummed around in college for the most part, and eventually I came to recognize the patterns of laziness and started chipping away....
That freedom is actually what forced me to start giving a shit. I bummed around in college for the most part, and eventually I came to recognize the patterns of laziness and started chipping away. Now I'm still lazy, but I know how to recognize the feeling and route around it if I have to. Good luck!
I feel kind of angry and disappointed about myself and I don't know why. It's supposedly the best I've been in years because my life is finally on track
I feel kind of angry and disappointed about myself and I don't know why. It's supposedly the best I've been in years because my life is finally on track
In my experience, that means that you're on the wrong tracks. Or you suffer from a mood disorder: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_disorder I'm personally on the wrong tracks. Externally my...
In my experience, that means that you're on the wrong tracks.
I'm personally on the wrong tracks. Externally my life is good but I took some decisions ten years ago and I've to "pay the consequences" now and, at least, for the next 5 years.
I think I feel like partly because it's the end of the semester for me (which means lots of work and lack of sleep) and I've gone through some social anxiety from having to deal with group...
I think I feel like partly because it's the end of the semester for me (which means lots of work and lack of sleep) and I've gone through some social anxiety from having to deal with group projects (where it was mostly me carrying everyone's weight)
The main reason, I think, is that I stopped taking care of myself to focus on college. I gained weight, gave up a few of my hobbies, stuff like that. But I went back to dieting and exercising and I already feel an impact, I think I'll try to learn something in my one now that I'm on vacation (it started today)
Maybe read through some of the textbooks for your next semester, I always said I was gonna do that and then never did, but It could mean next semester you grasp things quicker when explained and...
Maybe read through some of the textbooks for your next semester, I always said I was gonna do that and then never did, but It could mean next semester you grasp things quicker when explained and you can spend more time on other stuff and not be as stressed.
I have two vacant Lots about 20 minutes east of the city I live in work in. I bought a house last October. I really need the money from the lots, and one is under contract. I've been very patient,...
I have two vacant Lots about 20 minutes east of the city I live in work in. I bought a house last October. I really need the money from the lots, and one is under contract. I've been very patient, and very nice about the whole thing. But the transaction is taking a lot longer than it should. And everyday I'm wondering if the transaction is actually going to go through.
They signed a contract, so it is under contract. However, we're waiting on their financing to finalize. The couple doesn't really give me any specific updates. They just tell me things are moving along and they're pretty vague. I am putting up with it because I really need the money. But the longer it drags out the more irritated I get because that's just longer for me to sit there and think, well is it really going to happen or not.
There's a close by date. But those fall through all the time. It's more the not knowing what exactly is happening on their end and them being vague and me not wanting to push too hard. I'd be...
There's a close by date. But those fall through all the time. It's more the not knowing what exactly is happening on their end and them being vague and me not wanting to push too hard. I'd be super patient and give them lots of time if I just knew what was taking so long / what was going on. This has had plenty of time to finalize.
My job. There are long periods of time where I have little to no work and the days just drag. Plus my boss doesn't understand my role so I get no actual feedback on anything, ever. I know I should...
My job. There are long periods of time where I have little to no work and the days just drag. Plus my boss doesn't understand my role so I get no actual feedback on anything, ever. I know I should look for a new job, but at this point I'm so burnt out on "offices" in general that I'm honestly not sure I'd actually be happier somewhere else.
I'm a copywriter. Freelancing is a possibility, but I'm hesitating over trying to afford insurance/rent through the first year or so when I'd be building a client base. I have some savings but...
I'm a copywriter. Freelancing is a possibility, but I'm hesitating over trying to afford insurance/rent through the first year or so when I'd be building a client base. I have some savings but it's a big risk. I am considering it though.
Do you enjoy editing? My wife considered doing that before she got back into higher ed. She specifically looked at court reporting since she could do it from anywhere.
Do you enjoy editing?
My wife considered doing that before she got back into higher ed.
She specifically looked at court reporting since she could do it from anywhere.
Funny you say that, I actually worked in publishing (as an editor) before moving over to marketing, but I was in NYC at the time and the cost of living wasn't sustainable. My current city is much...
Funny you say that, I actually worked in publishing (as an editor) before moving over to marketing, but I was in NYC at the time and the cost of living wasn't sustainable. My current city is much more affordable, but publishing doesn't exist here.
Maybe I'll do some research on court reporting. That hadn't even occurred to me as an option.
Have you considered going to another country or something to have a bit more of a buffer if you try? Europe and Asia are full of amazingly inexpensive areas, and health insurance is in general...
Have you considered going to another country or something to have a bit more of a buffer if you try? Europe and Asia are full of amazingly inexpensive areas, and health insurance is in general pretty price-efficient there, too. Really an ideal place for a freelancer.
It seems like I can't ever decide what I want to do in my free time. I'm currently working toward a degree for a job I'll find fulfilling, but in the meantime I don't just want to consume media. I...
It seems like I can't ever decide what I want to do in my free time. I'm currently working toward a degree for a job I'll find fulfilling, but in the meantime I don't just want to consume media. I want to create something.
So I hop from idea to idea, never sticking to one for long. But every time I make a new jump, I'm convinced that this time I've found my passion. But when it inevitably fails for some reason (lack of talent, no clear direction, etc.), I return to this baseline state of feeling bottled up and frustrated.
I can't figure out if I have a concussion or am dehydrated lol. I've been training to fight MMA for like 2 years now but after every training session this past week(even when I don't get hit in...
I can't figure out if I have a concussion or am dehydrated lol. I've been training to fight MMA for like 2 years now but after every training session this past week(even when I don't get hit in the head) I've been getting headaches I drink a buttload of water and it disappears after I wake up in the morning...
Like @pilgrim said, go see a doctor. Better to get checked out and have it be nothing than leave it alone and make it worse (getting a concussion while you're already concussed can literally kill you)
Like @pilgrim said, go see a doctor. Better to get checked out and have it be nothing than leave it alone and make it worse (getting a concussion while you're already concussed can literally kill you)
Of course! Have to schedule an appointment. the meathead in me flashed my phone flashlight in my eye and I felt fine. I'll probably give an update with how it ends up going
Of course! Have to schedule an appointment. the meathead in me flashed my phone flashlight in my eye and I felt fine. I'll probably give an update with how it ends up going
I graduated from college with a pretty high GPA recently, but haven't been having any luck with getting a job or internship. It feels like all of my friends got something no problem, but everyone...
I graduated from college with a pretty high GPA recently, but haven't been having any luck with getting a job or internship. It feels like all of my friends got something no problem, but everyone I've applied to has either ignored me, or interviewed me, and then chose someone else on the basis of them being more experienced than me.
There was one position I really liked and that I thought I was a shoe-in for, only to get edged out in the final round. When I inquired about the internship they were thinking about setting up, they informed me they already set it up, and filled it with someone less skilled.
Everyone I talk to seems to like me, but nothing ever comes from that. I keep getting encouragement like "you'll end up somewhere great," "you have a really great skill set," and "people like you get hired super quick." While that was encouraging at first, I've heard that stuff so much without results that it's started to feel like people just lying to my face.
I did get a last minute internship through my school's career counselor, but it's an hour and a half drive away, unpaid, 16 hours a week of just straight research on a computer, probably won't lead to a job, and is on a topic I'm not really interested in, and doesn't really seem to be related to my major. I'm sticking to the hope that having it on my resume will somehow help me out, but I'm feeling doubtful.
I just feel like I'm at this really confusing point in my life where I'm trapped. I can't get a job or an internship because I lack experience because I can't get a job or an internship. It's like my worst fears realized, and I don't know what to do. I just hate not having a solid plan other than "just keep applying and hope something eventually works out, before you've been out of college without experience so long that nobody will hire you."
I know I'm a bit late but right now I'm struggling because I came to the realization not too long ago that I've had horrible untreated ADHD for my entire life and that I need help. The problem is...
I know I'm a bit late but right now I'm struggling because I came to the realization not too long ago that I've had horrible untreated ADHD for my entire life and that I need help. The problem is that the waiting list I'm on to even receive a clinical diagnosis is a year and a half long, and waiting that long would be a big problem since I'm a university student.
With that being said, I'm currently home for the summer and am in a different country that doesn't have socialized healthcare (can you guess which one?)– but because of that it's way easier to receive treatment for non-emergency medical issues. This would be great if I just went and got some help, but the problem is that in order to start getting treatment I'd have to tell my parents... And they aren't exactly supportive when it comes to mental health issues.
I have a routine checkup this Wednesday so if I can I'm going to try and tell my mom about it before talking to the doctor but otherwise, I'm not really sure what to do...
I definitely need to. I'm thinking that if I bring it up with him and have him tell my mom then it won't be as bad because she likely trusts his opinion on medical issues more than mine (which I...
I definitely need to. I'm thinking that if I bring it up with him and have him tell my mom then it won't be as bad because she likely trusts his opinion on medical issues more than mine (which I understand tbf, I'm not even close to studying anything med related) but either way something needs to get done. I'm so tired of being the way I am. I just need help.
Also– I'm not having any trouble coping or dealing with any comorbid issues of ADHD, just in case I came across that way. I just can't continue living the way I have for the last ~20 years!
This is supposed to be my last year at university (finishing my second undergraduate degree), but due to family stuff and lack of motivation on my part my grades aren't exactly stellar. I've got...
This is supposed to be my last year at university (finishing my second undergraduate degree), but due to family stuff and lack of motivation on my part my grades aren't exactly stellar. I've got some work experience, but it's mostly in an area I no longer want anything to do with (digital strategy/community management) and I can't really put some of the bigger jobs on my resume because they're under NDA anyway. So I'm not sure if I can get a job, and I have a sinking feeling that if I do it'll be one I hate even if it's in a more traditional programming role rather than where my experience is.
An alternative would be to take a year or two off doing something completely different to reset while working on portfolio pieces in my free time, but because I've spent so long at university already that would mean delaying starting my career until I'm nearly 30 and there's no guarantee I'll feel any more confident after that. Every option seems like a massive lose-lose.
Can you try to contact the people who made you sign NDAs and ask if you can put down some vague work experience there, or something? Also, where is your experience?
Can you try to contact the people who made you sign NDAs and ask if you can put down some vague work experience there, or something? Also, where is your experience?
I doubt the company would even consider it, to be honest. I could always put down something like the job description plus "(Site and Company under NDA)", but that seems kinda dodgy because anybody...
I doubt the company would even consider it, to be honest. I could always put down something like the job description plus "(Site and Company under NDA)", but that seems kinda dodgy because anybody could do that to pad their resume.
The common theme in my experience is in setting up various community spaces (forums, social media platforms, etc.) for game companies and managing the general strategy and direction of those to keep the userbase growing post-release. Sort of a mix of community manager and web developer. Or at least that's the theory - more of my tasks seems to devolve into a mix of sysadmin stuff and shouting at the children to play nice, which combined with a general lack of appreciation for people in those roles from all sides means I basically want nothing more to do with that kind of work.
(This StackExchange post might help you on how to handle the NDA jobs: https://workplace.stackexchange.com/a/8798 ) Ah; I don't think most people would!
(This StackExchange post might help you on how to handle the NDA jobs:
In case you didn't know, it's considered a feature, not an issue. The hope is that you'll read through the comments on the way day. That way, if you have a similar thought or opinion, you don't...
In case you didn't know, it's considered a feature, not an issue. The hope is that you'll read through the comments on the way day. That way, if you have a similar thought or opinion, you don't have to clog up the thread.
That being said, threads like this one would be a good candidate for having the box at the top, and sorting the comments by "newest first" or an activity-like method.
That being said, threads like this one would be a good candidate for having the box at the top, and sorting the comments by "newest first" or an activity-like method.
Don't know if anyone's gonna see this, but I flew home for a couple weeks and my mom paid for the ticket, but then cancelled the return flight. I have no money to get back and am basically trapped...
