Over the past few decades it’s become very clear this is needed. The problem is that by making LBOs illegal you are saying that a controlling stake of the company’s stock isn’t the same as owning a controlling stake in the company. So at that point the value of stocks becomes a bit more speculative and likely much less stable. Given that basically the entirety of our economy is built on the stock market I think this is incredibly unlikely to ever happen.
I use Google Docs for anything simple (1-3 pages), and if it has no citations or more than 2 figures. After that I upgrade to LaTeX.
I had a conference demand a docx file for the paper submission. I figured “fine it can’t be that bad to use word for a simple 8 page publication” but boy was I wrong! It was torture trying to get it formatted and arranged properly. Every part of the word tool is weird and clumsy.
Oh, and they’ve completely broken the original GUI WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get) premise of a GUI style editor. The PDF it creates often doesn’t look anything like what the document looks like on the screen.
I dropped a note on the conference organizers about the docx requirement. I don’t have that many hours to fuck around with bad tools so I can attend your venue. I’ll just go to a conference that doesn’t torture us to participate.
I think there is an alarmingly high number of users with a very large amount of heavily downvoted bad takes… usually from specific homeservers but not always. I’ve seen a whole lot more blatantly terrible attitudes compared to reddit.
The API documentation is extremely bad, especially for non-JS devs, and the developers defend it saying there’s nothing wrong and no plans to change it. People are always getting confused about how to use it to get the information they want and often never find any good help.
nextcloud provides apps for both calendars and lists, if you’re comfortable getting into self hosted services. of course, there are a number of other self-hosted apps that provide similar functionalities as well, but nextcloud is probably a good place to start
Yeah next cloud has some great options. The only issue I have is I don’t know of an app on the phone that syncs easy. But the web looks great and does what is needed.
I bought it, windows, as per work software what do you refer to? After buying it I logged with two accounts: my personal one, with my Gmail email AND the University’s email. during COVID they gave as free access to office, so obviously we would use the university email for that.
Did they give you any programs to install on that computer or did anyone ever take your computer and install anything to it? Did you notice any new programs pop up that weren’t there before?
In the search on the bottom of the computer, type “control panel” then click Uninstall a program. Click the name for Date Installed to sort the column by most recently installed programs. Tell us if you see any since setting up with the university that you didn’t install yourself.
well being a short list I’ll upload the images: the first ones I think are programs already present on the pc, and being 2020 when I first accessed office with the uni account, I don’t think there’s anythign weird there. But I don’t know much about softwares and stuff so here they are:
At the least, they could have access to any files you open through MS office since it has file history. I would also review your OneDrive settings and see what’s being backed up where, since Microsoft likes to mess with those settings.
Look into LibreOffice and OnlyOffice. Both can help you get around needing MSOffice, and the latter is visually very similar to MS
an opposite would be something everybody thinks is a bad idea until you name it
unless you're saying people disagree with the concepts and goals of eugenics until you say "but that's just eugenics" at which point they're fully on board?
Most people think that Eugenics are a bad idea even if you don’t name it, which is the opposite of people actually agreeing with the ideas behind Marxism without knowing its Marxism.
people sometimes end up accidentally talking themselves into eugenics and promoting eugenics before somebody points out that they're talking about eugenics
But it is what the comment said. It’s saying that people promote eugenics without realizing it. They do so by talking about the mechanics of eugenics without naming them.
Your confusion comes from the fact that you assume most people like the mechanics of eugenics. If that’s the sort of crowd you hang out with, then you may be associating with fascists.
but that's literally what the comment's saying? and you're saying "that's an example of the opposite?
e.g., there's a pretty good argument that pre-natal screening is a form of eugenics
if you describe the mechanics of pre-natal screening to somebody, i suspect most would be in support of that, but wouldn't be if you described it using the term "eugenics"
like, if you were to notice that completing tertiary education makes it more difficult for people to have children, and you decided to create some form of government aid to offset that, then oopsie daisy you just did a eugenics, but you could absolutely package that idea in a way that most people would instinctively go "yeah that sounds okay"
also to preempt pls nobody do the intellectually dishonest thing of pretending me following this line of argument means im in love with eugenics and am here to argue for more eugenics or that i just dont think eugenics is such a bad thing after all thnk u
if you want to use the sentiment expressed in this post as an argument for marxism being good, which seems pretty transparent in this case, then that same sentiment being used to justify eugenics isn't a good thing for said argument
i'm not that concerned with the precise definition of "opposite", but i am concerned with whether or not the post's logic is sound
i’m not that concerned with the precise definition of “opposite”, but i am concerned with whether or not the post’s logic is sound
The problem is that your argument relies on the idea that “most people support eugenics until you say what it actually is,” which is false in my experience while the post is correct.
