@rallycar-jepsen's banner p

rallycar-jepsen


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 19:47:51 UTC

				

User ID: 694

rallycar-jepsen


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 19:47:51 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 694

It depends on how intermixed they are, first of all, but anyone who has been ethnically distinct for three generations in America gets little sympathy from me and can be deported to where their grandfathers came from.

Not to tread old ground here, but I once again find myself curious about the tricky edge case of the old-stock American black.

(I'll take the former Georgia colonial territory circa the 1770s if you're offering it though.)

Well, I ended up taking the test three times.

The first run through was entirely vibes-based and I tried to really weigh out what felt like a triple-immoral vs. a double-immoral vs. a single-immoral, and vice-versa, usually trying to pick a direction one way or the other. This one was also probably the most influenced by the order I got served the questions in, because I think I got less decisive over the course of it.

That run matched me to Left-Liberal:

  • Care - 83%
  • Fairness - 67%
  • Loyalty - 36%
  • Authority - 28%
  • Purity - 17%
  • Liberty - 64%

The second run through I tried to keep with a strong preference for "neutral/not applicable" and only give any affirmative push either way if something about the situation particularly moved me strongly.

That run also matched me to Left-Liberal:

  • Care - 63%
  • Fairness - 58%
  • Loyalty - 31%
  • Authority - 28%
  • Purity - 31%
  • Liberty - 58%

For the third run I went maximalist and selected (three thumbs up) if I would fight for someone's right to not face legal consequences for the action, (three thumbs down) if I would fight for the threat of legal consequences to be imposed on someone for the action, and (neutral) in all other cases.

That run matched me to Libertarian:

  • Care - 33%
  • Fairness - 50%
  • Loyalty - 8%
  • Authority - 0%
  • Purity - 0%
  • Liberty - 83%

To me the scale itself is a little confusing. I can get an intuitive sense of what three different levels of morally wrong should feel like. But, I had trouble imagining what it means for something to be a little morally okay, quite a bit morally okay but not fully, or extremely morally okay.

I didn't interpret any of the options as communicating "this is a morally good action" so I wasn't really confident about my choices on that side of the scale.

In all three attempts I ended up giving a lot of "this is morally okay" answers to a lot of actions that would absolutely negatively impact the way I thought about a friend, colleague or stranger if I knew that they had done the action. I don't know if that means I've missed the point of the exercise or not.

(Sorry for the deletion of the previous iteration of this comment, I'm on mobile and replied as a top level instead of a comment accidentally.)

Well, this isn't that, but ... I offer it to you in its absence.

I expected to fall farther to the right than I actually ended up, although I suspect I'm still farther to the right than most people close to me would figure. I think that's probably common. I went on to take her actual survey, I found it interesting. I also read several of her write-ups about her insights about the data on her substack.

I do think you should probably look at the "past 4" section before being confident about telling people you're in there.

An opportunity to be a datapoint? Let me at it!

Extraversion - 29th p.

Emotional Stability - 81st p.

Agreeableness - 40th p.

Conscientiousness - 18th p.

Intellect/Imagination - 80th p.

It pretty much comports exactly with how I understand myself and so isn't offering me any fresh or striking insights, unfortunately, but what can I really expect from a 50-question personality test?

(I do think 'Openness to Experience' is a better label for their Factor V though - I don't know that I would consider myself in the 80th percentile of 'intellect', or if I were to, it wouldn't be based on anything this test asked me.)

That makes me curious though, has anybody here ever gotten a result from a test like this that's very surprising or counterintuitive, in a way that offered you some grain of insight or cause for reflection?

edit: Oh cool, several responders here did get such a result. Interesting!

/images/1694614151883709.webp

I'm sorry in advance that I don't have anything more interesting to respond with here, but I just wanted to say this is a good reply and I'm glad you replied. I actually think most of your intuitions here are basically directionally correct and I share a lot of your frustrations at a lot of the current conventions surrounding gender identity. As you say, much of it is, at best, not useful for human connection, and at worst, detrimental to it. Maybe I'll write more deeply on it here someday.