Don't know if anyone's gonna see this, but I flew home for a couple weeks and my mom paid for the ticket, but then cancelled the return flight. I have no money to get back and am basically trapped in her house all day with nothing to do but think about how depressed I am
Maybe try pressing her over the next few days to set you up another one? If you make her life a living hell, she'll probably be more prone to doing so; and it's not like you wouldn't be justified.
Maybe try pressing her over the next few days to set you up another one? If you make her life a living hell, she'll probably be more prone to doing so; and it's not like you wouldn't be justified.
I'm stuck at home for another month. I can't do anything with friends and I don't really have any hobbies I can spend time on, but I don't want to just play video games for eight hours a day.
I'm stuck at home for another month. I can't do anything with friends and I don't really have any hobbies I can spend time on, but I don't want to just play video games for eight hours a day.
Would you mind having a conversation about it? I'm in the same position as your dad (with less homophobia, though) and I would love to be able to know what I could do to be better.
It can a private convo, if you prefer it.
Absolutely! I don't mind either way (in the comments or in DMs) and would love to answer any questions you have. 😊 Curiosity is the first step, so you're already way ahead of him 💜
To be clear, your issue is more with gender identity and not same sex couples? Because if it's the latter I'd be happy to chat as well.
Gender identity, kid's too young to be in a couple at this point.
Thank you very much for the offer.
Power to you. I hope for more acceptance in your life
Thank you :)
I know how that feels.
I haven't told my family yet, but my significant other and I just broke up because of it. She was very supportive until I actually got on hormones.
Awww I'm sorry to hear that, if you ever want to talk feel free to PM me anytime 💜
The toxicity on the internet, even on here, though it’s much more reduced on tildes. Why can’t we all just get along?
I agree, trying to spend more time irl because being so much time online stress me
Are you active on any social media platforms? If so, have you considered unsubscribing from them? If you use their apps on your phone, have you considered not using the apps so spend a more limited time on these platforms?
I use mostly Reddit and Telegram. I have many friends on the latter and I use it for practicing Spanish, so I don't see myself getting off it but I could diminish my time on it
About Reddit, I really think I should spend much less time on it, maybe even delete my account. I'm only using it for distraction and end up getting into useless arguments a lot :P
For me, tildes is going to become the focus of my (already limited) time spent online; I’ll be on sites such as reddit a lot less often as more and more people move to this one.
On a side note, I really hope that tildes is able to maintain a healthy and nontoxic community as its age and prevalence increase. I’m interested to see how that community evolves as more people join...
Those aren't what I'd call "social media", but definitions vary. I was more interested about things like Facebook and Twitter, where people share their lives. Though that can also be done with the platforms you're talking about.
I personally do not use phone apps for any sort of social media (in my defined form), and only use Signal and Plain Ol' SMS for text messaging on my phone, and actual phone calls. I used to have more, but found myself spending way too much time on those and not feeling productive at all at the end of the day.
For actual social media (in my defined form), in my case Facebook, I've given up on it a while ago. I stopped actively using it when I broke up with a previous girlfriend, and only feeling bad whenever I went onto the platform. During that time, I found an article explaining how social media brings more (mental) harm than good, and I tried stopping it for a while. I felt much better about my life in general in a very short time, and eventually just deleted my account since I didn't use it anymore. Semi-recently I've signed up to Mastodon, but I'm still keeping away from phone apps so I am forced to spend less time on it than I used to with other social media platforms.
I still have contact with people, and I still share experiences in life and have interesting discussions, but now they're (almost) all in real life. Real life discussions generally work a lot better in my experience, as you can hear tone and see expressions, which are missing from written discussion. This is especially true on emotional subjects.
Don't be afraid to let go of some platforms if they stress you out or otherwise negatively affect you. You don't have to delete all your accounts at once, but you could try going a week or so without and see if it improves your overal mood.
I deleted facebook, instagram, and (surprisingly) gmail from my phone. Now I don't habitually pull out my phone every time I'm mildly bored, and it's great.
I've noticed that more and more people I know have started to go offline more and get rid of social media for periods of time..
I really hope it's a general trend that'll make things better and make the toxicity a lot smaller....?
It's the same with my friends, I maintain my Facebook account to keep in touch with friends and family at home (since I live a few thousand km away). But when I actually look at it the people I'm telling myself I want to stay in touch with are the people who either aren't on Facebook, or whose profiles haven't been updated in a long while.
Facebook has gone to shit in recent years anyway. All the feed manipulation and such that goes on isn't worth the effort. Blocking every stupid meme page that people share rubbish from as soon as it appears has gone a long way to cleaning up my feed. But now I can clearly see that there is very little of interest there. It's kind of interesting to see what all my old school buddies are doing, to a point. But then if I'd wanted to keep in touch with them I would have anyway.
My actual friends and I use a whatsapp group. Yet I still twitch a little every time I consider shutting my Facebook account for some reason! :-D
Yup. I'm tired of politics getting in the way of people interacting in a civil way. Can't we all just agree that we, collectively as humans, can disagree without assuming the other person is a lesser person until they do something to prove it? I'm sorry but just because someone holds a different view on the current hot-button political issue doesnt make them an awful person.
Let's take something very controversial like abortion. If you're in favour of abortion, you're in favour of murdering babies. If you're against abortion, you're against women's rights. Do you respect callous people who want to murder babies? Do you respect sexist people who want to remove women's agency?
This is how it works. If you hold a particular political opinion on an issue, you'll usually hold that opinion for moral reasons. If someone holds a differing political opinion on that issue, they're obviously not moral: a moral person would agree that babies need to be protected from murder or that women need to have control over their own lives.
Political opinions aren't just hypothetical intellectual exercises: they're how we express our morality. That's why they're so important to us, and why it's hard to withhold moral judgement on someone else who holds a differing opinion.
EDIT: I accidentally switched my "againsts" and my "in favours"!
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity
Stupidity is a bit of a harsh word but I've started to approach people holding other opinions from myself by starting from the position that they may not be as informed on a topic as myself.
That person against abortion may have given the topic all of 10 mins of thought before coming to a conclusion, they may not have done all the research into pro-choice arguments that I've done.
This has certainly started to help, what's frustrating is when someone who has given a topic all of 10 mins of thought believe their opinion is as nuanced as an opinion formed after hundreds of hours of research and deliberation; so the issue is two fold.
If those who have given a lot of thought to an issue understand others haven't and if those who haven't given a lot of thought to an issue realized they should be more open minded to arguments made by those who have spent a lot of time on issue it would be easier to have open civilized discussion and coexistence between those of sharply different view points.
I run into this with my father a lot. I have the opportunity to listen to a lot of audio whilst I work, which means most days I listen to 3-6 hours of news/political discussions from a wide range of various sources. My Father watches local news for 30 mins to an hour most days.
So when we debate on a topic it becomes frustrating because to me my father's arguments seem basic and rudimentary (most have been debunked or dismissed ad nauseam) and to my father it seems like i'm dismissing the validity of his opinions. I've tried bringing this up with him but he firmly believes that an opinion formed on nothing more than a rough understanding of a topic and gut intuition is as valid as an opinion based on facts and careful deliberation.
In this situation, it would seem that the most worthwhile way to continue the conversation would be to try to educate the other person / expose them to the information that you’ve been exposed to.
Whether or not they are receptive to this new information is something else entirely...
When I do this, people call me arrogant.
And what if they believe that you have not done all the research into pro-life arguments that they have done?
Why are you assuming that only your opinion is supported by research and understanding, and the other opinion is based in ignorance? This is just a different way of dismissing people you disagree with: instead of dismissing them as an awful person, you dismiss them as ignorant.
I think you misunderstood what I was getting at.
I'm saying I approach the conversation with the mindset that I should explain my views and opinions as if they had never heard them, instead of assuming they know those arguments and just dismiss them because they are just horrible immoral people as explained in your comment above.
I never said I dismiss them.
And...? What if you give them the best possible explanation of your views and opinions - better than every explanation they've ever heard before - and they fully comprehend your explanation, but they still disagree with you?
Then our morals are different and depending on the severity it could make me not want to associate with them.
For instance if it turns out that person actually is a white supremacist not just accidentally agreeing with a white supremacist's position in a single instance; probably not gonna wanna hang out with them.
I've always found Youtube comments particularly interesting.
There is a weird self-reinforcing self-selection bias which means most of the comments are awful, and then those people motivated to comment in a thread full of awful are even worse.
Edit: Is it helpful to think that the internet is not representative of reality?
YouTube is really weird to me.. Some comment sections are very wholesome, others are hateful etc.. In the end I think it really depends on the video..
I think the Internet is representative in the sense that it's a good showcase of polar opposite opinions.. They just get more attention because to a lot of people they stick out.. But what about the opinions of all those people in between?
The world today seems to be a lot about that everything is either black or white and somewhat polarised.. But there's so many more shades and layers to everything, and I try to stay optimistic that most people will realise this and not go crazy at each other all the time..
I think reasonable people look at youtube comments and 'nope' the hell out of there. Who in their right mind would want to get mixed up in that drama?
One thing I kinda realized about youtube is that its reaches are far vaster than that of most other social media sites. Think about it– people of all ages, of all ethnicities around the world, spanning both sexes and many religions, political affiliations, and beliefs, use youtube– a 67 year old redneck from Georgia could be having a weird discussion with an 8 year old from Bosnia. That, in combination with your idea that the social "climate" on youtube is self-reinforcing and the fact that a billion unique visitors come to the site every month, leads to a lot of horrible, ugly "discussion" that is hard to escape. That kind of stuff just doesn't happen as much on other social media sites. The only one I can think of that's even comparable in that regard is facebook.
This.
But I wonder why things tend to become toxic as more people come into contact with each other... Why is it that vastly different demographics interacting with each other on one site cause as much tension as they do? Hypothetically, how could a site encourage / maintain a certain level of civility while still accepting disagreement and conflicts of worldview?
Moderation certainly helps. Youtube is practically unmoderated, and the borderline unhelpful tools they provide creators rarely get used– if at all.
Another is an established mode of conduct from the getgo, much like tildes or reddit or many other hobby-specific forums (albeit reddit has sort of lost that in recent years due to the shift in focus from link aggregation to pseudo-social media).
Lastly I think that a site that focuses on pushing content where appealing to the lowest common denominator is rewarded, the majority of those consumers will be... Kinda shitty. Not that there isn't good content on youtube, because I follow some truly fantastic creators, but think of how much youtube promotes the Paul brothers despite them being genuinely awful people. When a site promotes civil discussion that prides itself on being as unbiased as possible it will naturally attract people of that caliber who seek good discussion like that.
The mess that youtube is in is a whole mixed bag of shitty circumstances leading to shitty people coming out in droves IMHO.
The problem with Youtube comments is that the downvote button doesn't work, meaning that all the people responding to a rude or false comment drive it up.
I havn't noticed the toxicity on tildes yet but maybe that's just me.
It's an interesting dynamic.
On the internet, if we disagree with something, we spend lengthy time arguing about it. https://xkcd.com/386/
More often, we silently agrees.
The upvotes means we really get along, however the toxic arguing on the majority of the page is what you saw.
This girl. You can wish me luck moving forward.
Good luck. All the luck to you
Thanks <3
Hey pal, how are things going? :-)
Damn; hi pal! It's a bit tough, but definitivly improving. I just deleted her from Facebook. Also, I met another cool girl and we're having fun. Thanks for checking up on me :))
Glad to hear it. :-)
I can't decide on my future. I just finished my bachelor's (compsci) and I'm looking for a masters.
Can't decide between it security, AI and also where to go. I'm 25 and I would like to work (to make some money) but I'm afraid I won't have the time next to my masters.
