dorchadas

I used to use Shreddit and other tools and the same thing has happened. Even worse, they give me notifications if someone replies in a sub that didn't opt-in to archive mode (another dumb decision; should've been opt-out), but I can delete them.

They're quite regular - look at the Wikipedia page for Irish orthography to get a good set of rules.

I worry it's going soon after the IPO.

I'm leaning more and more towards this myself, except for the fact I hate the look of most of them, and love my traditional watches. Maybe I could just keep it in my pocket. But it's ideal for what I want - GPS, WhatsApp, telegram, Spotify.

This sounds so tempting. I really wish I could have a phone that does a few simple things: Maps, Spotify, WhatsApp, Telegram, GPS tracker for running. That's really all I want on my phone. Does the Nokia allow for all of those? If so, sounds like it might be time to ditch the iPhone. Doubly so if there's a dual sim model, though I can get by with just one and using my iPhone when visiting America.

Edit: Just checked, can't add WhatsApp, etc to it. sigh another potential option gone

That's not how I interpreted it at all. I interpreted him as basically saying meaningless pub banter is now killed entirely. Because someone is going to pull out their phone and check, and that ruins the train of thought and the conversation. It pulls everyone out of it. Not that he can't confidently bullshit.

Exactly. The instant someone turns to their phone to check something, it ruins the conversation completely. The whole point is the conversation, the banter, the talking; not on the factual accuracy of some trivial thing.

From what I understand, it's not passed yet. They've just reached a deal on the amendments that need to be added so it will be passed.

This is honestly what scares me the most. Our biases are built in to AI, but we pretend they're not. People will say "Well, it was the algorithm/AI, so we can't change it". Which is just awful and should scare the shit out of everyone. There was a book [0] written almost fifty years ago that predicted this. I still haven't read it, but really need to. The author claims it made him a pariah among other AI researchers at the time.

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_Power_and_Human_Reaso...

We're getting there already. I taught for years in a poorer, rural district in a southern State. It was quite bad about many couldn't perform outside a very basic level in those skills.

That's part of it, but it's not the entirety of it. Which, as a former secondary teacher and now university teacher, I would agree with. They found, for instance, that higher leisure phone use correlated with lower scores.

I also noticed that scores generally seemed to peak in 2012, right as smartphones started becoming super accessible for everyone and right around the time Instagram started to take off too.

Notice on the graph that the drop pretty much starts around 2012. Quite interesting, and it definitely probably needs to be investigated more. They also mention the correlation between lower scores and higher leisure phone use.

The dichotomy between 'philosophical' and 'religious' Daoism is ahistorical, and stems from the influence, especially, of the Jesuits. They were tied together and mixed together from the beginning, especially neidan traditions.

Yes, there's two words - but they were often used interchangeably.

Oh I forgot to mention Coutinho's An Introduction to Daoist Philosophies, which looks at the three early Daoist texts -- the Laozi, the Zhuangzi, and the Liezi. I haven't read it yet, but have heard decent things. He specifically works from a comparative perspective as well, which makes it more interesting.

Personally, if you're interested in the early 'philosophical' side (which I don't think can - or should - be disentangled from the 'religious' side; the separation of religion and philosophy is inherently a post-Enlightenment, Western phenomenon, and doesn't really apply outside that cultural situation), van Norden's chapters on the DDJ and the ZZ in his book I quoted from above are a good start. But there was a 'religious' tint to a lot of this, even very early on.

If you're more open to how the three strands ('religious', 'philosophical' and 'literary') of Daoism have merged and mingled throughout history, I really like Ronnie Littlejohn's Daoism: An Introduction published by I.B. Taurus. It's essentially an introductory textbook, but does a good job at showing how these things have always been interacting (indeed, there's quite possibly Nedian references in the DDJ/ZZ/LZ!) and that trying to separate them really isn't possible (indeed, as said, it's an inherently modern, Western distinction between 'philosophy' and 'religion'), while looking at how they've changed over time.

Sadly the Tao of Pooh does not outline the basic tenets of Daoism. As van Norden says in the chapter on the Daodejing in his Introduction to Classical Chinese Philosophy:

> The Tao of Pooh by Benjamin Hoff ... is a charming work that has attained a wide readership. There is nothing wrong with enjoying it for itself. But it reveals much more about how the Daodejing as been appropriated to illustrate Western Romanticism than it does about the Daodejing itself. (See later in this section for more on Romanticism).

and, later on, here's what he has to say about the appropriation of the Daodejing and Daoism for Romanticism:

> We see a similar trend in the West. In particular, contemporary Westerners often project onto the Daodejing the assumptions of Romanticism. In reaction against the emphasis on reason that was characteristic of the Enlightenment, Romanticism championed the importance and wisdom of one's passions. But the dichotomy of reason and passion is Western, not Chinese, and the individualism characteristic in some forms of Romanticism is quite alien to the Daodejing. Consequently, we should be on the lookout for how Romantic preconceptions can distort our appreciation of the text.

