҉  ҉  ҉  ҉  ҉  ҉

@relevantusername.bsky.social

314 Followers 646 Following

1990/m/Earth //insults≠criticism //criticism≠destructive --- ❝When a journalist turns into a Politics Junkie they start raving & babbling about things only a person who has Been There understands❞ — HST --- Non-absolutes subject to change without notice

https://archive.org/details/storagestability0000benj/page/8/mode/2up
In the 1960s, the very first arts minister, Jennie Lee, described art and culture as public should "everyone, everywhere". But this mission didn't begin with her. It began with an economist. John Maynard Keynes drove the foundation of what was the Arts Council of Great Britain, drafting its royal charter and securing funding in 1946. It has always given me great personal delight to note that the 20th century's most impactful economist saw no contradiction between fiscal discipline and state investment in culture for its citizens' long-term happiness and wellbeing.
Amusingly I wasn't really planning on writing quite what I wrote in the post text, but upon seeing the post on which the words I was looking for (the John Muir quote in the alt text of the next picture) was about how "farming destroys soils natural structure" and that the comment I was replying to (see next screenshot) was literally two words in all caps, well sometimes things just fit. I described the situation of the post text in other, more shitposty words thusly: > A very simple explanation is understood by considering financial visualizations. I understand when I compare todays money with how much money a thing cost me when I was 15. I assume everyone is the same in that respect. Literally every time I see some number "adjusted for inflation", at this point I just trash it. Useless. One layer of abstraction is enough, and that's our brain. As soon as two are combined, two that are not absolute Laws of Nature so not predictable in any logical way, chaos results. That's how the boomers have destroyed reality itself while being barricaded both literally and metaphorically against any consequences and blaming everyone else for the problems which they both generally and specifically are guilty of creating. >It's as if they're lighting our grass on fire then asking "the data" why we continue to complain about burnt grass when it is clearly green. Then on the rare occasion one of them manages to have a thought they think removing all evidence of their arson will clarify the situation and don't understand what we - or rather, basically people like myself - mean when we say "you literally lit the shit on fire then immediately started wondering why it is on fire. Are you actually [REDACTED] 'cognitively impaired'?" To which they may reply "But there's no evidence! The data does not prove it, so it must not be! Besides, my grass is green. I think maybe you're just mentally handicapped."
Not my post but same thing. Logically speaking how does it make sense that only one key has an extra piece? I could see if it was a few, or even only the space bar & shift keys but not only space. The shift is the most frequently used key, not the space bar. Metaphorically fitting for *continues gesturing broadly* At this point it would be easier to specify what actually functions either as claimed or in a way that is beneficial. Which sounds bad, but it's worse because from what I've read, around the year I was born (1990) society was at a point that was optimized fairly well and it actually was simpler to point out flaws, but then the orcs took hold of the one ring and made lore fact. Or something like that, it's hard to explain because near everything is so God Forsakenly stupid.
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types — the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob. This is called the balance, or mutual check, in our Constitution.