Oh and I want to create educational YouTube videos, but I have no idea where to start. (if anyone wants me to explain something let me know haha)
Oh man, I am in similar situation, I am finishing my very generic business management education but want to get into programming. I don't know if that relates to your specialization at all, but it would be interesting to hear from you how would one get into CS or maybe what language to learn first
From my limited knowledge, AI sounds like the most demanded career path at the moment
Do you want to do a masters? There's compsci masters for people from different fields.
For starters you have to decide what you want to develop:
Literally just Apps? Learn kotlin/Java (better documented) or swift
Web development? check out freecodecamp
General programming, which in my opinion is the best way to go, since you should first learn how to program and then just think about the language: Python or Java which are both used around the world to teach programming concepts. Then you should learn about algorithms and data structures.
right now i want to learn it myself, heard freecodecamp is pretty good so I will try it out
This book is free and is supposed to be a pretty good intro to programming (in Python): https://automatetheboringstuff.com/
It seems to focus on teaching through more practical tasks, instead of the contrived, useless "toy" tasks that most programming books tend to use, so it might actually teach you some things that come in handy.
Al is a super nice guy, he is active on reddit as well and gave the course for free even though I missed the free period. I learned quite a bit from him. He has a course on udemy which is not priced like most '200 bucks but on sale for 10'. It's actually 30 but I think udemy offers them cheaper sometimes and he might have a coupon on reddit if I remember right
Out of curiosity, what is your motivation to pursue a masters?
I finished my bachelor's with a 3.7 GPA and want to see if I can hold it through the masters. Also I'm in Germany so pretty much everyone I study with or went to school with is doing a masters. I can see it's external pressure though. I have applied for a job at a big4 company and I got invited to an interview (which is one of like 10) so if I could get in there I would postpone my masters for now
I see. I only ask because after being in the industry several years, I've met several people with masters degrees who have conflicting feelings about its usefulness. I don't know what the German education and employment systems are like though, nor do I have a masters myself, so I can't speak definitively about it.
A lot of companies offer programs for employees pursuing a graduate degree to help pay tuition and accommodate their schedules, so that could be worth looking into as you look for jobs.
Good luck with the interview!
If you go into AI (in specific predictive via ML) you'll be making so much money after you get out that you won't be worried about making no money for a few more years. Some companies (like Google) are paying the top people in this field 500k+/yr (I've heard of some 7 figure jobs out there too).
If you're antsy to get a job, I'm not sure how it's like in health care over there, but it's very expensive in America so there are a ton of jobs for people who can marry to the two. Often times the people in data analytics have close to zero clinical experience or knowledge, so it's not too hard to get a job if you can do some basic data analysis.
Yeah, being good at ML is pretty much printing money. Even being mediocre at it will pay the bills. It's the Hot New Thing that everyone wants.
To play devil's advocate, security work will pretty much always be in demand in essentially its current form and also pays well (perhaps not quite as well as the AI superstars, but mid 6-figures is definitely possible if you climb the tree of certifications), while in AI you could well find yourself having to jump between doing different things over the course of a career as stuff evolves, with the potential outcome of either being out of work because the field has moved on or else ending up in an area you don't enjoy.
That is a very good point. While ML itself probably isn't a flash in the pan, its methods will likely evolve very rapidly and irrelevance is quite possible.
As someone who's been in data science for a while and does ML, the concepts haven't moved in a long time, and we're nowhere near it becoming irrelevant. There are so many fields out there (medicine especially) where we've barely scratched the surface of data analysis.
At it's core, ML is just statistics. Take a look at extremely statistics heavy subjects, like economics, and you'll find that jobs aren't going anywhere.
You’re the first familiar face I’ve seen here! Didn’t realize you were in data science or did ML. I’ve got some very basic questions I need help with if you have time to nudge me in the right direction. I’ll PM you later on Reddit.
I actually did my bachelor's in medical computer science. I guess you are right about not worrying about money. I just want to work some years, get some money and take a year off to travel the world. I traveled Australia when I was 19 and that's one of the happiest memories in my life
Then as someone in the health field I would highly recommend health IT, especially data analysis. It's in high demand, pays well, and doesn't require health experience (at least in America). It's going to be a huge field soon (with pop health demands growing) so it's a very secure job.
Any advice for someone who's 2 years into their Bachelors? Is there something I can start doing now that'll help me out after I complete it?
Just be sure you learn the basics of statistics, some sql, databases, and ETL. If you have some time for medical terminology it helps, but it's really not required. You can learn a bit about data visualization pretty quickly and tableau has a free version you can start building stuff with and publishing online.
Ooo what kind of videos are you looking to make? Like, screen cap with audio overlay for doing software demos, or sitting at a desk explaining stuff, or something else? I'd love to help you figure out ideas, if I can.
I am actually currently not sure which direction I want to go to. Help is appreciated lol. I do a lot of volunteering in which I teach mostly young students about how programming works, but also teaching about encryption, security, privacy. Sort of digital education
I just wanna say that people like you who teach stuff online are fricken saints. There were a couple 3/4000 level engineering classes I only passed because people like you decided to make videos teaching the topic.
I agree. Thanks it'd a real motivation to go out there
Since you already do face to face teaching, I'd take the approach of using video as a means to add to your normal curriculum. There are a lot of things you can do in video, things that wouldn't be feasible in a live lecture format, that can really help to streamline the explanation of concepts.
Right off the bat, video allows for a much higher degree of scripting and planning. You can ad lib as much as you want and slice it up in the edit, or have every shot and every word planned out beforehand.
You can use visual aids much more effectively than if you were using a powerpoint in the background during a lecture. I always got distracted by projectors during lectures because I tend to fixate on visuals. Visual aids can help a lot for people like me who tend to learn more readily through tactile experience and visual cues, but they can also be a detriment and distract from what's being said. But in video, it's much easier to dial-in the timing and presence of visual aids.
It can be fairly difficult to get comfortable with speaking to a camera as if it's your audience. It gets more natural with practice. But there is the question of whether that format works for your material or not. For some, visual cues from facial expressions can add a depth of meaning to what's being said, but others can be very bothered by the seemingly endless eye contact. You'll have to make the call as to whether you think the material is better presented with just a voice-over, or if you think a more personal presentation works better.
That will help you also figure out what kind of equipment would be best suited for the job. For example, if you're going to use real world video footage for your projects, you'll want a decent camera, boom or shotgun mic, and maybe some lighting. If you plan on doing mostly screen caps with voiceovers, you'll still want to grab a decent mic.
So the things to consider mostly boil down to what kind of content you feel could really add to the reception of the material. What sort of things have been helpful the most to you personally? When you volunteer, it might be useful to try and get some feedback afterwards on what worked well and what needed additional clarification. What do your students think would help? You can start to put together a much better idea of what form the videos could take. Could they be useful more as supplemental material? Could they function as standalone pieces? Maybe they could serve well as introductions to concepts, followed up in-class with practice.
I'm kinda winging my advice here because I don't know the specifics of your situation, so I may be offering suggestions that will be far afield from what your intentions are. I'm not trying to influence your plans one way or another, just trying to give you some ideas for what to consider in fleshing out a general idea.
Thanks a lot for the insight. I luckily have a good microphone already, I might get a pop filter as well. But I will use your questions to guide me
Right on. If you want to bounce any ideas off me at any point, you're welcome to DM me. Happy to help.
I'm kinda in a similar situation. I want to do a master's (still getting my bachelor's) in the future and I don't know what I should focus on. Security concepts really interest me, but I also like AI and computer vision. And I still don't know what kind of job I want to have.
Did you do an internship? That can give you an overview for the beginning
I have interned previously but it was regular software engineering. So I am currently trying to get the requisite background for the fields I am interested in
Failing another exam in med school and wondering if this nightmare is really worth it..
=/
Do you enjoy it? Do you have any long-term plans in the field? Is there anything you'd rather do, career-wise?
I feel like I did, but I'm starting to question it..
It's been my dream for several years and after applying several times until I finally got accepted, it was a dream that finally came true.
I knew it was going to be though. But this just keeps on piling on and on.. And after two years (with four more to go), I'm starting to question if I'm smart enough to do this when I'm struggling this much for so long now.
I already tried engineering and some IT, as that has always been a side interest of me, but in the end I kept on applying for med school because that was "the dream" and what "felt right".. Plus it checked most boxes in what I want.. And I can see myself in the job on the other side, even though I'm not sure about my specific direction..
I probably need to reevaluate all of it a lot..
Absolutely this.
My wife was told that people just opened up to her, she was a great listener, she was fabulous at helping people so she went and got a masters in psych.
My wife HATES people.
She likes helping or listening to people she knows or cares about but the general populace can fuck right off.
Dont get a career just because you think you should or because it pays a lot.
Especially a medical career because
a) if you hate your job its going to affect the people you treat
and
b) that shit is EXPENSIVE.
You have a really good point!
I've started to question my real reasons for going into this field, because the above is definitely something I want to avoid.
I agree with @Eva about needing to enjoy such a long and work intensive path as medical school. Being a medical professional necessitates a massive amount of effort, but if you think that it’ll ultimately be worthwhile, keep at it and see where it takes you!
The tunnel is long and dark, but there is a light on the other side.
Making it to the other side of the tunnel isn't worth it if you end up in the wrong place
True enough
I want to believe!
I believe in you 📣🤸
Just make sure it's not the headlight of an oncoming train.
I'm afraid of the human race not having a future.
You and me both my man. There was an earlier point in history where total destruction of life was possible - the cold war - but everyone just needed to not make the decision to launch nukes. This time we have to massively change our economies and cultures. It's scary to think what an environmentally sustainable world looks like - no more AC, no more international shipping, drastically reduced meat consumption, no more fossil fuel extraction, extreme reduction in military actions just to start with. Any one of these would be incredibly hard to get widespread buy-in on. All of them, together, and things still wouldn't noticably improve for potentially decades? I don't have a lot of hope. Baby boomers really fucked us.
Might be a bit much to put on the shoulders of one person though... maybe that's not your sole responsibility?
I know that.
It's just that I look at human history, not just recorded history but the past 2 million years, all of our progress. In just 100 or so years, an eyeblink in time, our technological prowess so far outpaces our collective wisdom and we do so much damage that our environment can no longer support us. And we do this just before we start migrating out into space, where separating ourselves into multiple biospheres would all but guarantee our survival as a species.
I've come to similar conclusions and all I can really say as far as coping is... well, we've had a good run of it. Sure, I'd like it if the species continued into perpetuity, but we might not.
However, the instinct to survive is a strong one, and necessity is the mother of innovation. We've engineered the biggest threat to our own survival that the species has gone through in history. If we can overcome that, just think of the advances we'll have made because we fucking had to
There are things that give me hope. The fact that we're working on technologies that not just reduce CO2 emissions, but actively remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Along with the massive amount of pushback the public is generating against Trump's idiotic policies, both environmental and otherwise.
We should research NETs (Negative Emissions Technologies), but we can't rely on them, since they probably will not work soon enough or at scale. You might enjoy Kevin Anderson's latest talk regarding IPCC projections. He's very informed and comments on them specifically.
Don't let hope hold you back from doing something.
Out of interest, are you working towards making humans an interplanetary species? It's something that's interested me for a while, though I doubt I'll end up working in the space industry.
No, I'm a programmer and my job is kind of pointless, but things like this should be important to everyone.
NASA hires software engineers sometimes! It's not the most direct sort of way to achieve your goal, but you might have a bit of a better time with it! (Plus, it's a government job; when they say permanent they really mean permanent if desired.) Might be a bit of a pay dock though.
https://www.usajobs.gov/GetJob/ViewDetails/502336900
I've thought about starting some sort of organization that would help organize like-minded folks - do you think there would be interest in that?
What kind of organisation?
I'm not entirely sure. I'd like to see some sort of global organization that holds several specific goals with a major one becoming a two-planet species. The idea would be to solicit donations and then use that $ to support groups and political candidates that would drive policy change.
I can't think of another group that has that exact approach but the various transhumanist movements probably come closest: https://www.britannica.com/topic/transhumanism#ref1207333
There are plenty of non-pointless programming jobs out there! Go find one!
