nacho's recent activity
-
Comment on How makers of nonconsensual AI porn make a living on Patreon in ~tech
-
Comment on Those who journal, how do you do so authentically? (How to stop “self-editing” or “censoring” yourself and your thoughts?) in ~health.mental
nacho LinkI think you just have to do it, thought by thought, gradually opening up to your journal. And I think the best way to be sure that you can write whatever you want is to ensure that you've got...I think you just have to do it, thought by thought, gradually opening up to your journal.
And I think the best way to be sure that you can write whatever you want is to ensure that you've got proper encryption/password protection so that no matter what happens to you (like dying or whatever), these things cannot be made public about you in the future.
When I write to write, I write quickly. There's no reason why you should be stopping to think. The words should be coming as quickly as your fingers can type because we all think more quickly than we type. If it's disjointed, so be it.
Once the words start flowing, I find I don't edit or filter myself, or think about repeated words, clumsy sentences, all sorts of editing. That can all be done later. Don't correct spelling. Don't correct grammar, just write.
Slow writers are those who cannot put a first draft on the page because they want to write a perfect final draft instantly. I can always go back to edit later, not sentence by sentence, but when I've put everything I need on the page first.
If time's a concern: Put down keywords in incomplete sentences so you can recreate your thoughts later if you want to engage with your own journaling. Some journals aren't meant to be read, not even by future you but are just about processing thoughts through the process of journaling. You can always delete stuff unread later.
-
Comment on US official says Chinese seizure of TSMC in Taiwan would be 'absolutely devastating' in ~tech
nacho Link ParentSorry for the mistake. Taiwan is seemingly offshoring, not outsourcing, its main product. The security concerns and geopolitical impact is the same. You're completely right that there are...Sorry for the mistake. Taiwan is seemingly offshoring, not outsourcing, its main product.
The security concerns and geopolitical impact is the same. You're completely right that there are differences between the two, but they're secondary in this case.
As the visits of senior US officials has shown (like Pelosi), the stakes are much higher with Taiwan than South Korea or Japan due to the China/Taiwan-relationship.
-
Comment on Switzerland's Nemo wins Eurovision as UK comes 18th in ~music
nacho LinkNorway beating its own record: Now last in the Eurovision final a record 12 times!Norway beating its own record: Now last in the Eurovision final a record 12 times!
-
Comment on US official says Chinese seizure of TSMC in Taiwan would be 'absolutely devastating' in ~tech
nacho (edited )Link ParentAs it is right now, Taiwan has leverage over the US. Approaching 2030, when TSMC supposedly has 2-nanometer chip production in the US, the security guarantees in the South China Sea seem way less...As it is right now, Taiwan has leverage over the US.
Approaching 2030, when TSMC supposedly has 2-nanometer chip production in the US, the security guarantees in the South China Sea seem way less important to the US.
How will Taiwan continue to have leverage?
It's exactly like you say: You don't outsource your main product. Why's Taiwan seemingly
outsourcingoffshoring its main product?US de-risking seems to have come well under way, with the first fab opening next year, having gone through construction for quite some time.
-
Comment on Fast-growing asparagus once flourished on California farms. Why is it disappearing? in ~food
nacho LinkI was under the belief that asparagus harvesting robots have been a thing for at least 5 years, probably more. Farming is a cut-throat business that requires huge investment when there's...I was under the belief that asparagus harvesting robots have been a thing for at least 5 years, probably more.
Farming is a cut-throat business that requires huge investment when there's technology change. Incumbents that changed tech in the not too distant past are therefore often at a disadvantage since their previous-generation stuff is still being paid off.
I expect there'll be a ton fewer jobs in the fields over the next few years. And way more technology.
-
Comment on My not so nice thoughts on Battlestar Galactica in ~tv
nacho Link ParentBattlestar Galactica and Firefly revolutionized sci-fi in 2003-2004. I mean, this is at the same time as The King of Queens, Frasier, Will & Grace, ER and Friends were ratings winners. Those shows...Battlestar Galactica and Firefly revolutionized sci-fi in 2003-2004.
I mean, this is at the same time as The King of Queens, Frasier, Will & Grace, ER and Friends were ratings winners. Those shows all feel extremely outdated today too.
Didn't JAG have high ratings around this time or slightly before?
-
Comment on Illinois Democrats speedily change candidate law; Republicans call measure ‘election interference,' "undemocratic" in ~news
nacho Link ParentI think the idea goes something like: Anyone should be able to stand for election There should be as few limitations as possible for this Traditionally, many don't want political parties...I think the idea goes something like:
- Anyone should be able to stand for election
- There should be as few limitations as possible for this
- Traditionally, many don't want political parties acknowledged/empowered through election laws
- Being enacted so close to this autumn's election, one couldn't plan for this requirement, so it's an unfair "gotcha" for the 2024 elections, specifically.