I try not to screenshot so much especially when the text is less than legible, but sometimes it's the only way to make the pieces fit --- https://thenextweb.com/news/cloudflare-pact-browser-privacy-bot-traffic-protocol https://www.cloudflare.com/case-studies/mozilla/ https://techcommunity.microsoft.com/blog/post-quantum-crypto-tech-blog/post-quantum-cryptography-and-crypto-agility/4530365 etc
Hitler and the Nazis were working on a Big Brother-style cable television propaganda industry to be broadcast across Germany By Chris Irvine Last Updated: 9:22AM BST 22 Oct 2008 Plans for the system were first found when Soviet soldiers entered Berlin but have recently been reexamined by researchers for a new Russian documentary. The Orwellian screens would have been set up in public places and would show "people's television", depicting how the Aryan race should live, with the Nazis focusing on news, sport and education. Ideas included building rooms beside laundries so women could gather round the TV to watch the broadcasts. Prototype programmes included Family Chronicles: An Evening with Hans and Gelli, which was an early reality TV show depicting a wholesome Aryan life of a young German couple. Engineer Walter Burch was asked to make the idea a reality, and tabled a document to Hitler called "Plan to supply people's transmitter to German homes" which would result in the laying of a broadband cable between Berlin and Nuremberg. Other plans included showing footage of executions of Nazi traitors. Curt Schulmeitser, a former SS officer, told the programme how a relative of Hitler's mistress Eva Braun was filmed being shot after trying to flee Berlin. It was implied by Hitler's deputy Heinrich Himmler the filming was for Hitler's benefit. He said: "Himmler wanted somebody else in a different place to see what was going on." According to the programme Joseph Goebbels, leader of the Nazi Party's propaganda unit, realised the potential of the visual image: "The advantage of a visual image over the audible broadcast is the audible becomes a visual image with the help of an individual's imagination, which can't be kept under control. Regardless, each will always see his own." Hitler used live TV signals to broadcast his speech at the Berlin 1936 Olympic Games, and he continued to film his speeches and parades realising the power of television propaganda.
https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1u27te3/comment/oqvlztx/ [OC] A satellite map of the atmospheric shift happening over North America's cities u/jasmineliumai Source: https://authors.library.caltech.edu/records/hgrw6-a9726 Tool used: Python libraries: cartopy, matplotlib, numpy, scipy, and huge help from Lium.ai --- This map shows the estimated lifetime of organic peroxy radicals (RO₂) across urban North America during summer 2023. RO₂ radicals are an important part of atmospheric chemistry. How long they survive helps determine whether they quickly react with nitrogen oxides (NOₓ) and drive ozone production or remain in the atmosphere long enough to follow other chemical pathways. Over the past few decades, NOₓ emissions have fallen across much of North America. As a result, the chemistry of many cities is changing. The study found that New York, Chicago, and Toronto have substantially longer RO₂ lifetimes than Los Angeles, giving these radicals more time to undergo reactions that can produce highly oxidized compounds and contribute to secondary organic aerosol. The colors show estimated RO₂ bimolecular lifetime (τ_bi), with purple indicating shorter lifetimes and green to blue indicating longer lifetimes. These patterns reflect a broader shift in urban photochemistry as NOₓ levels continue to decline. One of the most interesting findings is that this isn't just happening in a few cities. The satellite observations suggest longer RO₂ lifetimes are becoming common across urban North America, pointing to a widespread change in how pollutants are processed in the atmosphere.
Language, in this context, is a topic I could discuss from here to there and back again and again and again. To keep it concise: I am not a religious person by any means. I would describe my relationship with organized religion as something like "deathly allergic". That being said, I had a realization recently which is that many of the staunchest proponents claiming their religion is the One True Religion - thinking of Christian Nationalists specifically but this applies elsewhere too - hilariously commit the sin of idolatry regarding their holy book and messiah. As Kurt Cobain said: They sing the words but don't know what they mean As I've gotten older, I've stumbled across a lot of excerpts from various religious texts. I find there are two very different kinds of general ideas. One which is basically the normal "be a good human" kind of thing that all religions tend to teach. The other which seems almost opposite of that which is I AM THE ONE TRUE GOD I AM AUTHORITY AND THAT AUTHORITY IS YOUR CHURCH AND IF YOU DISOBEY YOU'RE GONNA BURN FOR ALL OF ETERNITY and I kinda feel like those two messages are coming from different messengers. Wasn't there like a period of history where the Christian Church as a State sort of did a lot of conquistadoring and whatnot? Seems kinda sus
https://iep.utm.edu/heraclit/ All things are an exchange for fire, and fire for all things, as goods for gold and gold for goods. (DK22B90) We can measure all things against fire as a standard; there is an equivalence between all things and gold, but all things are not identical to gold. Similarly, fire provides a standard of value for other stuffs, but it is not identical to them. Fire plays an important role in Heraclitus’ system, but it is not the unique source of all things, because all stuffs are equivalent. Ultimately, fire may be more important as a symbol than as a stuff. Fire is constantly changing-but so is every other stuff. One thing is transformed into another in a cycle of changes. What is constant is not some stuff, but the overall process of change itself. There is a constant law of transformations, which is, perhaps, to be identified with the Logos. Heraclitus may be saying that the Milesians correctly saw that one stuff turns into another in a series, but they incorrectly inferred from this that some one stuff is the source of everything else. But if A is the source of B and B of C, and C turns back into B and then A, then B is likewise the source of A and C, and C is the source of A and B. There is no particular reason to promote one stuff at the expense of the others. What is important about the stuffs is that they change into others. The one constant in the whole process is the law of change by which there is an order and sequence to the changes. If this is what Heraclitus has in mind, he goes beyond the physical theory of his early predecessors to arrive at something like a process philosophy with a sophisticated understanding of metaphysics.