I feel like we just need to hold out long enough to spread out away from Earth, which will be filled with dooms-day scenarios coming to life. With our species advancing so quickly, and the technological singularity approaching, I feel like there should be much more alarm among us to make sure we can survive ever more complicated and advanced threats. As we become smarter, more serious existential threats can be created by smaller groups of people. A few scientists with the knowledge of pathogens can create designer super bugs that would be next to impossible to stop with our current technology. A physicist could be held at gunpoint to create a black hole generator, or a drug that can take over people's thoughts and actions, or an arsenal of nuclear weapons. The knowledge to create these things will be available to everybody as we become smarter and more advanced, especially when we start to merge with machines to enhance our own intelligence. Most people don't even realize that they probably have made the longevity escape velocity (if they're under 50 years old), so they don't think that these problems will affect them. If we can educate the masses of these problems then we might have a slight chance, but I highly doubt it. Excuse the rambling. :p
While I agree that we as a species will have to branch out to other planets and prepare for a diverse onslaught of existential threats, I think that it’s important to make every effort to preserve Earth (for a long time).
From a practical perspective, Earth is the only place that is guaranteed to support us right now and we have yet to actually develop and prove the viability of technologies that could make extraterrestrial living possible.
Even if / when we do develop those technologies, Earth is where all our history and culture are. It would be terrible to lose everything that we’ve managed to build on this planet and be reduced to desperately fleeing to other places for survival.
Lately I’ve been reading about all the irreversible damage the human race has done to the rainforest in South America, and it makes me really angry. This is happening all over the planet, and as we’re becoming ever more resource hungry, we will continue the destruction. Worried about the human race? Worry about our planet!
Life is pretty resilient, I'd worry more about the human race. If we kill ourselves off, life will take back over and biodiversity will soar.
That's not to say we shouldn't care about the planet, it's just that she's a tough motherfucker who will kill us long before we kill her.
You’re correct; “nature finds a way”! I guess I was just feeling a bit fatalistic about the how stupid and short sighted some people can be when it comes to valuing profit over environment.
The most important thing we can do to preserve the environment and all these amazing natural locations is institute environmental regulations to keep corporations in check. If they are left to their own devices, corporations will happily destroy their natural surroundings to drive profit...
Sometimes I get caught up in that worry, but other times... I dunno. Do I care?
Does it matter if humanity ends? Everything ends. Every story, every song. Endings can be sad, but that's fine. Afterwards new things will begin. We wouldn't be here had the dinosaurs not died, and our solar system only exists because of the death of some long-forgotten star. One wave must ebb before the next can rise.
If humanity lasted forever, would it even have a purpose? What is the point of a thing that lasts forever? We best find meaning in a piece of art once we see it complete and whole. You need to read the novel to its final word before you can draw from it its ultimate message. Humanity until now has been incomplete, and it will remain incomplete until its over. When its over, whoever comes next can look back upon us and know the answer to that question that has troubled us from the start: why are we here?
We have a future indeed, and amid all the rest, that future contains within it our ending. And that's fine.
But there is no inherent meaning in anything. Any meaning that exists, we create for ourselves, either individually or as a society.
I work a couple jobs, one is in a theater, although I have no aspirations of acting. The theater's upcoming production was having a bitch and a half's time casting a role, which demographically, I fit. So the director asks to audition me. I say, what the heck, I like these people, and they're in a spot, why not see if I can help them out. It's the artistic equivalent of signing up to be a bone marrow donor, in my mind.
The audition goes great, it's a lot of fun, save for an awkward moment where the director asks me an inappropriate question about my background. We talk about scheduling, and if I can get it cleared with my other job, and arrange for more consistent transportation than the bus, I've got the part. So I start calling in favors, I get a vehicle to borrow, I get my boss at my non-art job to rework my schedule so I can do it, I let the director now, and he just needs to clear the casting with the Executive Artistic Director, who's my boss at the theater. They then proceed to not talk for a week. I nudge both of them, to try and figure out what's happening, and then 18 hours before the first rehearsal is due to start, I get a text from the artistic director saying that the director has decided to go in another direction with the casting. Five minutes later, I get a call from the director, who tells me that the artistic director forbid him from casting me. So, one of them is lying to me, and I'm going to be working closely with both of them in the upcoming months as the theater moves forward with the production.
The artistic director has been someone that I could count on to at least be honest about how the vampiric nature of an arts non profit was going to fuck me at any given moment, for instance, I haven't gotten paid in the last month because they screwed up their budget and we're trying to limp into our big annual fundraiser. However, my gut tells me that the director's emotional arc has been more predictable. But I have no history with the director. The only event I worked that he directed during my tenure at the theater was his improv troupe, which had a couple members who made similarly disparaging remarks of another individual who shares my background. So it's entirely possible that the director's an asshole who likes to jerk people like me around, because he associates himself with those kind of people, and if he's the one who pulled the plug on me, then I have to consider that as a possibility.
On the other hand, if it was the artistic director who took me off the table in favor of bringing in a professional actor from across the state, who's going to require pay and housing when they can't even afford to pay me right now, well, that's just insulting. Especially after I bent over backwards to accommodate them when they asked me.
So, we've got our weekly production meeting today, and it'll be the first time the three of us are in the same room since all this went down, and I'm not sure how I'm going to handle it. All I know is that the more I think about it, the angrier I get.
My unasked-for .02. Assume positive intent. Write out before hand what you want to ask about, and then re-write that several times until you don't sound upset, then bring that in with you. Oh, and I'd start exploring something else in general because you don't sound too happy.
I would love to hear an update!
It's been somewhat resolved. I went to a trusted friend who knew all parties involved, and she told me a lot of things I didn't know about both the artistic director and the director, and while the stuff about the artistic director was nothing that I hadn't seen some variation of, the stuff about the director was pretty eye opening. It turns out he's one of those self-centered "woker than thou" liberals who uses his progressive cred to put himself in a position where he's beyond criticism for his bad behavior. I suspect what I was sensing from him in terms of emotional authenticity was actually manipulation. One of the shitty things he was known for in his last stint directing for the theater was doing exactly what he did to me to another local actor who was a mutual friend of ours. Up until now, the only people who knew what really went down then were the director and artistic director.
So after a very cordial production meeting where I avoided talking with the director, I pulled the artistic director aside and explained my anger about the situation. She then told me that the director had never told her that he had offered the role to me, and they had been in regular contact during the week that they took to make a decision, but they hadn't talked about me until the final day, all their other conversations were about finding other actors to fill the role. I talked about his inappropriate question, and she also admitted that it was a recurring problem with him, he uses his credibility derived from his work with disadvantaged populations to act uncomfortably familiar with a lot of people in our theater community, like it's ok for him to ask that, because he's someone who's trusted by so many. She counselled him about when she brought him back for the production. She's livid about how things went, but at this point, we both agree that we're in too precarious of a position, and too far down the road to do anything drastic, but I told her that once I'm done with this production, I don't want to work with him in any capacity again. She understood.
I've decided against trying to seek out any closure with the director. If he wants to have a come to jesus moment with me, he'll have to seek it out. Otherwise, I'm going to get through this production, and hopefully he'll never work here again.
Rant incoming...
Fucking politics and political discourse on the internet. It's so extremely frustrating to read, let alone participate in, political discussion anywhere on the internet.
Politics today is a team sport. People either support team blue or team red. They are very similar though they are not identical. Now, I expect that last statement to be contested so I'll explain what I mean.
Let's take Bill A, for example, that would bring about socialized healthcare in the US. Immediately, we think that Dems will support this while the GOP will be against it. The truth of the matter is that Insurance companies, Hospital conglomerates, and the Pharmaceutical industry are all against this bill and as such will donate large sums of money to BOTH parties to ensure it doesn't happen. So, now that the initial bill was proposed, 1 of 2 things will happen.
Assuming 1 happens, the bill will likely pass as it will do nothing but show voters that their congressional representatives care. Now, if 2 happens, the vote will depend on which party controls the majority. If the GOP is in power, they all vote against and Dems all vote for. This makes the dems look good to their base and the GOP look good to their base. If the Dems are in power, the GOP votes against and just enough Dems vote against to ensure the bill doesn't pass but it still makes the Dems look like they were for the bill.
This is the crux of the problem. Both the GOP and Dems are making laws based on corporate interests, not the will of the people. They vote in such a way to appear as if they are working for the people but, as we've seen, very few laws get passed that actually help the people.
Finally, trying to discuss any political topic on most sites on the internet is impossible. Many people are not willing to consider another perspective, so if you don't agree with them you are just plain wrong. Being a centrist makes this even worse. Centrists are considered nazis by the left and communist by the right. It's really frustrating.
Rant off. Everyone have a great day!! :)
Maybe put up filters on social media platforms to remove any mention of it, if you dislike it so much?
I try to do that quite a bit, but still see this stuff everywhere. I see people bringing up politics on posts every where from video games to movies and sports to programming.
To add, it's not that I dislike political discourse, I have great conversations with friends about politics almost daily. It's the tone and general attitude of your average commenter. That said, Tildes hasn't seen too much of this rabidness... yet.
Fair enough. Politics are something fascinating to me, but it's always a matter of "Pick your battles," which is a bit annoying.
Welcome fellow centrist and have a hug.
Its hard out here in the streets where the pendulum is always on one side or the other.
Meaningful political discourse is pretty much impossible to find in the vast majority of places on the internet. That being said, I have really high hopes for tildes and am eager to see if successful discussions surrounding difficult and controversial issues will continue to flourish as the site grows.
My wife lost her $40k/year job of nine years in a re-org last year, and hasn't been able to find any position anywhere since. Submits resumes and applications every day, hasn't had a single interview. Not even as a barista or cashier or third-shift call-center thing. I'd been working a lot of overtime to make ends meet, and now overtime's canceled indefinitely as business is slowing amid political uncertainty. We no longer have a car or cable, we don't eat out, we don't drink or smoke... our grocery budget is now 100% dependent on what we sell on eBay and how much we get for it. We own a house that's worth less than the mortgage, so just picking up and moving is non-trivial and we frankly don't have the money, anyway.
Has she had someone look over her resume? Has she done research about how to write effective resumes/cover letters? Maybe she already has, which is great, but if she isn't getting calls back, it might be time to give it another go. Dumb question... is her contact information correct on the resumes she's sending out?
That's a tough situation, friend. Good luck to you both.
Yeah, she's been to a couple of job fairs, talked to folks at a couple of temp agencies, had people go over her resume with her. Everyone agrees it's perfectly fine. And yeah, the contact info is correct. Just... nobody wants to hire her.
And now lately it's leading to a seemingly endless depression about being either under-qualified or over-qualified for everything. And I can't really blame her. Target won't even give her an interview, and no offense to Target, but they'll hire just about anyone, FFS.
That is so frustrating! I'm really sorry to hear that.
More unsolicited advice coming up: so don't read if you don't want it!
What is her field in? If she's looking to change careers, she should look into functional resumes if she hasn't already. That's what I did when nothing was working and I was trying to break into a new field. It's all about focusing on your skills and experience vs your actual career path. So "Customer service gave me the people skills I need to be an orderly at this hospital," etc. Obviously you wouldn't write that on a resume, but it's an example of the mindset.
I'm sure she's tried everything, so I hope I'm not being annoying. I've been in her shoes where nothing is working and sometimes it's frustrating when people assume you haven't tried things you tried months ago.
She was a financial something-or-other at a mid-sized bank. I forget the exact term just now. Series Six license. It was all a bunch of acronyms to me, lol. Supervised a shift in a service center for escalated complaints/inquiries involving brokerage accounts. Spent a year and a half helping train call-center staff overseas. Really heavy customer-service credentials, basically, with a lot of banking-industry knowledge (spotting money laundering, etc) and a lot of multicultural supervisory experience. All the obligatory Office/Excel/Powerpoint/blah blah blah experience.