Sadly, there's not many good non-academic introductions to Daoism out there, and the most popular translation - Stephen Mitchell's - was done by someone who can't even read Classical Chinese, but thought his Zen teaching was a 'good enough' guide to allow him to translate it.

-----------

All this is to say I'm glad the book worked for you, and helped you find peace. It's just not Daoism (nor is Alan Watts!)

I feel it's pretty clear he's aiming for the Nobel if it's true. It can only be split three ways, after all.

From my perspective as a former secondary teacher, it's parents. At the least sign of their kids being in trouble (or failing), many parents will come up to the school (that they often never visit otherwise) and proclaim that the teacher is wrong and shouldn't be punishing little Johnny. And schools give in because they're worried about lawsuits and having to deal with parents, so the teachers get thrown under the bus and can't punish the kids.

Thankfully the last school I worked at did back the teachers - at least to some extent - but it was so annoying having to deal with parents who never showed up to parent-teacher conferences, never contacted me (or answered my emails/calls!) come up as soon as their kids got sent to in-school suspension for misbehaving or for having too many missing assignments or getting a bad grade.

There's also an anti-punishment trend prevalent in education research. Which I truly get, but sometimes kids need to know the limits and you have to do something with the bad ones so the others can actually learn. It's a lose-lose situation (and part of the reason why I left, though I really do miss it and am considering returning, though maybe at international schools).

As a former secondary math teacher, you'd be surprised how many kids can't do basic arithmetic without a calculator. This doesn't even just include kids with learning disabilities or those at the lower end of the grade spectrum. I had many students who couldn't multiply or divide when they got to me (let alone understand negative numbers or such) because of the over reliance on tech and calculators when they're younger.

No, it'll rely on exploitation of workers. That's what's happening in Dublin -- they're exporting the English language students as in Ireland you can work (legally, many work more) 20 hours a week on a student visa and the English schools count. Then they're stuffed into rooms with five others somewhat nearby. It all relies on exploitation on the desperate.

It doesn't change the underlying issue. The issue is every single one of those rooms available on AirBnB is a room/house not available for long-term rent. And that's the problem. It's just as big an issue that there's 10x more one-bed rooms on AirBnB than there are one-bed places to let.

There is room - in the hotels. Tourists aren't entitled to live in local houses. And I never said to not build more. I said it's only part of the answer.

It has nothing to do with tourists visiting. It's tourists taking up the local housing. Tourists are planned into any good urban planning -- but they're not expected to stay in the residential areas, especially while the local residents are getting hurt because of it.

The issue isn't tourists, it's where they're staying. Tourists are welcome, they're not entitled to live like 'locals' at the local's expense. Stay in a hotel.

> Maybe we should just build enough housing for everyone.

Except that won't ever be enough because more and more will just come. And there's already even a glut on AirBnB for tourists, so none of that housing will go the locals. Building isn't the only solution.

Just go to AirBnB and check -- right now, there are over 1000 open rooms for one guest in Dublin. Going to daft.ie, Ireland's main rental site, there's only 200 one-bed places to let (and that includes one room open in otherwise occupied houses). An order of magnitude difference, and it'll get worse throughout the summer.

It's a cancer that has directly impacted and caused the skyrocketing of prices and constraint of supply. The answer isn't to (just) build more, but to end the exploitation from AirBnB.

And, as mentioned, it's worse in other cities.

Yes, 10x more rooms on AirBnB than open rooms to rent in Dublin. At least with single bedrooms; I haven't looked into more rooms as I'm only searching for a new place for myself.

> though I'm still unsure how much of this is merely displacing hotels/hostels relative to actually sucking up long-term rental slots.

It very much is happening. Dublin saw this during the pandemic, when the long-term rent market doubled after tourism was shut down. These are houses that are zoned for residents, not people coming in, and landlords see they can easily make more money letting them out to the tourists.

See this article from The Irish Times about it: https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/pandemic-reveals...

It's only gotten worse now, too, with many going back to AirBnB.

Living in a city heavily impacted by it, I couldn't agree more. People love it, because they feel entitled as tourists to live like locals, at the expense of the actual locals. It's literally all about entitlement, while forcing the negative externalities on the community you came to visit! Outta sight, outta mind.

It's definitely impacted Dublin, where I live, and the rest of Ireland. There's 10x more rooms on AirBnB than there are long-term rents in Dublin; in other parts of the country it's 100x.

One that seems to pretty much throw ethics out the window.

Not the populace, that's for damn sure. The uber-wealthy who capture even more of the wealth and then use whatever legal tricks they can to avoid paying taxes on it, all while weakening the power power of the other classes.

I read Technopoly not too long ago, and by the end I found myself grieving that Postman still wasn't alive to write about the world we live in today. He predicted it in the early 90s, I can only imagine what he would have to say now, 30 years later. I can't imagine it'd be good.