>Of this Word’s being forever do men prove to be uncomprehending, both before they hear and once they have heard it. For although all things happen according to this Word they are like the unexperienced experiencing words and deeds such as I explain when I distinguish each thing according to its nature and declare how it is. Other men are unaware of what they do when they are awake just as they are forgetful of what they do when they are asleep. https://iep.utm.edu/heraclit/
Fun fact Occupy Wall Street started on my 21st birthday. // There is no doubt that Obama is listening to Occupy Wall Street, as he detailed the scandal of crushing income inequality and the growing wealth of the top 1 percent: After all that’s happened, after the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, they want to return to the same practices that got us into this mess. In fact, they want to go back to the same policies that have stacked the deck against middle-class Americans for too many years. Their philosophy is simple: we are better off when everyone is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules. Well, I’m here to say they are wrong. I’m here to reaffirm my deep conviction that we are greater together than we are on our own. I believe that this country succeeds when everyone gets a fair shot, when everyone does their fair share, and when everyone plays by the same rules. As I’m finishing my book (finally) I had reason to go back and listen to the rant that helped launch the Tea Party: CNBC’s Rick Santelli’s vicious February 2009 attack on the president’s plans to help homeowners facing foreclosure (help that barely materialized). Republicans like to depict the Tea Party as populist, but Santelli’s rant was anything but: He railed against efforts to bail out the economy’s “losers” on the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, while traders cheered him in the background. Addressing the president directly, Santelli asked: Why don’t you put up a website to have people vote on the Internet as a referendum to see if we really want to subsidize the losers’ mortgages, or would we like to… reward people that could carry the water instead of drink the water? This is America! How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills? Raise their hand. President Obama, are you listening?
In the back-and-forth between Clinton and Gingrich, and in the elections of 2000 and 2004, I sometimes felt as if I were watching the psychodrama of the baby boom generation -- a tale rooted in old grudges and revenge plots hatched on a handful of college campuses long ago -- played out on the national stage," writes Obama. It's a theme he's returned to with increasing frequency lately. "There's no doubt that we represent the kind of change Senator Clinton can't deliver on. And part of it's generational," Obama told Fox News in early November. "Senator Clinton and others have been fighting some of the same fights since the '60s. It makes it very difficult for them to bring the country together to get things done.