And so far, completely unsuccessful at translating any of that into a job, anywhere.
She's tried the functional resume thing. You'd think that years of customer-service experience might qualify one to, say, be a cashier, or a dispatcher, or whatever... evidently not. :(
I say this because Ive done it in the past when a job fell through that we moved across the country for.
Have her look at call centers.
Its a complete shit job and it makes you want to kill yourself some days but its a paycheck.
Make an alternate resume where she downplays any management or leadership stuff and plays up the customer service and office suite stuff.
Leave off any higher education.
Again it will be a shit job but $10/hour is better than $0/hour.
That's...really not good. Maybe try retraining yourself/her to a different skillset? A career change sounds like it'd be really helpful for both of you.
It's actually the current state of Tildes. If I look at the homepage, all I see is people hating on whatever a certain person is doing, no matter what it is. Enforce rules? He's literally Hitler. Use his powers to change those rules, he's still Hitler.
I've seen people try to argue for "diversity invites". I don't think there's anything more hateful than giving certain people an advantage (or disadvantage, depending on how you view it) based on how they were born.
People call "bad faith" on others simply for disagreeing with them, refusing to enter into a discussion. There's people trying to argue that using any word uttered by the Wrong Person implies agreement with Wrong Person's complete world view.
I came to Tildes to find a new place for civil discussion, not hating on everything that disagrees with the wishes of the regressive ideology. Lately, Tildes is not doing great in that regard.
If you want civil discussion, you'll benefit from not framing the people you disagree with so disingenuously.
Trump's ICE is not merely "enforcing the rules", and no one cares if these are rules. He had them change their policy and do terrible things. His executive order didn't simply "undo" everything, so pretending the people you disagree with simply can not be happy is just ignoring what they're actually saying.
How on earth can you compare inviting diverse people to a website to hate and discrimination? Claiming anything that involves changing behavior based on a person's identity is exactly the same is such a convenient and, yes, bad faith argument to make. You can't seriously compare it to lynchings, oppression, and genocide. And ignoring identity is not anti-bigotry, it's allowing the status-quo bigotry to prevail. There's a reason people make fun of those who say they "can't see race".
Referring to progressivism as "the regressive ideology" is just being disrespectful.
I explicitly did not name anything directly because I don't want to devolve into something every other thread is already doing. Great job of showing what I'm talking about, though. You just need to spew hatred and talk negatively about Trump on every occasion, even when he's (intentionally) not explicitly mentioned.
Because it is. Inviting people based on their genitals or skin color is sexism and racism, even if you can't comprehend it. I liked one of the comments in one of said threads that said to invite diverse viewpoints, not diverse people. You're literally in favour of discriminating based on the way someone is born.
I never mentioned any of this. Nice strawman.
Maybe if the ideology wasn't actually regressing society, I wouldn't have to call it that.
Your comment was obviously about Trump's ICE. Keeping it nonspecific only serves to prevent arguing while giving a clear nod to people who agree with you.
But more to the point. In your prior comment you called for civil discussion, yet in this comment, you've accused me of spewing hatred, supporting sexism, racism, and discrimination, and being apparently too stupid to comprehend sexism and racism. Do you see any of that as civil?
Yes, it serves to prevent off-topic arguing. You still seem to be interested more in making everything off topic just so you can push your narrative.
Probably not. But I also explicitly tried to avoid this off-topic arguing that you so desperately wanted to start. I also did not go out of my way to put words in your mouth that were never mentioned at all.
How is it off topic? If you're bringing up a problem you have with the users of this website, then the way you frame that problem and what it actually is is a natural way to follow that.
Regardless of the argument at hand, which I have no interest hopping onto, you can't just call someone out like that (especially in a way that they feel misrepresents them) and call any response pointing that out "off topic".
I really sympathize here. I don't think people realize how exhausting it is to get back into the old fights of another thread. You seemed to be trying to bring up what is, to you, a troubling intolerance for alternative views without trying to rehash this particular immigration debate. But I also think you were just unfair enough to those other fights that it would invite them to comment on what is, to them, a misrepresentation of those discussions.
It's tough. I don't think there are easy ways forward here. But I think we would all do better to remember the humans behind the words we read.
This could be true. I tried to explain in abstract terms what I was talking about, because just saying "people are doing bad things" isn't really bringing forward the point. I wanted to bring some example to show what I mean, but keep it vague enough not to slip into off-topic arguing. It seems I failed in that regard, though.
Yeah, I clearly don't have a good answer or suggestion here. The only time I tried to do something similar we got lost on exactly the same sort merits-based, kind of ranty, rehashing discussion that you were trying to avoid here (though that did seem to end on a much better note at least, as you and I used that opportunity to understand where the other was coming from--well, I know I did; I can't speak for you but it seems like you did too).
I will say that for my part, I've been feeling dread hang over me since I posted a poll on people's ability to separate fact from opinion. The reaction was, uh, not grappling with much other than the first page and headline, and it left me feeling like people weren't really reading the whole thing (and incidentally were proving the poll's point about media literacy more generally).
The poll was incorrect anyway, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.
One fuzzy term does not make the base claim completely unproveable (especially considering how they defined fact, you can prove losses or gains in territory even if "how much" is a fuzzier metric), nor does that one fuzzy classification of fact undermine all the other 11 statements being measured.
I don't really know how you consider that one criticism enough to call a poll like that "incorrect."
I figure them getting it wrong even once in an article whose point is to get that specific thing right is enough to discredit them, or at least make me wary of anything else they say.
True, the base claim that they gained or lost territory can be proven, but they're the ones who said "significantly," not me.
No, the point of that article was not to get facts right. The explicit definition of a fact was "can be proven wrong regardless of actual truth." I said that elsewhere in the thread and it was on the very first linked page.
This is exactly the sort of reaction that made me so disheartened and filled with dread.
My point still stands, though. It's not useful to sidestep the issue.
Does it? You looked for any reason at all to totally discount the entire poll. That’s not a fair approach to anything. It’s hard to see why your point, that “the poll is incorrect anyway”, when it isn’t as you admit the line labeled as a fact can be proven or disproved at a clear point, invalidates an entire poll.
It’s that lazy unfairness that fills me with dread. You were not alone, nor were you the worst. And that’s the problem
No, I didn't. That inaccuracy was very obvious; it didn't require any searching to notice.
And you're still missing the point that they said "significant," not me. That is why their "fact" is not a fact.
“Significant” losses can be argued to be within a possible spectrum, but there is a very clear point at which it can be disproved. At worst you can say the inclusion of that word makes proving it require more clarification, but it can still be proved, making it a fact (regardless of its truth).
What is so obvious to you is not at all obvious to me.
There's really no point at which it can be proved because it's entirely subjective.
Careful with your hyperbole. "Significant" isn't just "2% decrease from their peak land holdings." It would have to be argued to be meaningful, which means there is a point at which it can be arguably proven. I think if the real losses were 60% from peak values, we would all agree that those losses are "significant." Maybe not enough, but very real, very proven, and not very subjective (though the end point might have a small bit of wiggle room).
But that doesn't prove anything. Even if every human on Earth agrees that it's significant, the concept of significance is entirely subjective.
You can "prove" it by convincing people, I suppose, but that's an inappropriate usage of the word, I think.
Are you sure that "60% losses from peak values" would prove nothing about the claim "ISIS has had significant losses"? Because if you are that sure, and if you think the same is true for literally all four of the other facts, and that none of the 5 opinions are facts, then I'm even more distressed than the feeling of dread I had before. The reason that would make me more distressed is because the fundamental difference between us on what is "proven enough" would be so large that there would never be anything I could say to you that would prove anything to be true.
And that's grounds for deep disagreement, a disagreement where the participants so disagree on the rules for resolving things like issues of fact that there can be no shared understanding.
First of all, it would prove nothing regarding "significance," because again, that is subjective. It cannot be proven, by definition. It's like how you can't objectively prove that chocolate tastes good, because it's a matter of opinion.
Did ISIS have losses? Yes. Were they significant? It's up for debate.
Secondly, where did I suggest anything about the other facts listed? Why do you assume that I think they're also incorrect?
Hi, uh, I'm not really involved in this discussion, but the inner pedantic in me saw this particular thread. When you refer to something as "regressive", it specifically means reverting to the way it was before. Assuming that's what you mean, I'd be interested in hearing this...?
I do mean "regressive", yes. Because that's what they're going for, especially the "diversity" and social justice crowds.
They cry the hardest about stopping racism, sexism, and every other word they can find that ends in -ism. Yet, their proposed solution is to apply racism, sexism and every other -ism to counter it. Fighting fire with fire isn't going to help. All it will accomplish is more hate between groups, and the actual problem only becoming bigger.
Things like safe-spaces, or black-only events are exactly what happened during the era of segregation. You'd think people are happy that those things have passed, but instead the SJW crowd applauds it. Same goes for women-only events. I was hoping we could see eachother as equals and not try to divide or segregate based on physical conditions.
Then there's the anti-Trump crowd, that just really hates Trump no matter what is happening. They don't want any actual progression. They simply wish for Their Enemy to disappear, even though he was democratically elected. Sure, you can argue USA democracy is broken, but it has been like that for a while now. It's petty to only make a big deal out if when "your side" loses. If you're unironically arguing for Trump to be removed from presidency for not doing what you want, you're against democracy, and want to regress to times before we had such things in place.
If you truly wish to be "progressive", accept that he is currently the president and try to make the best out of it. Learn from the mistakes that got Trump into power and deal with it in a mature manner. Don't try to bring back segregation and blatant racism and sexism, not even for the sake of supposedly fighting racism and sexism.
See man, I didn't even want to get into this, but I'm really not buying your case that you're looking for a place for civil discussion. Let's look at your response:
Who is "they"? What is "their proposed solution"? How are they applying "racism, sexism", and especially, "every other -ism"? What even is an "-ism?" There are some assumptions that are safe to make, but you should try to outline the specifics of what you're talking about. What's a specific example of progressive ideology that you disagree with, and think is inherent to the belief? What makes it racist or sexist, in your eyes? How would you instead prefer to deal with the issue, or instead, why do you think the issue isn't one at all?
All right, that's a... well, I guess it's a mostly substantive paragraph. You're outlining a somewhat clear example of what you're talking about (safe spaces), and you outline what your motivation is, or rather, why you don't like it (hoping to see each other as equals). Your jab of "the SJW crowd applauds it" adds nothing of value to this paragraph, and you don't provide any examples of what you think an unacceptable woman-only event is, but alright, it's a start.
This entire paragraph adds nothing, pal. We have no idea who you're even talking about, and yet you're already certain of who this extremely vague audience is saying and what they believe in. It's a textbook definition of a strawman, and not just a single sentence, but the entire paragraph. What does wanting Trump impeached have to do with the historical impact or connections of progressivism? I'm not saying it's wrong, but you need to build a case for how you think this goes together. Do you think wanting Trump impeached is equivalent to, for example, Teddy's attempt a third term, or something like that? This is the point where I really felt like you're no longer even interested in what I asked you about, you're just looking for a platform to rant and have me agree with you. And that's precisely what this website is not about.
Okay man, your concluding paragraph to your argument. The question is; "how is progressivism a regressionist ideology?", and your reply is "If you truly wish to be "progressive", accept that he is currently the president and try to make the best out of it." Your final sentence does a little better, at least it... well, vaguely brings back that you think progressive policies are racist / sexist. But you still haven't provided any examples of why you think that is, you haven't said a word of how this ties into history (how it's regressive), and you haven't even attempted to try to engage with my question. All I've gotten from you is a completely off topic and angry rant :/
Your answer is literally one sentence before that. Taking things out of context and then pretending there's no context whatsoever is not a great way to start a discussion. "They" refers to the "regressive" people, specifically those who favour "diversity" and "social justice" above all.a
Discrimination. Give people additional benefits based on how "oppressed" they are in their eyes. In practice this usually comes to events where only a specific group of people are allowed, such as women-only events. Affirmative action is what they prefer to call it.