Illinois is an "open" primary state, so non-party members can essentially try to nominate a candidate for a party that the party democracy itself doesn't want, which creates some legitimate reasons to be able to put your name to the ballot irrespective of the results of the primary.
-
Comment on AI, automation, and inequality — how do we reach utopia? in ~talk
nacho Link ParentGreat comment! I'd also add that as technology advances, demands for increase in standard of living weigh heavily. The overuse of the Earth's resources won't stop unless that mindset collectively...Great comment!
I'd also add that as technology advances, demands for increase in standard of living weigh heavily.
The overuse of the Earth's resources won't stop unless that mindset collectively changes.
That'd take a lot, considering it isn't happening at scale despite the climate crisis and the nature crisis the UN has described in frank and dire terms.
-
Comment on Google lays off hundreds of ‘Core’ employees, moves some positions to India and Mexico in ~tech
nacho Link ParentThere's a lot to unpack in your comment. Here are two major topics: Several systems to balance power between employees and employers exist. One of the most successful ones specifically deals with...There's a lot to unpack in your comment. Here are two major topics:
- Several systems to balance power between employees and employers exist. One of the most successful ones specifically deals with introducing the third party formally: government. This is the basis of the Nordic model.
- Being public-run doesn't ensure employer rights. Quite the contrary. Some of the least secure jobs are in the public sector because they rely on budgets being passed right before they finance the future livelihoods of workers.
The Tripartite system or Nordic Model
What regulation would you introduce that would permanently resolve the tension between the worker who needs to maintain a certain standard of living, and the owner(capitalist) who wants to maximize their profit?
The Nordic model, or tripartite system. The tension is resolved through regular, regulated and continuous negotiations between the three parties in the employment sector.
The model acknowledges that government and regulations are foundational issues for resolving the tension between employers/owners and employees/workers.
As such, government is actively introduced into the Nordic model in wage negotiations, labor negotiations, pension reform and pension systems, vacation rights and on and on.
As worker organizations and employer organizations are actively part of the negotiations, they need to make things work too. They have to be party to talks as they're responsible to society for regulation, for workable rules, for avoiding hurting third parties with damaging strikes/lockouts, for losing out to international competition because working conditions are too expensive or too bad to recruit the workers needed.
As government and the public is a huge employer, they are also forced into the system to take care of public workers so they retain rights voters otherwise wouldn't grant them (who doesn't want public services to be as cheap as possible in ways that force unreasonable working conditions on public workers to have more tax-money to fund other services or cut taxes?)
I highly, highly encourage reading this report from 2015 that outlines in detail how and why this system works and why this leads the Nordic countries to have some of the very best working conditions in the world, while also having highly, highly profitable companies on the cutting edge in many industries:
https://www.fafo.no/index.php?option=com_zoo&task=item&item_id=7253&Itemid=923&lang=nb
Here's a "Nordic Model for dummies" that gives a good overview:( PDF-warning) https://samak.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/THE_NORDIC_MODEL_FOR_DUMMIES.pdf
So in short: the working conditions do not have anything to do with capitalism being the economic system. It has everything to do with regulation.
I want to highlight that the Nordic (tripartite) model is only one of many successful models that don't leave a huge power imbalance in favor of owners/employers at the expense of employees.
The US is one of the largest failures here, with the fewest protections for workers. Many Americans simply cannot envision a regulated, capitalist society and so they blame their failings of regulation on capitalism.
Public-run doesn't ensure worker rights
Many have things backwards: Often it's public workers that have the most pressure from their employers in terms of efficiency, poor working conditions and having little impact on their work lives.
Public budgets mean decisions made often late in December leave those working on public projects or in public functions without jobs on January 1st.
Socialist and communist systems have been places where some of the most ruthless employee conditions have been normal.
What does this tell us?
As stated in my previous comment: The issue isn't the economic system. The issue is labor regulation and an imbalance of labor rights.
Many capitalist systems have regulations that crush efficient organization of labor into unions, while the same regulations leave owners/employers empowered. Many people do not recognize the importance of being in a union.
It's obvious that company leadership stands to gain when they can set employees up against each other to divide and conquer as one single, strong unity, while workers fight among themselvs for their own personal goods. Standing together, workers are empowered to get their fair share of earnings.
Or these same workers, with proper regulations, can strike in ways that in the extreme can bankrupt their employer. Everyone's in the same boat, so everyone is responsible for the ship not sinking.