It's like this except instead of 1. Hollyweird 2. Aw shucks Americana fairy tale... It's more like 3. what the fuck is the God forsaken nightmare, the only "tradition" I had was the yelling and screaming. I had the TV, radio & Internet for a time... until the people in charge decided life was too expensive for the poors. I even momentarily escaped, not once but twice - two and a half times approximately - but fuck you. That was due to miracles of my own doing, once despite and then in spite of all the bullshit "incentives" (or "taxes" by other names) and "community" "support" that doesn't goddamn exist. Fuck you. Debts require payment. https://web.archive.org/web/20220630113520/https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-features/science-fiction-in-steven-spielbergs-suburbia-44190/
3. "Incentivising" reliance on "community" only works when that community is healthy, capable & willing. AKA guaranteed to fuck up. That's the point of a "big pot" called a "government" so people aren't FORCED to either rely on - or provide for -others. When it is part of the "system", like it once was, for a very short time, when all this prosperity was "discovered"? Things "just work". Like magick. Instead of being particular people who are "lazy" or "mooching", it's some far off abstract concept of an idea of a person. There's no individual receiving unnecessary harm. You stupid fucks. This isn't complicated. Your parents, or your parents parents, figured this out and recorded the whys and the hows extensively. The metaphor has remained with West ever since. It seemed to sum up an entire worldview: “If you parent, that was your decision so you’re on your own,” she said. “We don’t owe you anything for that.” This way of seeing children has become ingrained in American society. Just look at minor cultural flare-ups, like the long-running debates about air travel and whether small children are an intolerable burden for other passengers. It’s little wonder that arguments for publicly supported parenting have felt so impertinent for so long. But how did Americans come to see parenting as a private issue in the first place? In the 1970s and 1980s, economists like Milton Friedman hitched their star to an ascendant conservative movement that prized personal liberty and resented federal power. “Free markets” became the order of the day as governments rolled back regulations on businesses and politicians railed against social welfare. These ideas suffused political and cultural life, as well — in the valorization of choice. In this way of thinking, which became known as neoliberalism, the individual is a rational actor in a market who knows best what she wants or needs.
https://www.reddit.com/r/taoism/comments/1d1w9hk/comment/l5yehaw/ The Tao begot one. One begot two. Two begot three. And three begot the ten thousand things. The ten thousand things carry yin and embrace yang. They achieve harmony by combining these forces. This is just one example of a hierarchical description of Taoist cosmology. The name that can be named is not the eternal name. The nameless is the beginning of heaven and Earth. The named is the mother of the ten thousand things. In the great beginning, what there was was nothing—devoid of definite being, unnameable by any name. There arose from this continuity a unity but without yet any definite form. Accessing this, making it their own, things come to life; their appropriation of it is what is known as their intrinsic virtuosities. When definite shapes have not yet emerged, but in the undivided continuity certain tentatively distinct portions appear, this is called their individual allotments of life. As motion that also stays and maintains itself, distinct living beings emerge, and when these beings become complete, each producing its own distinct structural coherence, this is called their physical bodies. Those physical bodies become protective preservers of imponderable spirit, in each case with its own specific styles and laws, which we call their specific inborn natures. So, naming brings the 10,000 things into being, but who does the naming? I've always assumed that it is we, humans, who do it. That leads me to think that everything except the Tao takes place inside us - the truths of the Tao Te Ching and Chuang Tzu are psychological truths. Taoism is about self-awareness. It's not a literal description of creation.
Those albums: Atreyu's A Death-Grip On Yesterday & Under∅ath's Define the Great Line The reason I combined the covers is complicated. Tangentially related, the story of the individuals who contributed to each of the bands, and how that has changed over time, is a good example of a lot of the larger picture I try to point towards. See also... idk what I said exactly, but it was in various songs by Norma Jean I've linked. Some of them listed under the Youtube account for Norma Jean the band, some listed under the Youtube account for their record label. It's often said that porn or video games "lead the way" for the best and proper purposes for which technology may be used. That may be true, and with major caveats, I think it is. Music is another angle that is often unheard. Politicks should be left in the rearview. As with many human things, when too much thought is focussed on it things get stupid quickly. Self-consciousness - which isn't necessarily a bad thing, in moderation. When that self-consciousness doesn't even recognize the difference between the self and the others? Well that's where The Problem, which is as old as time itself (aka history aka humanity, as far as we're concerned), looks new but is mostly just scared and confused <3 As Hunter S Thompson said: when the going get's weird, the weird turn pro. When the pros become weird? Well, they should've ate some shrooms and remembered what it's like to die before attempting to lead the way. You can't lead somewhere you've never been https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/atreyu/creature.html https://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/underoath/towhomitmayconcern.html Like Katt Williams once said (paraphrased): >Fuck the messenger, did you understand the message? And as for the controversial recommendation of hallucinogens, a very smart person I once knew taught me this: >When you get the message, hang up the phone I think a lot of people forget that. Though some "messages" require a constant connection.