Affirmative action is a big one which hurts both sides in the long term. People who get in to a certain job based on affirmative action will never be able to feel like they've succeeded because of their own qualities, and others will see them as lesser peers since they did get in based on a quota, not skill.
Not specifically my eyes, but by the very definition of the words. Treating people differently based on their race or gender is racism or sexism.
I'm not exactly familiar with all of the presidents and their wrongdoings, I'm also not from the USA. Generally, when I see people talking about impeaching Trump it's mostly out of spite because they just really don't like Trump. And I can certainly understand disliking Trump, he's not the most upstanding person in my mind. But constantly talking about how bad he is, or wanting to get rid of him as a president isn't helping anyone.
That's exactly what I see happening with Tildes right now, and is exactly what I want to avoid. In this particular topic, I might come off as ranty I guess. I'm not particularly interested to talk about Trump in here because it's off topic. I want to present my side in an abstract manner so that we can discuss the problem, not the symptoms.
But I did explain that. Specifically I hinted at segregation and the basis of democracy.
That's quite dismissive to say. I tried to explain my point, which is why I commented on you in the first place. To say I don't even attempt to engage is quite a low blow. What reason do I have to put down this comment if you're just going to ignore context and then tell me I'm not trying to engage in discussion at all?
Feelings are subjective, I guess? I explained my reasoning for calling it regressive. I can't really help that you consider it being angry, let alone off topic as it was literally what you asked for.
Alright, that's good. You should always mention the subject that you're talking about before you start using pronouns like they or it, because otherwise it's hard to follow what you're actually talking about; furthermore, otherwise it sounds like you're just lumping everyone you dislike under "they".
Nice, alright, we have a specific point; affirmative action. And you disagree with affirmative action because you think it's racist, correct? If so, what do you think would be some non-racist ways to accomplish the same goals affirmative action does? Or, why do you think that the goals themselves are wrong? (just as an example, if you believe everyone is already perfectly equal, what makes you think so?)
Well, let's take a look at a common progressive argument for impeaching Trump, specifically, that he violates what's known as the Emoluments Clause of the Constitution. Specifically, the clause states as follows: "no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State". Their argument is that since Trump routinely accepts the payments and gifts of foreign leaders and diplomats who stay in his hotels, which he thereby receives profits from, and since Congress hasn't authorized or is likely to authorize this, that he's violating an explicitly stated section of the Constitution, and therefore can't be president, since the president is required to uphold the Constitution, and can't hold power without it. What is your opinion on this?
You didn't want to avoid it man, you dived in headfirst, lol. No part of my question required you to mention Trump at all, and yet you did, 4 separate times. You don't just come off as ranty, you were ranty, it's nearly the entirety of your comment....
Hinting is not explaining, it never is. Hinting is when you tell a little to suggest what you're thinking, but you're purposefully leaving room for ambiguity. Explaining is talking precisely so that you remove as much ambiguity or unclarity as you can, you see. You talk about segregation and democracy, that's interesting. You think that in order for a state to be considered a democracy, there can't be any segregation, correct? In this case, imagine that someone's handed you a country that is suffering from segregation as is. What do you think would be the best way to fix it?
Because, bluntly, you didn't. Nowhere in your post did you ever talk about progressivism as a political belief system or why you think it's regressive; in other words, why you think it's a step back, why it's a traditionalistic belief. All you told me was how much you dislike people who always criticize Trump and "SJWs" (which itself is a reductionist term that doesn't lend anything to an argument, just like "conservitard").
Man, there is no reasoning in your post. What does this have to do with the history of progressivism?
or this?
or this?
None of this has anything to do with the history of progressivism and previous historical situations. It's literally just insults directed at people you don't like, and your post most certainly does read as quite angry. Even my Aspberger's afflicted social skills can tell that much. If you didn't mean it that way, you should be very careful when using emotionally charged, and especially insulting, language.
They are wrong in my opinion, indeed. They go for equal outcome, not for equal opportunity. That's not something to strive for in a society, in my opinion. I'm pretty sure we already have laws that ensure people should be treated equally, giving them the same chances to reach something as others. For instance, if you are a woman and you are actually being paid less for the exact same job, you can sue your boss for it.
Does he accept gifts in addition to their stay in his hotels, or is they stay itself the gift? In the former, one could argue that this is wrong and he should be held accountable. If it's the latter, he can't really force people to stay in different hotels. I also thought he handed over his business to other people.
Incorrect. One can have a democracy and a segregated community.
I did not, but thanks to explain my own reasoning to me.
Maybe hinting was the wrong word to use there. I gave examples using democracy and segregation.
Because it's regressing back to the times of segregation, and a time where democracy isn't a thing. I mentioned this multiple times now. I'm not sure why you ignore this.
It's actually spelled Asperger's.
Insult is not given, an insult is taken. If you feel like I was insulting to you, it would be best to just point it out and not try to act like it was my intent all along.
I'm sorry, but this is the entire crux of your issue and you're doing your best to avoid responsibility for it. You have come across as insulting quite a bit, take some responsibility for it and seek to make sure that doesn't happen again.
It's kind of how ignorance of the law is not an excuse to break the law. Ignorance of tone is not an excuse for your bad tone.
If you want this to be a place of good discussion, it starts with you. Not other people. Watching your tone is exactly where it starts.
My advice: stop with the reddit-esque quotemining argumentation style, where one quotes one line at a time out of context that they want to reply to. It encourages ignoring the true message of the other person in favour of picking at little details and arguing something else entirely.
I thought I was having reddit flashbacks haha. This quotemining style argument can be a good way to dissect a person's comment to make it easier to understand why they disagree. Unfortunately, I agree that it is very easy to take things out of context to help your argument. I feel that Silbern did a good job getting their point across without purposefully taking quotes out of context.
That's true, discrimination on race, gender, religion etc. are disallowed. However, how would you go about proving it? Imagine if you are you, and you apply to a company, and get turned down for a vague reason. You believe that it's related to your race, as the employer seemed to express interest until you came in for the interview, and didn't explain very well why they turned you down. How would you go about proving this in a court of law? Furthermore, given the time and money involved, do you think you could afford to sue in the first place?
It's mostly the latter, as I understand it. And I would disagree; he certainly can ask people to stay elsewhere, there are tons of hotels in the DC area, and it's a conflict of interest. If you're a paying customer of mine, I'm going to be less likely to negotiate against you after all. And it's not just the money they pay at the intentionally inflated rates (prices at Mar-A-Lago for example, often spike by up to to 3x their value when foreign dignitaries or Donald Trump is visiting, and this the rate the US government and foreign governments pay to stay here), but they also provide free and extensive advertising, both in their appearance themselves, and in all the news coverage of the events. And he didn't hand over his businesses; he was supposed to, all previous presidents did, but he refused to do so.
But you're not explaining why. What about progressivism makes you think it's a return to segregation? What's an example you can think of where it's intentionally dividing and cutting communities off from each other?
Good that you still understand what I mean though. It's a word I often mispell.
I don't think that you've insulted me, but you most certainly did intentionally insult everyone you think is a progressive. For example:
Why not just say "They may think they're righting racism and sexism, but their attempts are simply making more of the issue"?
Why not just say, "I think it's hypocritical that they seek to encourage unity, but use divisive techniques like safe spaces or events only for people of a certain status?" Why even use a term like SJW, which was invented specifically to be offensive, and doesn't add anything else to the conversation?
You seem to be ignoring a lot of what @tyil is saying.
Just wanted to jump in on this one because I used to be against affirmative action for similar reasons. You might want to check out this study on the subject.
In case you don't have time to read through it (it's a good read if you do), I'll highlight 2 quotes from the discussion section.
I'm off topic, but anyhow.
Having just shown Ferris Bueller's Day Off to a friend, as soon as I read that, my mind flashed back directly to the Isms scene.
I don't think inviting diverse people is discrimination, I think it's a good thing. If it meant blocking non-diverse people from joining that would suck, but I really doubt that's happening
Excuse me, but how is only recruiting from sources that are 80% male and 80% white not giving people an advantage because of how they were born? I don't think @Deimos has intentionally tried to exclude anyone, and you have to build a userbase somehow so leveraging existing relationships makes sense and nobody has done anything wrong. I was merely suggesting a more intentional approach to the next stage of recruitment so that nobody is excluded.
The only way this argument makes sense is if you view membership of Tildes as a zero-sum game, but afaik there is no limit on the number of users, so recruiting one person doesn't mean someone else is denied membership.
White men would be getting an advantage if Reddit prohibited other genders/races from joining it. But it doesn't. The fact that the userbase happens to fall that way is not relevant.
Would you be making similar calls for diversity if Reddit were 80% black and 80% women?
That's just not true, because Reddit policy is not the only thing at play here. I know for a fact that the toxic culture on Reddit has caused minority folks to leave because they were tired of seeing and fighting back against the ignorance. That itself is a barrier to entry. That's not even getting into the issues with race and gender in tech, which is relevant because Reddit started as a website focused on programmers. The mistake they made that let this toxic culture form, is letting it start in the first place.
But before I go off on too much of a tangent, what you've said is frankly irrelevant.
Take all the emotion out of it.
If you have a bag with 80 blue balls and 20 red balls, if you draw randomly from that bag your chances of ending up with a more diverse array of balls are exceedingly slim. If 80/20 is not your ideal ending mixture, it doesn't make sense to only draw from that bag.
What you've said has also been ruled against as policy - time after time as the legislature and the courts have reaffirmed affirmative action. Some people have the mistaken idea that AA is basing decisions on race. Really what it means is making an effort to recruit from a diverse candidate pool. Time after time this has been considered the fair way to do things.
Well you see, Reddit doesn't exist in a vacuum. The popular culture is mainly white, and mainly male. So spaces go counter to that trend serve to add more diversity to the wider culture. Honestly I think Reddit would be a more interesting and less toxic place if there were more of a diversity of people, leading to more diversity of viewpoints, that made it unacceptable to express casual racism and misogyny. I'm not sure what that magical number is, but let's keep pushing until we find it.
So the most important thing is to try to stay receptive to other peoples’ statements. I think that if we manage to respectfully present differing viewpoints and have civil discussions about those viewpoints, every party involved will end up having benefitted from an interesting and meaningful conversation.
You seem to be assuming "bad faith" for most people disagreeing with you in this thread and engaging in unnecessary name-calling. If all you see around you is hating, perhaps you are part of the common denominator. You point out straw men and off-topic derailings from other people, but fail to see it in your own comments.
I'm trying to make no assumptions, but I admit that I might fail at it from time to time.
Can you point these instances out?
Feel free to point them out. Just saying someone is doing something bad but not explaining what exactly or why is not going to teach anyone to improve.
First off I want to say that I do sympathize with you in regards to some of the unfounded accusations people have throwing at you. I don't believe you are a Troll or operating in bad faith... However...
I have seen you use "regressives" on dozens of occasions in reference to Progressive and Liberal ideology, which is undeniably a pejorative term. If you're genuinely interested in engaging in productive dialogue rather than starting fights, you really need to stop doing that. If I was to refer to Conservatives as "backwards" in nearly every paragraph I made on this site, you would have every right to call me out for it, because it would be deserved.
I use that term because the term "progressive" is actually wrong. I don't want to use a term that is (at least to me) completely incorrect in describing the group. The term "conservative" does apply and is correct to their ideology.
What other term could I use that would be less pejorative, but also correct?
In Canada we have a major political party called the Progressive Conservatives. In my personal opinion they are anything but progressive but my personal opinion doesn't matter because that is their party name. When speaking of the party and especially when talking to people who support that party, I still refer to them as the Progressive Conservative (or PC) party because to do otherwise would be asking for a fight. Were I to constantly call them the "Regressive" Conservative party, I would rightly be called out for being an asshole.
