@The_Nybbler's banner p

The_Nybbler

If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.

8 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

				

User ID: 174

The_Nybbler

If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.

8 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 21:42:16 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 174

The stuff in 30 Rock was inside baseball, nothing to do with the average person.

But your complaint seems different to @SubstantialFrivolity 's you seem to think your previous place's management wasn't pushing the tools enough, at least to the people provisioning them.]

It's not that they weren't pushing them, but that they were simultaneously pushing and crippling them.

Last place I worked, they insisted we use AI to do something. The tools had all sorts of claimed cool features... half of which didn't work at all, most of what remained were locked down due to various security policies, and the rest of which required interaction with someone to get permission to use. Said someone was naturally a bottleneck. I have no doubt that people using the tools on their own (and if with work stuff, against the explicit directive of management) had a better experience, but I expect it's likely true that more experienced developers are less willing to do that. More to lose and more experience with getting nothing but blame for violating policy to get the job done.

What would it take for you to believe that the managers have actually done some reasoning here?

LOL, as a career-long IC, "A goddamned miracle" is what it would take.

I suspect a good deal of manipulation -- try to drive down the price to get in lower. We saw similar articles right before Nvidia released its last set of results.

Doesn't mean it's not true, it just means I don't believe these people have any real insight or information.

If you're the kind of black man who wants to do whatever, the cost of getting shot dead by police while unarmed is extremely high.

The chance of a black man getting shot dead by police is higher than that of a white man or black woman, but it is still extremely small -- certainly smaller than the chance of having your kids taken away by CPS.

Might have been, but class consciousness has been part of the human experience for a long time, so it could have been just that with a racial class marker.

Well, and yet none of the other countries with more broad-based usage of public transport physically segregate minority riders. If you want to argue that the US is unique because segregated seating became a civil rights issue and this resulted in an overcorrection preventing more justified action against minorities on public transport

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Though obviously it wasn't just segregated seating; it was segregated everything, voting rights, etc.

If you want to argue that the US is unique because segregated seating became a civil rights issue and this resulted in an overcorrection preventing more justified action against minorities on public transport, then it seems as fair to say that "Rosa Parks made public transport a last resort option" as it is to go one step up the causal chain and say "segregation made public transport a last resort option".

No, because that's attributing actions done by the civil rights activists (enshrining black people as a privileged group) to actions done by their opponents. It's basically the bully's "Look what you made me do".

Sure, but they were segregationists; it wasn't about crime.

The problem is you're arguing against a real-life Pascal's Wager, or at least Pascal's Mugging. If you're the kind of parent who wants to buck CPS so your kids can have a better life, the cost of having your kids taken away from you is extremely high. The cost of having to stop doing it (that is, comply with "reasonable requests to stop") under (individual, not general) threat of having the kids taken away is also high. If you want good parents to find it reasonable to parent their own kids less strictly, then the chance of that has to be infinitesimal, not merely a few percent or tenths of a percent.

Waitress is a mostly female job in the US, but they aren't selected for attractiveness.

Depends on where you go. It's no coincidence there aren't any fat ugly waitresses at good restaurants. (Nor fat ugly waiters) They're not solely selected for attractiveness, but they're definitely selected for it.

In the better Red Tribe schools, of course. In Blue Tribe schools, maybe but not because of anything they learned in schools (maybe videogames). In underclass schools, oh yes, definitely, it's of practical importance.

It's kinda connected. The particular regulation isn't, but the practice that ultimately developed that having and enforcing a policy of removing disruptive people who are minority members would result in painful legal action whereas just letting shit happen wouldn't, was.

Because it didn't really have consequences last time. MLK Jr. spent maybe a few weeks in jail, total, right? Civil disobedience in the US wasn't like in South Africa where they actually imprisoned Mandela for a long time -- it was just a show.

it was only when the real holes in the story became too big to ignore

And that only happened because a cranky old white guy at the Washington Post was willing to call BS.

You know who WAS able to produce the dress? Monica Lewinsky.

The statute of limitations has run.

The fact that the Supreme Court can lay down very clear precedent and lower courts are free to plug their ears and say "lalala I can't hear you" is bordering on a constitutional crisis.

It's only a crisis if the Supreme Court does not yield, and they have.

It just means the Second Amendment has been replaced with the anti-Second Amendment: "None of your other rights apply when guns are involved".

I believe the standard darwinian playbook is that you draw the line so it encompasses the cases that support the things you are trying to prove, and does not encompass cases which do not. And the line applies only in the instant discussion and not to any other discussions involving the same evidence.

I describe our current situation as a K-selection spiral. We put a lot of effort into protect and raising each individual child, which results in fewer children. Fewer children results in making each child more precious, and thus demanding of more effort to protect and raise, etc.

Does such a person exist in reality, or is this a hypothetical?

Caster Semanya comes close, but does not have ovaries. I'm not aware of an 46,XY DSD condition which results in ovary development -- all I know of result in either testes (as with 5-alpha reductase deficiency, which Semanya has) or non-functional undifferentiated gonads.

Doesn't matter, though; those are intersex conditions, and are rare enough to simply be taken as exceptional cases. That there are a few edge cases that blur the lines doesn't mean the lines don't exist.

Sorry, as @gattsuru has been pointing out with gun cases, precedents only apply when the left wants them to apply. Lawrence was about people higher on the progressive stack, so does not apply here.

And Roddenberry was definitely doing '60s Cold War analogies.

Personally I offer nothing. But there are alternatives to the Calvinist ideal that one should be suffering all the time; hedonism and epicureanism are diametrically opposed, for instance.

It's fairly easy to find references in Google Books both ways in the first half of the 20th century, though the only non-fictional contemporary one with an opinion I find asserts that blue is for boys and pink is for girls. This is post-Victorian (and American, besides).

I find nothing from the Victorian era, the only thing I find before the 20th century is this 1833 work, which also asserts that "pink is for girls".

I'm surprised by the photo. Acid attack to me would indicate foreign Muslim (some form of brown), not probably-domestic black.