Last time out, just to survive the Jaws previews, he’d had to boil himself in Valium. “I was semiconscious throughout the entire movie,” he recalled enthusiastically as he settled beneath a white lamp in the sitting room. “I remember I was in a daze and couldn’t sit down in a theater seat, so I stood by the exit. In the second reel of the picture, after the kid was killed on the raft, I see our first walk out. Which is a very scary thing, when you see a person walking out of your movie. And this person begins walking up the aisle. And then begins running, then begins speeding! I realize, this guy not only hates the movie, he’s running out of this film. He passes me, then he stops. And he begins throwing up all over the carpeting of the lobby. Found his way into the bathroom. Came out, wiping his mouth, went back to his seat. Suddenly,” Spielberg crowed joyfully, “I was, you know, conscious again.” We laughed it off. I told him that seeing Close Encounters left me with a long night full of pursuit dreams. He was delighted.
Pictured: money since no later than early 2018
TLDR: Wall Street & realtors & the top whatever percent of the income and/or wealth distribution in the US, or any other country, ≠ reality for everyone in that country. And when there is extreme wealth alongside high inequality, that actually makes the wealth almost/arguably a "bad" thing due to how statistics and averages work. It obscures the poverty. This is why I repeatedly bring up any sensible financial data needs to be by individual, not household or any other grouping. Not that those aren't useful, but when you don't measure individually, that's all "cracks" people disappear in. Anyway I could write about it forever, and I have, but there's only 720 characters left in this text box so >This is not enough, in Trump’s eyes, to offset the suffering of American producers who are undercut by foreigners whose central bankers exploit a service (dollar reserves) America provides them for free to keep the dollar overvalued. For Trump, America is undermining itself for the glory of geopolitical power and the opportunity to accumulate other people’s profits. These imported riches benefit Wall Street and realtors but only at the expense of the people who elected him twice: Americans in the heartlands who produce the “manly” goods such as steel and automobiles that a nation needs to remain viable. See here for more about the spontaneously typed and not well thought out comments above: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergodic_(disambiguation) k bye
https://en.m.uesp.net/wiki/Lore:Alduin
https://conversationswithbillkristol.org/transcript/david-gelernter-transcript/ KRISTOL: So the actual education comes online. GELERNTER: The actual education comes online.
Why phase metaphors break Phase is not like personality. Phase is not like identity. Phase is not like "where I am in life." Those things don't repeat. Human lives are non-ergodic - you already know this. There is no "cycle" you return to. So any metaphor that implies: · repetition . cycles . loops . periodicity ... will fail when applied to human beings. That's why "two people clapping" works for waves but collapses for people. The correct metaphor for phase Phase is timing alignment, not personality. Here's the metaphor that does work: Phase is like two musicians playing the same tempo, but one starts a little earlier. Not personality. Not identity. Not life cycles. Just timing offset. That's all phase is.
Why phase metaphors break Phase is not like personality. Phase is not like identity. Phase is not like "where I am in life." Those things don't repeat. Human lives are non-ergodic - you already know this. There is no "cycle" you return to. So any metaphor that implies: · repetition . cycles . loops . periodicity ... will fail when applied to human beings. That's why "two people clapping" works for waves but collapses for people. The correct metaphor for phase Phase is timing alignment, not personality. Here's the metaphor that does work: Phase is like two musicians playing the same tempo, but one starts a little earlier. Not personality. Not identity. Not life cycles. Just timing offset. That's all phase is.