So what do you call progressives despite not agreeing that what they believe in is progressive? For the sake of civility, you call them progressives because that's what they identify as. If you can't stomach to do that, then at the very least you could refer to them as Democrats or Liberals.
I'm not in the camp of people who think I should just change the meaning of words because someone "identifies" as a different meaning of an existing word. The word "progressive" has a meaning, and so does "regressive". To change the meaning of the word "progressive" to mean "regressive" in some contexts sounds silly to me, and would make sane discussion harder for everyone involved.
But then I'd refer to a much larger group that doesn't necessarily prescribe to the regressive ideals. I'd also miss out on some other groups that also prescribe to regressive ideals.
I've tried calling the group I'm talking about "progressives", with quotes, to denote that it's not something I agree on, but that too receives a lot of flak.
In general, my stance on this is that if you don't want to be called "regressive", you shouldn't promote regressive ideology.
This view can be interpreted as undermining one of the more time-honored principles of good faith discussion. That principle? Can you describe a view in a way that the person holding the view can agree with? Words have no meaning on their own. Their meaning is in their shared usage between the participants using them.
So in other words, what you're doing by saying "I refuse to use your definition of this term," is saying "I refuse to engage with your view." If you were to couple that with a statement criticizing that other view, it's very easy to see why people would become frustrated with your approach. It would be not only rude to approach discussions that way, but it would undermine the possibility of coming to a shared understanding.
To flip the ideological tactic here, so maybe you can see it more easily, "My stance on this is that you don't want to be called 'a racist white nationalist,' you shouldn't promote racist white nationalist ideology."
Hopefully that clearly demonstrates why you shouldn't do that.
What I'm saying is that words have definitions, and warping definitions just so you can use certain words isn't a good basis to start communication. You're just going to make it harder for everyone to follow whatever you're trying to say.
The words "racist", "white" and "nationalist" all have definitions, just like the word "regressive". If I were to adhere to those three definitions, one would be correct in calling me that. But I don't adhere to those. This is what you get when you warp the meaning of a word like "racist". Once someone warps that word, they start using it in contexts where it isn't appropriate. Other people will hear the word "racist" and be angry even though there was no racism by what the rest of the world thinks the word means. But the damage has already been done at that point.
I don't identify as a "racist white nationalist" because those terms (well, other than "white") don't apply to me. It would be silly if I were to say that the meaning of "racist" and "nationalist" have to change just so I can identify with it.
Words do have definitions, but what makes you the arbiter of someone else's definition? Dictionaries are intentionally trying to create the vaguest application of a word that still retains a shared meaning as its generally understood, so you miss out on a lot of nuance when you're dealing with specialized terms. So dictionaries are often a very ... unreliable authority to appeal to here, when we're dealing with terms that each come with unique histories to the specific political contexts in which they're used.
You say that the problem comes when these words are "warped," but how did they come to have any meaning in the first place? Prescriptivism and descriptivism within linguistics is a debate worth having all to its own (and despite what I'm saying here, I do typically fall harder on the prescriptivist side than you might think). The general gist that any linguist worth their salt will tell you is that words are dependent, exclusively, on their users. You are only ever one half of any attempt to communicate. So how do you resolve these definitional disputes if you can't reliably run to a dictionary or wikipedia? How do you know what the ideal definition for a word is?
Insisting you are that arbiter who decides the meaning of all important terms is arrogant and puts you in a position where you cannot demonstrate you understand someone else's view in terms they would agree is fair. If you can't see that, it seems clear why you're befuddled when other people interpret your behavior as rude.
It is fair easier, and better for discussion, for you to keep the definition that you understand a word to have separate from the definition that someone else is using. My understanding of the word "Progressive" is very likely based on different facts, history, and experienced usage than your understanding of the word "progressive." That is not to say you aren't basing your understanding on facts, history, or experienced usage, but that our different understandings (and the reasons why we have those different understandings) might cause serious conflict if we pretend to each be the arbiter of the term.
To put the problem more bluntly: if everyone insisted that only they had the true definition for a word, there would never be any good discussions. That behavior, if applied generally, would make meaningful discussion virtually impossible.
Ah, so you don't support Donald Trump? Under the (fictitious) true meaning of each of those terms, to be a racist white nationalist is to support Donald Trump. That would seem to me that you adhere to them, and calling yourself anything else is just wrong.
Also only I have the true understanding of these words, so sorry about your luck there. The un-warped definitions of these words (as defined in some implied process that must necessarily mean I have chosen the true definition) prove that you are a racist white nationalist for supporting Donald Trump.
Also you can't debate those definitions because they're the true definitions. Just look them each up in the dictionary.
I'm modelling horrible behavior, but hopefully it's more clear why it's really, really bad to engage in this behavior. I will call this behavior out regardless of where I see it, because I see it as so destructive to meaningful debate.
So to be clear, I'm not saying that you're a racist white nationalist. I think anyone who did say that is due for a light ass-kicking when it comes to good faith debate. But don't you go on doing the same thing with different terms! The very nature of all these political terms is to be vague and weirdly history-laden with all sorts of messy implications that usually no one is very clear about.
This entire sentence is contradictory. If words have set definitions, there is no such thing as "my definition" or "your definition." There is just the definition.
If "my definition" is a thing that makes sense, then words do not have set definitions. You cannot have both.
EDIT: Unless, of course, I misunderstand what you mean. I suppose it would be better to ask for clarification instead of assuming a contradiction!
Yeah, I think it might help if I say that I never said that words had set definitions. All languages change over time. There is a reason Shakespeare is a big deal. Languages evolve, and words shift in meaning. The point that a good descriptivist in linguistics makes, I think, is that different groups learn words in new contexts, and that is largely what changes the meaning of those words, causes some words to fall out of favor, creates openings for new words to enter the mainstream.
Words have definitions because they are, by definition (haha), symbols that must reflect some meaning. To be a word is to have a definition. At least to someone. Now whether that definition is set depends on who the authority is we consider to have set it.
While your opinion is perfectly acceptable and welcomed on this site, it does not entitle you to lessening the validity of other people’s opinions before a meaningful conversation has even started.
I agree with you about not wanting to make claims (in this case, call a certain demographic beneficial to the advancement of society) that you don’t personally believe, but if you are willing to start a conversation involving people with different perspectives, you should imply in your comments that you are open to those differing perspectives instead of shutting them down right from the get-go.
Saying that a certain political ideology is regressive to society degrades that ideology instead of fostering an environment for a meaningful discussion on conservatism in relation to progressivism, liberalism in contemporary society, etc.
As someone who called you out for rude behavior that I interpreted as "bad faith," I can't help but be curious if anyone else but me has done this to you (or someone else that you've seen), or for a reason different than the one I gave for why I accused you of this. The way you've worded this comment makes me think you see it as more common than I've seen, so maybe you have had other experiences along those lines. Or maybe you're still not over our scuffle and think I called your participation "bad faith" simply because I disagreed with you (which I can't imagine is a sustainable view if you read my comment in the now-closed thread).
But I do sympathize with your being exasperated with the, uh, overwhelming focus on le immigration fiasco. Some threads have been framed in overtly hostile and context-blind ways to the worst elements of the fiasco, and initially in a place that didn't seem obviously suited for that type of discussion. But for the most part, even that thread worked itself out surprisingly civilly, with no mentions of bad faith discussion that I saw.
Yes, it has happened on multiple occasions. And not just to me, also to others, and that is still not acceptable in my view. It's nothing I hold personal to you.
I'm not arguing that I see it in every other thread, but it's common enough for me to have noticed it (and I certainly don't read every comment here). Most threads on the immigration issue I have not read, I've been active in one and don't recall anyone calling me out on supposed bad faith in that one. Luckily it's not that common, but I'd also like it to still be a little less common altogether.
Yeah that sucks. I'm not sure there is a good solution here. I just try to treat people's arguments as fairly as I can before criticizing them, and hope that others will do the same for me. It's likely easier for me though because I'm pretty neutral about, well, everything. Growing up in an ideologically split household in suburban, midwest America will do that.
I've been trying to use my "diversity invites" to find some more dissenting voices. No luck so far.
The Wrong Person is incredibly polarizing, and there is a distinct trend towards disagreeing with him in the type of person who shows up on Tildes. I wish that such discussions didn't get so emotional, since it only worsens the divide. For what it's worth, I don't think I've seen you argue in bad faith (though "the regressive ideology" is a bit on the baity side). And, reading through some comment threads, I understand your frustration. The points you're arguing are in the minority here, and it's frankly marginalized. While personally I'm of the opinion that there are certain actions, positions, and people that are indefensible, dissent from people who see it differently helps strengthen the discussion and keeps it honest.
I strongly oppose him and even I find some of the post on the front page rather emotional. That being said that only accounts for the articles that were posted. The discussions seem civil. (At lease those I skimmed through)
Either way maybe take a break from tildes for a day or two. If a discussion is getting heated don't be afraid to just walk away from it.
I'm not in a brilliant way at the moment. Got an exam tomorrow which I'm going to fail, meaning I'll go to my second choice university which is a bit of a bummer. I'll be going travelling soon so hopefully I can use that to clear my head a little.
No one likes to fail, but it's also a really important thing to do from time to time. Adam Savage has a really interesting talk on failure that's worth watching. The most valuable things I've learned about myself haven't come from the times when I've been successful. The most valuable things I've learned about myself have come from the instances when I've absolutely bombed a presentation, a paper, a test, an interview, etc... While those experiences were painful at the time, I'm really glad they happened.
What's the exam on? Try not to beat yourself on it. Relax, study a little, relax, study some more, eat well, sleep well, relax.
Pure Mathematics. I'm retaking this one since I didn't do brilliantly last year. I'll probably end up with an A instead of an A* (+) which isn't exactly bad but I've underperformed academically for basically all of school and I've got no one to blame except me. I despise how lazy and weak I am. It's just getting a bit much tbh. I have large amounts of both narcissism and self loathing which means I'm not satisfied with myself unless I achieve the best possible result so I'm always disappointed in myself.
I realize that no words will change that sort of feeling, but try not to worry about it so much. Beating yourself up over it doesn't help anyone.
I am what one would define as a slacker. All of my teachers from elementary school up until I graduated high school talked about how I'd be getting As if I would just do my damn homework. I couldn't be bothered (I already proved that I get it by taking the test, right?) and ended up graduating with like a B+ average.
College continued the trend, but now nobody was forcing me to go to class. So I ended up failing about a class a semester because I couldn't be fucked to go to it. This, in retrospect, was a mistake. I graduated with a 2.75 overall (3.5 in-major).
I moved out of my parents' house by getting a 20-hour a week job that paid like garbage. I was eating off of the dollar menu at McDonalds every day and pretty much only paid for a share of the rent / bills, gas for my car, and weed.
Eventually I got a job working tech support (definitely not the field in which I have my degree), which gave me the opportunity to get my current job as a systems administrator.
Now, you may be wondering why the fuck I'm rambling about my life story. It's something of a narcissistic tendency of age that you feel like your experiences can help someone younger go through theirs.
I don't know exactly what got me to stop hating myself for being lazy. Finding things I actually care about (rather than simply trying to perform in the structures outlined by the educational system) helped. A handful of acid trips gave me a bit of perspective. Eventually I kicked my own ass into gear and just started fixing things I didn't like. This has had mixed results, but a net positive from what I can tell.
This too shall pass, and in the grand scheme of things nothing much matters. Trying your best doesn't mean that you're always going to be perfect, it just means that you gave it a shot with the resources you had available.
Thanks for the advice, it means a lot to me :-)
It's a pure maths paper, differentiation, integration etc. Here's an example paper.
Good luck tomorrow, I hope it goes well :-)
Are you going off to university this year? If so, what subject are you doing?
Piggybacking off this to say me too, I'm having maths exams soon.