These two things leave us where we started: at the assertions I made in my previous comment.
-
Comment on Google lays off hundreds of ‘Core’ employees, moves some positions to India and Mexico in ~tech
nacho Link ParentHow would livelihoods be less at risk "without capitalism"? Answer: They wouldn't be. Livelihoods being unreasonably at risk stems from insufficient labor regulation in a host of areas. Employers,...How would livelihoods be less at risk "without capitalism"?
Answer: They wouldn't be.
Livelihoods being unreasonably at risk stems from insufficient labor regulation in a host of areas. Employers, irrespective of whether they're public, private, in competitive sectors or non-profit areas all have the same problems.
In the US, at will employment and other employer rights for firing people willy-nilly have nothing to do with capitalism. It has to do with poor regulation, a flawed democracy and an electorate that collectively elects politicians with deficient values.
The root cause here is not the economic system.
Changing the economic system will not fix the core issue, or lack of labor rights for anyone.
-
Comment on Google lays off hundreds of ‘Core’ employees, moves some positions to India and Mexico in ~tech
nacho Link ParentI think that line of argument proves too much: There are too many companies that don't cannibalize, do the mass layoffs and so on, for the sake of medium- and long-term profits to sensibly ascribe...I think that line of argument proves too much: There are too many companies that don't cannibalize, do the mass layoffs and so on, for the sake of medium- and long-term profits to sensibly ascribe this behavior as a failure of "capitalist growth mentality".
Or that the behavior necessarily follows from the current state of affairs.
It's clearly at least in part an issue of lawmakers not doing their jobs and creating sensible regulations of employment, taxation and so on.
That's demonstrably the case. Letting elected politicians off the hook because of irresponsible business legislation is exactly what both businesses and politicians want. Because then we're sure the regulations won't change, and folks will just be angry in the future, while the right pockets get stuffed.
I'm equally sure that blaming "capitalism" for the failures of our politicians means losing a huge part of the audience/electorate we need on board to have the politicians make the needed changes.
-
Comment on Case before Norway's Supreme Court claims that depriving sex offender of a Snapchat account is unlawful under the European Convention on Human Rights in ~tech
nacho Link ParentI just hope the courts draw up some sensible lines. There are instances of people making thousands of fake facebook-profiles to scam people selling items they don't own. These accounts get banned...I just hope the courts draw up some sensible lines.
There are instances of people making thousands of fake facebook-profiles to scam people selling items they don't own. These accounts get banned within hours, according to court rulings.
At what point do you stop a sexual abuser from accessing Snapchat if that's where they're performing the crime, or stop them from being allowed to access Facebook if they scam scores of people there?
Norwegian police stopped using Twitter to exclusively share information some time back.
Your point holds true for various police accounts on Snapchat, Facebook etc, but after Musk's twitter shenanigans, Norwegian police actually made their own platform for police related announcements: politiloggen
-
Comment on Making tough decisions: what’s your go-to approach? in ~talk
nacho LinkI talk one or more of the people I trust the most to get external input. I'm the one who has to make the decision. I'm also the one who has to be comfortable knowing that with the information...I talk one or more of the people I trust the most to get external input.
I'm the one who has to make the decision.
I'm also the one who has to be comfortable knowing that with the information available to me, I made the best decision I could, however things turn out.
-
Comment on Looking for help scraping and deleting a Reddit account in ~comp
nacho LinkA lot of old online content has been indexed by many different public "archive"-services of various kinds. The way to ensure that people don't find the actual pieces of content you don't want...A lot of old online content has been indexed by many different public "archive"-services of various kinds.
The way to ensure that people don't find the actual pieces of content you don't want online is to make un-indexing requests to online search engines, not to have the content scrubbed from the original site submitted to.
My experience with search engines is that they often remove the content from results, irrespective of source. Therefore the indexes don't appear in search results either. If someone were to go to an index site directly, they might find stuff, but their searches are often poor, and a lot fewer people will check those places as compared to just googling someone as part of due diligence for whatever they're trying to ever-so-slightly background check me for.
That's often quite a bit of work, so you'll have to be selective about what things you actually want to rid yourself of.
-
Comment on US House approves $95 billion aid bill for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan (gifted link) in ~news
nacho Link ParentI'm open to an argument that the Republicans played chicken, and in the end were the first to look away as Ukraine so desperately needs the aid. I think part of their thinking has to be how losing...I'm open to an argument that the Republicans played chicken, and in the end were the first to look away as Ukraine so desperately needs the aid. I think part of their thinking has to be how losing an issue it is if they're the ones who cause Ukraine to lose the war.