What are securities? A security is a tradable financial asset that can be bought or sold in financial markets. Securities cover a wide range of assets, but most fall into two primary categories: equity securities and debt securities. Each plays a different role in how investors pursue growth and try to manage risk.
Relative_Wave_102 Why do colors have unique names? Like for example, the color orange is named after the fruit. Makes sense because, if you don't have a name for a specific color, you would compare it to something that is also that color. So by that logic why isn't blue called "sky"? Why come up with an arbitrary word rather than just saying "this thing is the same color as the sky" In a strange way this is like the perfect post that encapsulates what I talk about when I say that ignorance of etymology has had severe consequences. And secondarily that the lack of recognition of the importance of etymology was probably one of the earliest examples of a new technology (the English language) creating new "problems" (words and their origins being not obviously connected... which is a complicated idea to grasp) and not understanding and addressing that has had some severe ramifications, far down the line. This is very related, though the dots between are blurry, to the cult of anti-intellectualism. To many, this post is a stupid question. Etymology should replace grammar and spelling. Grammar and spelling are important because standardization are important, but not teaching etymology whatsoever is sort of relative to how many people don't understand Nature at a fundamental level. Like how when I worked in a National Park the rangers would tell anecdotes about how people would ask where the animals were locked up at night. This is also related to the consequent problems from the extreme hyper-specialization and categorization of education (& everything else). It isn't so severe when it comes to history & english (lit)... but I think the separation of math and science is fundamentally stupid Everywhere you look the problems can all be traced back to some sort of fundamental error that can be understood metaphorically by the phrase "all rectangles are squares, but not all squares are rectangles" en.wikiquote.org/wiki/William_Whewell#Respecting_the_Language_of_Science
Considered to be a stunning upset by most of the NBA world, the Detroit Pistons managed to defeat the Lakers with imposing defense.[16] Defensively clamping down on everyone but Bryant and O'Neal, the Pistons managed to hold everyone else to a total of 16 points. O'Neal recorded 34 points and 11 rebounds for the Lakers. The Pistons trailed the Lakers 41–40 at halftime, but by the fourth quarter the Pistons had opened up a 13-point lead; they would not trail for the rest of the game. The Pistons outscored the Lakers 47 to 34 in the 2nd half as they got the road win in Los Angeles.[17] Chauncey Billups recorded 22 points, 4 assists, and 3 steals to fuel his team towards the win.
The preference between dogs and cats (or I guess other animals) is, I think, probably one of the best and least potentially discriminatory (& therefore, eventually harmful) ways to explain a theory of personality differences. It removes the nonsense about superficial background traits and explains things in a way that is based on 1. preference and therefore choice 2. still rooted in the various archetypical human personality characteristics This is the logic behind ye olde childruns storeys that always used animals Culturally we've been doing everything backwards and wondering why it's so much more difficult to swim than our ancestors had it. Blaming that on the technology we have. When it's like no, we're just swimming against the current, which is stupid. Especially when we're like using our technology to make the current faster when what we're supposed to do is get on the damn boat. The only reason we need to be swimming is for pleasure or to maintain our health.
I'm making assumptions here but I think this, which I've seen very similar on numerous other websites, is a consequence of the abuse of intrusive advertisements and tracking technology which kind of has handicapped the Internet and web browsers. Probably the most real world example I've ever seen of "this is why we can't have nice things". This is also why extremely centralized power - unless that power is strictly regulated to ensure fairness and prevent abuse of peoples rights - causes problems. If that weren't a thing, or if it were appropriately managed, none of this would have happened. But instead, because it did, now the websites and businesses that try to do things the right way are increasingly forced to ramp up their use of ads shown to the people not using adblockers, to make up for the people that are blocking them, and for the websites that realized it's better to try to solve a problem than continue stacking shit on a fundamentally broken foundation, they do things like what Wikipedia has. But nobody is happy, everyone has a worse experience, and yes the businesses even make less money. But for a short time, there was a lot of value generated for some shareholders.