He/they user here, it just means either pronoun set is fine. "She/they" is just shorthand for "She/her/hers or they/them/theirs", usually in the sense of "She/her/hers or they/them/theirs, dealer's choice."

If they're anything like me, it's probably because they honestly consider themself nonbinary but they aren't visually readable as gender-nonconforming, have a deferential/non-confrontational habit, don't find absolute pronoun correctness a particularly critical part of life, and/or are averse to policing other peoples' language on principle.

That said, there also do exist a (probably small, but memorable) set of people who will see "She/they" in a bio and do their damnedest to rotate between the two mid-sentence like "She felt their day was going exactly as she hoped it would when they walked out of her door" which is absolutely alien to me and I cannot fathom wanting that or wanting to participate in that. I have to wonder whether that's actually what anyone is truly asking for or if it's just misinterpretation all the way down and nobody in-ranks wants to ask or clarify.

Even when people ask for "any pronouns" (which ... I have a personal and probably irrational aversion to) I always assume what they mean is "pick one set, whichever, and then use that one" not "all text and speech referring to me must be indecipherable".

I do think most people who do it just use "She/they" or "He/they" to mean "Use whichever of these causes the least friction for you, neither one bothers me."

It at least definitely never means "She walked they dog in she front yard."

I've been very loosely intrigued by the advent of phone-based lidar systems like the one that's apparently now included in modern iPhones. Do you (or anyone else) have experience using these lower-end lidar systems? How big is the gap between that system and the next highest price tier of specialized lidar equipment for a casual user who is not surveying professionally?

We have a small (2-3 acre) rural property that's very non-uniform in shape, elevation, orientation of structures, etc ... is it within the realm of possibility that I could use one of the lower-end iPhone systems, paired with e.g. a smaller DJI flight-programmable quad drone, and wind up with a scan that, if not inch-accurate, would be broadly useful for planning or visualizing new constructions or modifications to existing ones? (I have the 3D/CAD experience to get the rest of the way once I have a point cloud.)

I have the impression that even the low-end lidar might be more dimensionally accurate than doing a traditional, camera-based photogrammetry session with, say, the same iPhone + drone setup. Is this correct?

A reasonably-accurate scan of our property and the ability to do it for others would be helpful and fascinating, but not five-figures helpful or fascinating. Maybe four figures if the first figure is a 1 and if it's also equipment I can do aerial photography with. Depending on how usable the scans are at what scales, I could see myself getting into scanning for all types of projects of smaller scope once I've got the equipment.

For something as large as a scan of the property, though, would I be better off trying to find someone locally who I could hire to do it once with very good equipment?

I'm neutral on the current image being the favicon or not, but I will say I do like it as the site's header image, especially with the current header font and style.

(It's a subjective aesthetic feeling so I'd be hard-pressed to explain why. To me it's a nice look. It feels stately and sharp but modest and grounded. 100% subjective here.)

I had this same thing happen to me just now with a reply to a comment of mine in a different thread. It also appeared to have just turned 24h old when I got the notification for it, and I'm also almost certain I could not see it before that.

Seconding 5434a at not understanding the sublimation bit, but a couple of weeks ago I was driving to work in the morning alone on a dark country road listening to '100 Years' by Five for Fighting (2003) and some flood gate just unlatched in my brain and I spent the remaining 15 minutes of my commute just absolutely emphatically sobbing, laughing, profoundly sad and terribly grateful to be alive, struck by the absurdity of the experience.

This was I think the third time this 19 year old #28 US Billboard Hot 100 Single soft rock ballad has flipped that exact switch for me while driving alone, over the course of the last probably 6 months. Always catches me on normal ass days.

No new information to add here, just thanking you for the helpful response. I think I'm going to dive a little deeper into the world of photogrammetry.

... You didn't happen to finish the story, did you?

This premise is ... fascinating.

It's actually reassuring that I'm not the only one confused about that! Not that I'm assigning any particular positive or negative valence to it ... they seem like a lively bunch ... I just wouldn't have guessed.

Does it have to do with us building the site out of their codebase or is the relationship an old one that I've just never noticed?