25 principles often given up by content creators in order to pursue an audienece.
You won't believe number 7!
283 karma · joined August 21, 2016
You won't believe number 7!
Meatspace, to me, is a term that encapsulates the authenticity of being a blood and bone human being and all of the foibles that come with it. Cyberspace, at least so far as social media is concerned, is a perpetual performance where what matters is how strangers feel about you and how they feel about you is often indepedant of what you actually do in meatspace.
To me cyberspace shines with a much stronger contempt for humanity than meatspace. Meatspace simply demands you be the lump of meat that you are while cyberspace demands that you please a judgemental and often quarrelsome mob.
Everything about this "boom" from 2012 on was, from a market perspective, about as artificial as you could get. At least the events leading up to the .COM and '08 crash there weren't central banks openly putting their thumbs on the scales by being an active market paticipant buying debt securities, the quality of that debt be damned, and making price discovery next to impossible.
The lesson investors took from '08 and certainly from 2020 was that the powers that be will gladly use moral hazard to protect asset prices. Profits are privatized and losses are socialized.
In my case, I hate cutting people off because I know people can change. What I do to manage relationships is run a forgiving version of exponential backoff. Start off friendly and forgiving. If someone becomes transgressive, increase the latency between interactions. If the transgressions continue, double the latency. If bad interactions persist, the time latency can go on to months or even years which means you'll probably never interact with that person again. Conversely, if an interaction goes well, reduce the delay for when you're willing to meet again. E.g. say an irritating individual causes the latency to go to once a month. If you have an interaction that goes well then the latency drops to 2 weeks. If interactions continue to go well they drop further to say no latency, i.e. you're willing to meet this person whenever. Obviously it's not perfect but it suites my needs quite well.
I also found his chapter on "overfitting" excellent. I like to think of it as "smart person disease." Big idea is that having more data can actually hamper decision making instead of enhance it because you winde up solving the wrong problem.
Delegation is part of the job but you don't get to delegate consequential executive decisicions to something as capricious as an internet poll...
That didn't pan out too well either.
https://i.redd.it/manager-does-a-little-code-cleanup-v0-5cxg...
I've worked in the mental health field for years and when it comes to treating diseases like schiziphreina the go to model has been to give drugs to manage symptoms. There were a bunch of models for what _could_ be happening but there was no solid etiology for what is actually happening.
Gut inflamation along with a bunch of correlations with infections and autoimmune issues have been noted for years. Yet, there hasn't been a foundation setup to truly answer what _IS_ schizophrenia etiologically speaking.
Schiziphrenia is a heart-wrenching disease both for the people suffering from it and for their loved ones. Seeing papers like this give me tremendous hope.
:)
I'm only in my early 30's and share this sentiment already.
Tech sure moves fast...
If you're interested you can look up how macros work in Vim. You can automate entire sequences of key strokes which goes beyond 'find and replace'. It's awkward at first but after you master it it becomes second nature and feels like you're working at the speed of thought.
When I have to use an IDE I usually try and install a Vim plugin.
It's a very simple app and something you can play with during a break but if you can master the 'advanced' sections you will become proficient.
Keep at it! Vim's made me way more productive and saved me countless hours over the years.
https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1593673339826212864
Evidentally that doesn't work on celebrities.
Posting a swastika alone is not necessarilly a call to violence like posting a confederate flag or ACAB isn't always a call to violence.
It's been more than evident that the drivers Musk's policies on moderation are commercial and personal which is well within his right.
Others are pointing out the hypocrisy of him claiming that his motivations for setting policy have been a dedication to 'free speech absolutism' which is clearly not the case.
If yourself and others the moderation policy on Twitter was too oppressive to right wing views and are happy with this new direction all I can say is good for you. But you and those same other people should come out and expressly say that instead of getting on a high horse over "free speech absolutism" when thats clearly not what you're interested in.
I don't have a problem with Twitter banning hate symbols but I have a massive problem with the intellectual bankruptcy over this "free speech absolutism" horse shit.
Impossible to write off harrassment and doxxing to "It's just a website!"
Elon Musk lied when he said he's a "free speech absolutist".
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/ot...
Because some people do not give a fuck. We're talking about people who support valuation of assets based on speculation with no actual economic value while pumping out oceans of CO2 and wasting copious amounts of energy to have computers, to simplify a bit, guess a number somewhere between 0 and 2^255 for the privelege.
Seems on brand.
Agreed. But when people are incentivized to show outward indicators of certain emotions, people aren't particularly good mind readers which makes it hard to parse out fakers from the authentic, it leaves the door open for opportunism, smarm, passive aggression and a different flavor of toxicity.
The way I see it:
Authnetic and happy?