Nationalism and how engrained it is into the collective mind of the people. Both sides of the political spectrum are nationalistic, it just becomes more overt as you tend to the right. (most) Nations are spooks.
People who think that by giving them information, that you are being condescending. That by being in a field longer that you've picked up some things about how things run in a particular place, and will share insight.
People who completely ignore written workplace policy, and can't take feedback.
I want to participate more on tildes, but I don't have the time :(
I didn't usually have a lot down time at work, and I seem to always have stuff happening at home. Sometimes I just want to sit around and do nothing all day...
Ow; that's not good. I hope your schedule clears up soon! We all need a little downtime, sometimes.
The current state of the farming economy. Low grain prices, razor-thin margins, and an unreasonably high price of land make me very nervous about the future.
Luckily, we're starting to automate it! And land's still really cheap in rural areas!
If I may, you sound like you have an interest in the farming economy? As someone who knows about it, what do you think of the various counter-tariffs that have been in the news recently? I've read about them myself, but I'd be fascinated to see what someone with actual knowledge thinks.
I'm a farmer, not an economic analyst. I'm not remotely equipped to predict the long-term impacts of international policy. But the tariffs have already hurt my bottom line, and the atmosphere of uncertainty they create is even worse. Farm economics by necessity stretch into planning decades ahead (it will take me ~30 years to pay off a new farmland purchase), and uncertainty can be disastrous.
I don't know about upset. But recently I've found it hard to be enthusiastic or happy about anything. I'm sure I'll be better once holidays start though.
I'd recommend talking to your doctor about getting a blood test; it's definitely not guaranteed, but it sounds like you might have a vitamin deficiency, maybe?
I'd definitely recommend it, then.
I'm not happy with myself and feel like I generally fail as a person constantly.
Why's that, if I may?
Whole lot of reasons
If you're self-aware, that's generally at least a semi-good sign that you're not as bad of a person as you think you are.
I'm leaving for college on the other side of the country in less than two months and I'll be leaving basically everything I know behind. I'm excited but I don't think I'm ready for such a huge change.
What part about the change is going to be hard? Family and friends, I'd imagine?
Yup, and I was never the best with motivation either so having so much freedom might not be too good for me.
That freedom is actually what forced me to start giving a shit. I bummed around in college for the most part, and eventually I came to recognize the patterns of laziness and started chipping away. Now I'm still lazy, but I know how to recognize the feeling and route around it if I have to. Good luck!
Don't worry—if you're excited, you're going to be ready.
I feel kind of angry and disappointed about myself and I don't know why. It's supposedly the best I've been in years because my life is finally on track
Aw yes, the failure of success. Good luck. Keep swimming :)
In my experience, that means that you're on the wrong tracks.
Or you suffer from a mood disorder: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mood_disorder
I'm personally on the wrong tracks. Externally my life is good but I took some decisions ten years ago and I've to "pay the consequences" now and, at least, for the next 5 years.
I think I feel like partly because it's the end of the semester for me (which means lots of work and lack of sleep) and I've gone through some social anxiety from having to deal with group projects (where it was mostly me carrying everyone's weight)
The main reason, I think, is that I stopped taking care of myself to focus on college. I gained weight, gave up a few of my hobbies, stuff like that. But I went back to dieting and exercising and I already feel an impact, I think I'll try to learn something in my one now that I'm on vacation (it started today)
Btw, thanks for the message :)
Maybe read through some of the textbooks for your next semester, I always said I was gonna do that and then never did, but It could mean next semester you grasp things quicker when explained and you can spend more time on other stuff and not be as stressed.
I have two vacant Lots about 20 minutes east of the city I live in work in. I bought a house last October. I really need the money from the lots, and one is under contract. I've been very patient, and very nice about the whole thing. But the transaction is taking a lot longer than it should. And everyday I'm wondering if the transaction is actually going to go through.
They signed a contract, so it is under contract. However, we're waiting on their financing to finalize. The couple doesn't really give me any specific updates. They just tell me things are moving along and they're pretty vague. I am putting up with it because I really need the money. But the longer it drags out the more irritated I get because that's just longer for me to sit there and think, well is it really going to happen or not.
Any payment due date in the contract?
There's a close by date. But those fall through all the time. It's more the not knowing what exactly is happening on their end and them being vague and me not wanting to push too hard. I'd be super patient and give them lots of time if I just knew what was taking so long / what was going on. This has had plenty of time to finalize.
My job. There are long periods of time where I have little to no work and the days just drag. Plus my boss doesn't understand my role so I get no actual feedback on anything, ever. I know I should look for a new job, but at this point I'm so burnt out on "offices" in general that I'm honestly not sure I'd actually be happier somewhere else.
What kind of work do you do? Is there a field you think you'd like better? The option of freelancing in your field, maybe?
I'm a copywriter. Freelancing is a possibility, but I'm hesitating over trying to afford insurance/rent through the first year or so when I'd be building a client base. I have some savings but it's a big risk. I am considering it though.
Do you enjoy editing?
My wife considered doing that before she got back into higher ed.
She specifically looked at court reporting since she could do it from anywhere.
Funny you say that, I actually worked in publishing (as an editor) before moving over to marketing, but I was in NYC at the time and the cost of living wasn't sustainable. My current city is much more affordable, but publishing doesn't exist here.
Maybe I'll do some research on court reporting. That hadn't even occurred to me as an option.
Have you considered going to another country or something to have a bit more of a buffer if you try? Europe and Asia are full of amazingly inexpensive areas, and health insurance is in general pretty price-efficient there, too. Really an ideal place for a freelancer.
It seems like I can't ever decide what I want to do in my free time. I'm currently working toward a degree for a job I'll find fulfilling, but in the meantime I don't just want to consume media. I want to create something.
So I hop from idea to idea, never sticking to one for long. But every time I make a new jump, I'm convinced that this time I've found my passion. But when it inevitably fails for some reason (lack of talent, no clear direction, etc.), I return to this baseline state of feeling bottled up and frustrated.
Maybe join a FLOSS project? If you're into that, of course.
People depending on you will help you develop a passion over time, from my experience.
I can't figure out if I have a concussion or am dehydrated lol. I've been training to fight MMA for like 2 years now but after every training session this past week(even when I don't get hit in the head) I've been getting headaches I drink a buttload of water and it disappears after I wake up in the morning...
Please go see a doctor today.
Yeah I fully plan on going sometime next week. It's not a crazy headache but probably worth checking out
Like @pilgrim said, go see a doctor. Better to get checked out and have it be nothing than leave it alone and make it worse (getting a concussion while you're already concussed can literally kill you)
Of course! Have to schedule an appointment. the meathead in me flashed my phone flashlight in my eye and I felt fine. I'll probably give an update with how it ends up going
Please do!
How did your day turn out?
That's fantastic! Really hope your weekend manages to top all of it!
That's great! I'm happy for you!
I graduated from college with a pretty high GPA recently, but haven't been having any luck with getting a job or internship. It feels like all of my friends got something no problem, but everyone I've applied to has either ignored me, or interviewed me, and then chose someone else on the basis of them being more experienced than me.
There was one position I really liked and that I thought I was a shoe-in for, only to get edged out in the final round. When I inquired about the internship they were thinking about setting up, they informed me they already set it up, and filled it with someone less skilled.
Everyone I talk to seems to like me, but nothing ever comes from that. I keep getting encouragement like "you'll end up somewhere great," "you have a really great skill set," and "people like you get hired super quick." While that was encouraging at first, I've heard that stuff so much without results that it's started to feel like people just lying to my face.
I did get a last minute internship through my school's career counselor, but it's an hour and a half drive away, unpaid, 16 hours a week of just straight research on a computer, probably won't lead to a job, and is on a topic I'm not really interested in, and doesn't really seem to be related to my major. I'm sticking to the hope that having it on my resume will somehow help me out, but I'm feeling doubtful.
I just feel like I'm at this really confusing point in my life where I'm trapped. I can't get a job or an internship because I lack experience because I can't get a job or an internship. It's like my worst fears realized, and I don't know what to do. I just hate not having a solid plan other than "just keep applying and hope something eventually works out, before you've been out of college without experience so long that nobody will hire you."
Just remember, the job search sucks really bad right until that one phone call where it doesn't suck anymore.
I know I'm a bit late but right now I'm struggling because I came to the realization not too long ago that I've had horrible untreated ADHD for my entire life and that I need help. The problem is that the waiting list I'm on to even receive a clinical diagnosis is a year and a half long, and waiting that long would be a big problem since I'm a university student.
With that being said, I'm currently home for the summer and am in a different country that doesn't have socialized healthcare (can you guess which one?)– but because of that it's way easier to receive treatment for non-emergency medical issues. This would be great if I just went and got some help, but the problem is that in order to start getting treatment I'd have to tell my parents... And they aren't exactly supportive when it comes to mental health issues.
I have a routine checkup this Wednesday so if I can I'm going to try and tell my mom about it before talking to the doctor but otherwise, I'm not really sure what to do...
Tell your doctor! It's really important that you do.
I definitely need to. I'm thinking that if I bring it up with him and have him tell my mom then it won't be as bad because she likely trusts his opinion on medical issues more than mine (which I understand tbf, I'm not even close to studying anything med related) but either way something needs to get done. I'm so tired of being the way I am. I just need help.
Also– I'm not having any trouble coping or dealing with any comorbid issues of ADHD, just in case I came across that way. I just can't continue living the way I have for the last ~20 years!
Good luck!
Thanks!
mortgage.
This is supposed to be my last year at university (finishing my second undergraduate degree), but due to family stuff and lack of motivation on my part my grades aren't exactly stellar. I've got some work experience, but it's mostly in an area I no longer want anything to do with (digital strategy/community management) and I can't really put some of the bigger jobs on my resume because they're under NDA anyway. So I'm not sure if I can get a job, and I have a sinking feeling that if I do it'll be one I hate even if it's in a more traditional programming role rather than where my experience is.
An alternative would be to take a year or two off doing something completely different to reset while working on portfolio pieces in my free time, but because I've spent so long at university already that would mean delaying starting my career until I'm nearly 30 and there's no guarantee I'll feel any more confident after that. Every option seems like a massive lose-lose.
Can you try to contact the people who made you sign NDAs and ask if you can put down some vague work experience there, or something? Also, where is your experience?
I doubt the company would even consider it, to be honest. I could always put down something like the job description plus "(Site and Company under NDA)", but that seems kinda dodgy because anybody could do that to pad their resume.
The common theme in my experience is in setting up various community spaces (forums, social media platforms, etc.) for game companies and managing the general strategy and direction of those to keep the userbase growing post-release. Sort of a mix of community manager and web developer. Or at least that's the theory - more of my tasks seems to devolve into a mix of sysadmin stuff and shouting at the children to play nice, which combined with a general lack of appreciation for people in those roles from all sides means I basically want nothing more to do with that kind of work.
(This StackExchange post might help you on how to handle the NDA jobs:
https://workplace.stackexchange.com/a/8798 )
Ah; I don't think most people would!
That I can't comment without going all the way down the page...
In case you didn't know, it's considered a feature, not an issue. The hope is that you'll read through the comments on the way day. That way, if you have a similar thought or opinion, you don't have to clog up the thread.
That being said, threads like this one would be a good candidate for having the box at the top, and sorting the comments by "newest first" or an activity-like method.
Don't know if anyone's gonna see this, but I flew home for a couple weeks and my mom paid for the ticket, but then cancelled the return flight. I have no money to get back and am basically trapped in her house all day with nothing to do but think about how depressed I am
Have you asked why she did?
I don't have any money and apparently having no money in Vermont is better than in an actual city where I don't need a car
Maybe try pressing her over the next few days to set you up another one? If you make her life a living hell, she'll probably be more prone to doing so; and it's not like you wouldn't be justified.
I'm stuck at home for another month. I can't do anything with friends and I don't really have any hobbies I can spend time on, but I don't want to just play video games for eight hours a day.