Right but "open source", understood intuitively and semantically should refer to information being 100% open which includes the who that you are. Unfortunately due to the way that the Internet is, that is and can be very dangerous. However, because, as you stated, "platforms have a responsibility to be good stewards of personal data", that is both the cause of and solution to these problems. I tell... whatever platform who I am, they don't tell other people, they vouch that irrelevantusername24 is a credible person to be contributing to the source code of whatever application that is used by billions of people. Simple. All it requires is for people to have the bare minimum level of trust in some platform provider. Which unfortunately for the major platform providers, particularly the ones who kind of did this already without asking if they could or should and then also violated the trust by [doing the exact thing people were worried they would do](https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/1tj8jd9/google_publishes_exploit_code_threatening/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) (looking at you Android and Google and Chromium and Palantir), once trust is broken it probably isn't really repairable for 99.99% of people. It has to be replaced with a different provider. Enter stage left "AI" edit: meanwhile, the appropriate and more trustworthy platforms/organizations/groups/people have been standing over at stage right quietly waiting for people to realize what has happened and what should have happened. I am referring to, of course, the legitimate and more trustworthy Journalists and publishing/news companies or for the adventurous and more tech minded folks, of course, Mozilla. Hell, I even think Microsoft ain't so bad. But google and zuckbook done fucked all the way up, for the last time, as I have repeatedly explained. Because you get once
https://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hinton/absps/dh93.pdf This paper shows how to create a Q-learning managerial hierarchy in which high level managers learn how to set tasks to their sub-managers who, in turn, learn how to satisfy them. Sub-managers need not initially understand their managers’ com- mands. They simply learn to maximise their reinforcement in the context of the current command.
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1tj0h6y/comment/omy8yjm/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button https://mises.org/power-market/why-stable-systems-fail-illusion-institutional-control https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/after-closure https://mises.org/mises-wire/lines-we-thought-machines-wouldnt-cross It turns out people who actually understand philosophy have been right all along, or at least more right than the frauds who have effectively used money to self-appoint themselves --- Also don't forget how, in reaction to the 2008 crash (which was caused by the same thing that caused literally all prior crashes) instead of doing what made sense, they did the exact opposite. And then, one of the few things they did which did make sense - [zero percent interest rates](https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/keynes/general-theory/ch12.htm) (see: euthanizing the rentiers) - they basically did the only possible thing that would make that not make any sense, which is... like it isn't even coherently explainable. An economic system with a zero percent interest rate is exactly the opposite of what they did, the only reason what they did was possible is because the entire thing is completely detached from reality
https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/1tf9pko/comment/om8o5ep/ Maybe people are starting to realize that what numerous highly respected people from various backgrounds and eras said was true: when it comes to "social" things, the data can explain what happened but it will never help to predict what will happen. Confusing the two, and making claims about what will happen is almost sure to fuck everything up because if there's one thing that is almost unchanged throughout all human history, it's that humans do not like being told what they are going to do and we will actively harm ourselves and those around us to prove that prediction wrong. You can disagree, but you're wrong
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/William_Whewell#Respecting_the_Language_of_Science
Even if we grant that luck is to blame for the unequal distribution of property and wealth, it does not follow that the force of the state ought to be used to expropriate it. Again, David Gordon writes, “Even if you do not morally deserve to profit from your natural talents, you are entitled to your superior wealth and income, so long as you obtain these through a just system of property acquisition and transfer.”
Even if a desirable outcome can be attributed to luck or chance—in part or in whole—that does not mean that the outcome is unjust. Since luck—to the extent that such a thing truly exists—cannot be measured or controlled, and since diversity and inequality are natural realities and fundamental to human nature, the focus should be on whether property has been legitimately acquired through production or exchange.