i've given two examples where i think the average person would come down on the side of "let's do some eugenics" until being told "haha you just agreed to do some eugenics"
the problem with the post is that if you boil it down, it becomes "things that sound good on the surface are automatically good", which doesn't hold
"people have a negative connotation to the word Marxism" absolutely has baked-in implications, and an argument left unsaid, even in total isolation
if i say to you "people think the word nazi has negative connotations", then even with no other context then obviously you'd conclude that i'm a nazi freak
the post doesn't make any justification for the ideas being sound and good, it says they sound good
i don't think this post's subtext is as simple as the interpretation you're providing
if i say to you “people think the word nazi has negative connotations”, then even with no other context then obviously you’d conclude that i’m a nazi freak
Good thing Nazism isn’t sound, nor does it sound good, even without the label.
the post doesn’t make any justification for the ideas being sound and good, it says they sound good
It does, actually. Marxism is popular and easily understood, yet red scare propaganda and anticommunism has given it a negative connotation. Eugenics and Nazism are not popular, and have bad connotations because they are bad ideas in general, not to mention Nazism being based on pure evil extermination.
Good thing Nazism isn't sound, nor does it sound good, even without the label.
it was brought up to explain why "it's just saying it has negative connotations" doesn't make something neutral
Marxism is popular and easily understood, yet red scare propaganda and anticommunism has given it a negative connotation
you're kind of just imagining a different post at this point?
"it does, actually"? you're going to have to clarify what you mean by "this post makes a justification as to why the concepts behind marxism are sound and good", unless you mean that "people thinking the ideas sound good" is your justification, which you just argued a second ago wasn't what the post was doing, and which is exactly what i'm saying is a junk justification
"Marxism is popular" this post very specifically makes the point that marxism isn't popular, but its ideas are. that's like the whole point of the post
also, "easily understood" what? we haven't even defined what sort of marxism we're talking about here
it says nothing about the reasons for negative connotations; you're adding that yourself
Eugenics [is] not popular
again, i've given two examples where the average person would probably support eugenics-in-description-only
No, it was brought up to draw equivalence to Marxism, don't play coy.
cool ur jets buddy
it wasn't, and doesn't even really make sense when read through that lens
what kind of person comes into a thread and posts a pro-communism video clip and then angrily equates marxism to nazism?
No, Marxism is popular, it's just sold as different names.
that's describing the same sentiment i just expressed using different words
Is there some other kind we need to worry about here that's hard to understand?
honestly the term "marxism" is nebulous enough that just deciding on what counts as "in-scope" is kind of non-trivial
are we talking about the economic theory? marxist communism? the whole body of marx's work?
what definition are you using?
No, you pretended the average person would.
i'm fairly confused what you're trying to say here
are you saying that that, for those two concepts, you don't think you could pitch the basic ideas behind them in a way such that the average person would agree?
it wasn’t, and doesn’t even really make sense when read through that lens
what kind of person comes into a thread and posts a pro-communism video clip and then angrily equates marxism to nazism?
I dunno, why bring up the Nazis as though they had popular ideas?
honestly the term “marxism” is nebulous enough that just deciding on what counts as “in-scope” is kind of non-trivial
are we talking about the economic theory? marxist communism? the whole body of marx’s work?
What parts of Marxism do you want to chop off? I am referring to the whole of Marxism, ie critique of Capitalism, philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism, and Communism.
are you saying that that, for those two concepts, you don’t think you could pitch the basic ideas behind them in a way such that the average person would agree?
Yes, people generally don’t agree with the ideas posed by Nazism.
I dunno, why bring up the Nazis as though they had popular ideas?
i didn't and i've already clarified that?
i'm not sure what more there is to say on this
What parts of Marxism do you want to chop off?
if you're referring to everything then that would include stuff like das kapital which i don't think you can reasonably refer to as "easy to understand"
"philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism" also seems like it would be a fairly hard thing for the average person to understand
also, marx didn't invent communism, so to say communism is contained within marxism is incorrect
the opening of the communist manifesto literally references the fact that european powers were already trying to "exorcise" the idea from the continent at the time
Yes, people generally don't agree with the ideas posed by Nazism.
nazism proposed pre-natal scanning and graduate family planning stimulus? that's news to me
if you’re referring to everything then that would include stuff like das kapital which i don’t think you can reasonably refer to as “easy to understand”
“philosophical grounding in Dialectical and Historical Materialism” also seems like it would be a fairly hard thing for the average person to understand
also, marx didn’t invent communism, so to say communism is contained within marxism is incorrect
the opening of the communist manifesto literally references the fact that european powers were already trying to “exorcise” the idea from the continent at the time
All of these are fairly straightforward and easy to understand, it just takes a while to get into the nitty gritty. Marx did not invent Communism, but Communism is core to Marxism.
nazism proposed pre-natal scanning and graduate family planning stimulus? that’s news to me
Ah, “the trains ran on time.” We both know that’s not Nazism.
