I think this is a very useful framework for "choosing the right tool for the job". For me personally, there isn't much difference between the Chef's Hat and the Teacher's Hat; the way I make code presentable is the same…
> Self diagnosis is not reliable Professional diagnosis is not reliable either. ADHD and autism are often misdiagnosed as one-another, especially in girls. > If you don't have an official diagnosis you can't be certain…
Press X to not be violated
People can't just choose to stop feeling unsafe. Chronic stress causes brain damage and reduces tolerance to further stress. This is a fact. Calling people in this situation irrational accomplishes nothing.
Crime isn't the only thing that impacts people's health. - Difficulty getting insurance to see the doctor impacts peoples' safety and sense of safety. - Fear of gaps in insurance coverage keeps people in toxic jobs…
Why put "feeling unsafe" in scare quotes? There's a lot to feel unsafe about right now.
I can't imagine what it would be like to actually have to deal with the scenario you described.
This feels like a J-class SCP
They probably know that it doesn't hold water legally. The hope is to victim blame as much as possible so that fewer people sue them in the first place. The next step will be to "remind" people about the TOS that they…
Help us, European Union. You're our only hope.
I would love a search engine that only catalogs pages without ads.
Humans and AIs both evolve as the result of some iterations dying. In both cases, we tacitly erase the ones who don't make it (by framing the discussion around the successful, alive ones). The difference is that humans…
> The answer is either to educate the public about the value of public wealth... That's not a solution because the people in power materially gain by feigning ignorance. > Teachers are always going to lose out on that…
I didn't make it explicit, but the point was about where you draw the line. Obviously a software engineer has a lot more bargaining power, but anyone is paid less if they believe in their work because the desirability…
> Imagine that lot contains your home, one you've lived and loved for decades and raised your family in and you're rather fond of it. Just because an 8-plex goes up next door, shouldn't mean now you are forced out…
Does that logic still apply to teachers? How about public defenders? Food bank staff? Punishing people for believing in their work is called "exploitation".
Taking away land isn't the goal; it's just the logical consequence of making it prohibitively expensive to rent-seek. The problem goes away if you don't treat land ownership as a right. What is the advantage of letting…
> Who decides what they’re worth? The poster above you; they're the one who made an implicit claim about the value of software developers' work. You're welcome to disagree. Do you think everyone is paid fairly?
> I find it deeply troubling that so many people conflate “being smart” with “min-maxing labor and earning” And they're veeeery vocal other people trying to get something for nothing.
> So I feel like you just agreed with my premise, no? Maybe. I can't tell if we're talking past each other. > The value (and thus the tax) on my empty lot with nothing but dirt is going to be set by the tax of the…
> The LVT idea isn't really to tax the bare land, it is to tax it as if it was being used by the most financially productive way possible. Yes and no. You're not taxing the land as if it was bare or as if it was full;…
> Uh huh, so you’re taxing land based on some theoretical “highest and best use”? Someone has to eat the opportunity cost of sub-optimally used land. Would you rather it be corporations and house-flippers, or renters…
If tax is based on land improvement, a flat parking lot in a busy area is profitable, even if it doesn't provide optimal value to the community. The owner may wish to add some buildings to the lot, but land improvement…
I don't disagree that modern features can be useful, nor do I disagree that some modern cars do it right. I'm saying that one car making the user say "pretty please" before disabling a distraction is one too many.
This. Any friction between the user and controls that affect safety is a serious flaw. Old cars don't make me look at a screen to make the window less foggy.
I think this is a very useful framework for "choosing the right tool for the job". For me personally, there isn't much difference between the Chef's Hat and the Teacher's Hat; the way I make code presentable is the same…
> Self diagnosis is not reliable Professional diagnosis is not reliable either. ADHD and autism are often misdiagnosed as one-another, especially in girls. > If you don't have an official diagnosis you can't be certain…
Press X to not be violated
People can't just choose to stop feeling unsafe. Chronic stress causes brain damage and reduces tolerance to further stress. This is a fact. Calling people in this situation irrational accomplishes nothing.
Crime isn't the only thing that impacts people's health. - Difficulty getting insurance to see the doctor impacts peoples' safety and sense of safety. - Fear of gaps in insurance coverage keeps people in toxic jobs…
Why put "feeling unsafe" in scare quotes? There's a lot to feel unsafe about right now.
I can't imagine what it would be like to actually have to deal with the scenario you described.
This feels like a J-class SCP
They probably know that it doesn't hold water legally. The hope is to victim blame as much as possible so that fewer people sue them in the first place. The next step will be to "remind" people about the TOS that they…
Help us, European Union. You're our only hope.
I would love a search engine that only catalogs pages without ads.
Humans and AIs both evolve as the result of some iterations dying. In both cases, we tacitly erase the ones who don't make it (by framing the discussion around the successful, alive ones). The difference is that humans…
> The answer is either to educate the public about the value of public wealth... That's not a solution because the people in power materially gain by feigning ignorance. > Teachers are always going to lose out on that…
I didn't make it explicit, but the point was about where you draw the line. Obviously a software engineer has a lot more bargaining power, but anyone is paid less if they believe in their work because the desirability…
> Imagine that lot contains your home, one you've lived and loved for decades and raised your family in and you're rather fond of it. Just because an 8-plex goes up next door, shouldn't mean now you are forced out…
Does that logic still apply to teachers? How about public defenders? Food bank staff? Punishing people for believing in their work is called "exploitation".
Taking away land isn't the goal; it's just the logical consequence of making it prohibitively expensive to rent-seek. The problem goes away if you don't treat land ownership as a right. What is the advantage of letting…
> Who decides what they’re worth? The poster above you; they're the one who made an implicit claim about the value of software developers' work. You're welcome to disagree. Do you think everyone is paid fairly?
> I find it deeply troubling that so many people conflate “being smart” with “min-maxing labor and earning” And they're veeeery vocal other people trying to get something for nothing.
> So I feel like you just agreed with my premise, no? Maybe. I can't tell if we're talking past each other. > The value (and thus the tax) on my empty lot with nothing but dirt is going to be set by the tax of the…
> The LVT idea isn't really to tax the bare land, it is to tax it as if it was being used by the most financially productive way possible. Yes and no. You're not taxing the land as if it was bare or as if it was full;…
> Uh huh, so you’re taxing land based on some theoretical “highest and best use”? Someone has to eat the opportunity cost of sub-optimally used land. Would you rather it be corporations and house-flippers, or renters…
If tax is based on land improvement, a flat parking lot in a busy area is profitable, even if it doesn't provide optimal value to the community. The owner may wish to add some buildings to the lot, but land improvement…
I don't disagree that modern features can be useful, nor do I disagree that some modern cars do it right. I'm saying that one car making the user say "pretty please" before disabling a distraction is one too many.
This. Any friction between the user and controls that affect safety is a serious flaw. Old cars don't make me look at a screen to make the window less foggy.