The politicking is happening behind closed doors, so we don't know what the calculus is, but I think you're totally right that the Republicans have egg on their face, irrespective of the exact reasons.
-
Comment on Indiana now has a religious right to abortion in ~health
nacho Link ParentWe'll see how that goes with the Arizona case, where the state supreme court upheld the "only to save a pregnant woman's life" abortion law from the 1860s. Then there's the Idaho case, where the...We'll see how that goes with the Arizona case, where the state supreme court upheld the "only to save a pregnant woman's life" abortion law from the 1860s.
Then there's the Idaho case, where the Supreme Court has a law where the only exceptions are life of the mother, molar or ectopic pregnancies, rape or incest.
-
Comment on NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism in ~news
nacho Link ParentNo. This is not about the paradox of tolerance or allowing those with junk views to have those views reach through in product to readers. News organizations are not and should not be microphone...No. This is not about the paradox of tolerance or allowing those with junk views to have those views reach through in product to readers. News organizations are not and should not be microphone stands for others, or to magnify the views of their journalists.
This is about involving people of certain views in ways in the news room so the editorial decision-makers manage to reach a huge portion of their audience effectively with real, substantive reporting that takes facts into account.
It's about having devil's advocates, about picking up trends that need to be debunked, ways in which the good arguments need to be framed to effectively reach those who need to hear those things the most.
And so on.
-
Comment on NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism in ~news
nacho Link ParentHolding that view, I'd be extremely worried if people of that party weren't represented in a newsroom. I'd view that as extremely, extremely dangerous. How else would I have any shot reaching all...one of them is a group of fascists actively trying to install a dictator
Holding that view, I'd be extremely worried if people of that party weren't represented in a newsroom. I'd view that as extremely, extremely dangerous.
How else would I have any shot reaching all those people with messed up political views, who're the ones that need to be reached by real journalism and news, than without people who share those views to speak up about the issues and the ways we should be writing to reach those people who hold debunked, junk political views and are willing to put force behind misplaced convictions?
Who can write stuff in a way that those of junk political views might actually listen to, to change minds, to hold their attention so it isn't spent on more dangerous reading/listening, or just propaganda rather than news?
Where are those people with bad views going to be edited and not get their material out without a layer of editing and control so the unfiltered garbage doesn't just get out?
How are you going to have the important conversations where opinions differ and are weighted against each other inside the newsroom without people with different views and experiences represented in that newsrooom?
Writing people off and just not wanting to deal with them is not a solution. It's irresponsibly feeding the problem so it festers, grows and these people become even more entrenched.
We need people who're preparing the time when these junk views are passé. We can't just murder these people, or shun them or lock them out of society for the rest of society to move on. The people of silly views now need to be rehabilitated. For society's sake.
-
Comment on NPR suspends veteran editor as it grapples with his public criticism in ~news
nacho Link ParentYou make an extremely important point: When you have a huge group of employees/ selected people who all share the same characteristic, whatever that may be, you'd almost certainly want your next...You make an extremely important point:
When you have a huge group of employees/ selected people who all share the same characteristic, whatever that may be, you'd almost certainly want your next person to add to that group to have a characteristic they don't.
Examples:
- A board contains 18 women and 0 men. You'd almost certainly want a man for your 19th person.
- No-one in your political reporting unit leans politically far left. You'd want someone with far-left views. You'd want them in every single discussion about politics in your political reporting unit for their political perspective.
- You don't have anyone who dropped out of college or never went to college in your cohort at work, even though you don't strictly need a university education to do the job we all do in the team. You'd almost certainly want to recruit someone without a college education next.
- You only have people who've grown up rurally in your farming business. You'd almost certainly want someone who's grown up in a city next on your team.
We're all products of a bunch of characteristics, beliefs and experiences. Many chosen, many not. We all bring a complete package. In recruitment and diversity, we want packages to cover all sorts of qualities we should have.
In a newsroom, you want varied folks, especially in just conveying whatever you like to all the people who don't share your points of reference, say a huge majority having certain political views. We cannot lay our biases at the door. Being aware of them is not enough.
Diversity is extremely diverse. It seems obvious NPR (and so many other organizations) are failing at diversity and that their products suffer in turn.
I think the tech platforms have manage to trick society to think that it's reasonable to run a massively profitable platform without sufficient employees to moderate the platform.
That's not how business in other areas are regulated. Regulation of online spaces is obviously required to avoid the breakdown of society. Regulation is not bad, regulation and public oversight are strengths when dealing with increasingly large, gigantic and global platform companies.
If myr site requires human pre-approval before any and all user-submitted content is published not to break serious laws, then maybe my platform needs to hire all those employees or shut down if I can't afford to.