Fantastic!
Authentic and morose?
Not ideal but if the person makes positive contributions and can be trusted theres potential for value add.
Inauthentic with a sunny disposition?
This screams underhanded, manipulative and untrustworthy. Fuck off.
Makes me think of an adage from Warren Buffet.
"We look for intelligence, we look for initiative or energy, and we look for integrity. And if they don't have the latter, the first two will kill you, because if you're going to get someone without integrity, you want them lazy and dumb."
https://www.inc.com/marcel-schwantes/warren-buffett-hiring-t....
This is important.
I haven't watched cable news in years (maybe a decade now?) but still check in with long form journalism for in-depth exploration of a topic.
I think this right here is a source of all of the evil mentioned in the article:
https://fs.blog/narrative-fallacy/
I'm not always above creating narratives and cherry-picking information that feeds those narratives because, end of the day, Im human just like everybody else. But being aware of this and learning how to better catch yourself as you're doing it does make a massive difference. It also damned near forces you to try and look for information closer to the source.
(Try reading news sources in another language from another country and watch what happens. Ideally you wouldnt use Google Translate)
It's funny. I remember being young and being told not to do drugs to "escape reality". Escaping reality seems to be almost sacrosanct these days...
The difference is I felt guilty as hell when I sacricied things I could look forward to in my real life day for a one day 20 hour DOTA binge.
The greivance the author highlights in the article that Meta seems to paint a picture where the Metaverse is the only palatable escape from a cruel, indifferent world that has no place for you.
Me playing too much DOTA -> wasting time that couldve been put to better use making a better more fulfilling life for myself in exchange for a dopamine hit.
Me engaing with the Metaverse too much -> No such thing. You're real life is depressing, intractable and out of your control. This is the last place you'll be able to find any semblance of joy.
Thats not to say that any engagement with the Metaverse will be inherantly unhealthy. If Facebook's history of increasing user engagement with little to no scruples is any indication I don't blame people for being concerned about a dangerous flavor of escapism being promoted.
I consider myself a tradesman who, naively or not time will tell, leverages a rarified skill set at market rate trying to deliever value to clients as best as I can.
Millenial enough to have no expectations of a charmed future, despite earning an annual income in the top decile, but not jaded enough to put a price tag on my soul, principles nor well-being.
Huh. Today I learned I'm not one of the good ones.
Exactly! Thank you.
Simple explanations are usually far more useful than ideological and narrative driven ones.
Wrong.
This was a deliberate and planned response to protect their true stake holders from the liquidity crunch that COVID lockdowns almost unleashed. Asset owners. For all intents and purposes it worked extremelly well.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/blackrock-is-biggest-benefi...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/sergeiklebnikov/2022/02/11/two-...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/moneyshow/2020/02/25/moral-haza...
Nothing incompetent about it. This is moral hazard in action and has been the bull case for some time now. Fundamentals don't matter anymore because anytime the market gets rickety its been a safe bet that either the Fed will swoop in with more QE and low interest rates or the federal government will issue more bailouts.
Risk is socialized while gains are privatized.
Thanks for this.
"Meanwhile, journalists and federal health officials discovered several troubling lapses in the conduct of the study. For example, the researchers had earlier told the FDA they would tighten up the trial’s eligibility criteria, but they never followed through. When two patients suffered serious side effects, the scientists did not immediately inform the agency or put the study on hold as required. It turned out Jesse’s pretrial test results showed he had poor liver function, indicating he arguably shouldn’t have received the OTC gene injection.
But perhaps most damning were failures in the informed-consent process. Researchers hadn’t told Jesse about the earlier patients’ side effects or about two lab monkeys killed by high doses of adenoviruses. If he had been properly briefed about these previous issues, he might have dropped out of the study and still be alive today. Wilson was also accused of a conflict of interest: he had a stake in the company that owned the gene-transfer technology and stood to benefit if the trial succeeded.
...
The investigations drew attention to wider problems in oversight of gene-therapy experiments and human research generally. For example, the FDA and NIH revealed that 691 volunteers in gene-therapy experiments had either died or fallen ill in the seven years before Jesse’s death; only 39 of these incidents had been reported promptly as required. The agencies tightened monitoring of trials, increased inspections, and created a new system for reporting serious side effects, among other steps. Penn responded to the crisis by strengthening the institutional review boards that oversee its trials, putting in new protections for patients, and prohibiting researchers from having financial stakes in their trials."
Truly nothing new under the sun.
That's the sort of blood that writes regulations. Experimental medicine has a long, clumsy and cruel tradition.
I think the "go fast and break things" mindset is scarier here than the debates about whether or not we have the right to play God.