All of these are fairly straightforward and easy to understand, it just takes a while to get into the nitty gritty
i feel like everything's "easy to understand" if you assume infinite time to explain it, but for the sake of argument, let's agree that these in fact "easy to understand"
in which case, the ideas behind pre-natal scanning and graduate family stimulus are also easy to understand, so we haven't really moved anywhere.
this post still doesn't make any case for marxist ideals being sound other than "people like them when they hear them without the label". which i'm arguing (via the use of the provided two examples) is also true for eugenics.
and if "people like the ideas when they hear them without the label" is justification for ideas being good, then eugenics must be good, but we know eugenics isn't good, so it's not a good justification
so the post doesn't make a good argument for marxism being good
and we already know the post is attempting to be an argument for why marxism is good, because you already acknowledged it's making the case that "people have a negative connotations about marxism", and combined with the point about nazis from earlier you enjoyed so much, that's sufficient to show that it's attempting to be an argument for why marxism is good
Ah, "the trains ran on time." We both know that's not Nazism.
what are you talking about? why are you trying to bring nazis into everything now?
(also, "trains ran on time" is mussolini, who was a fascist, not a nazi)
Actually I think I get what you’re saying now and I think you have a point. I am not sure the two can be directly compared that way, though. There are different reasons for why people think each is bad once they hear the name and I don’t think the meme is actually saying that this is an argument for or against anything. Just a funny observation.
i wouldn't say you're working particularly hard given that all you've done is issue a blanket "no", and cowbee seems to be coming at the problem from the angle that i'm secretly the ghost of joseph mccarthy
i've given you two examples where i think most people would agree with the concepts of eugenics before being told it's eugenics, and so far nobody's disagreed with them? what's your issue? that you don't think most people would agree with them, or that you don't think that that fact draws enough of a parallel between eugenics and the post?
Pervasive cradle-to-grave anti-communist indoctrination programming, affecting nearly every western institution from media, education, law, political structures, etc.
You’re mostly over reacting. You’re on the first few days, months, or year at this work environment, you’re not going to feel plugged in to it by yourself or coworkers right off the bat. You’re also making the mistake a lot of people make in any interpersonal interaction, you had one good interaction, and you didn’t get reciprocated treatment, so you assume it’s not working. One interaction isn’t enough, you need many, 10-12 interactions are more realistic. Your new, so the burden is on you to provide the majority of the interaction.
You aren’t wrong AT ALL about not going out of your way to interact with people who seem distant, or standoffish with you. Not being forceful with interactions shows respect and intelligence. Go for natural interactions and remember, you’re a dozen more interactions away from even seeing if this is working. At the same time focusing on people who are friendly and open to you is a wise choice, some people won’t warm up to you until you have established connections in their workplace.
Also as an introvert that worked in sales for a long time, you’re not understanding what introvert means, or maybe the way you’re talking about it is awkward to me. Introverts make great sales people, I can talk to an introvert on day one and say ''when you’re asking if they want the service package, you have to explain all service after purchase is 100% free, and includes a regular yearly maintenence service, and all can be in home service, they think it’s an extended warranty if you don’t explain it’s a service package" and they will get all points across every pitch, and typically they will focus on word choice and reading customers. Extroverts? It’s at least three conversations about this, and I have to coach their word choices.
Introvert just means you’re exhausted by socially interacting with others, it doesn’t mean you bad at it, or you fear it, it mostly means you’re not having fun when your talking to someone, you’re working. Lots of benefits in that, and lots of draw backs, but it’s not a lack of capability in you, it’s just a skill, and like every skill you need to practice before you get good at it. Also leaving yourself stretches of no social interactions during your work day so you don’t get burned out is also a very good idea.
You’re on the right path, just be consistent, and accept it takes time to get folded in at a workplace, and never take it personal. If you’re there for more than a year and you feel like they haven’t accepted you, then there’s some serious problems at that particular workplace that are out of your control, and you might consider moving on, or location change, whatever your profession allows that’s also in your favor.
kbin.life
Newest