Then tried to retrieve the password and got “no account associated with that email” so he tried to make a new account and got “there is already an account using that email, please use the lost password link below”.
I’m not missing the point. For most people it is fake and used as a tool against them. The “office family” is a tactic utilized by employers to make workers complacent without raising benefits. It’s in the same toolbox as “pizza parties” and “PTO donation”.
Gotta disagree. I’ve always had the belief that if you’re in management, you don’t get to play the comradery game with staff because that can easily be perceived as preferential treatment or fraternization. Management has their connections with other managers. Staff should use their comradery against management. However, your perspective isn’t wrong either. I just believe that even if you’re faking the “office family,” it still makes work that much easier
The office “family” gets in the way of clear and honest communication by guilt tripping anyone who disagrees by treating them like someone who upset grandma at Thanksgiving. It has always been counterproductive in my experience.
You got the wrong office family haha. I’ve always had the belief that you should always have the life you live at work and the life you live at home. You’re not supposed to take your work home with you and you should never bring your home to work. But that doesn’t mean you can’t be civil and conserting while at work. And I honestly don’t think there’s anything wrong with your mindset. We all perceive situations in different ways. But being earnest to your coworkers with clear social lines never hurts anything. You should be allowed to be very concerned about a coworker that has health issues, but on the same hand, it shouldn’t dictate your home life or emotions when not there. I hope I’m explaining what I’m trying to say correctly.
You are saying the same thing that I am on how it should work, but in my experience any office that says that they are a family tends to be the manipulating, toxic parts of families.
I do agree though, that the forced family is the worst.
At some point, someone found out that people who get along with their coworkers work better and like their job better. So, some dense HR directors thought, “If we want people to work better, we should force them to be friends!”
Then you get mandatory team-builders that maybe two people enjoy, and the rest are thinking about how they’d rather be spending their time.
True. Me and a friend of mine used to work together and live together. Then we’d go home after work, get drunk and play video games just to wake up and do it all over. Granted thar was years ago.
I did work with my now wife at one point. But we never actually hung out too much when we were working together because we were management and she would always go hang out with staff which I wouldn’t do
I met this guy at work. It’s a very long story, but the short and skinny is I was homeless and he and his mom gave me a home. I suppose he’s more like a brother than anything else. They never asked for anything in return. He just wanted to hang out and get into shenanigans. And shenanigans we certainly got into
Isn’t that the whole point of hiring people that fit the company culture? I’ve worked at both types of places in different stages of my life. Both can feel good or bad depending on where you’re at. Don’t try to change the job to fit your needs. Find a different one.
Totally get that. Just saying that different people want different things out of their jobs, and it’s a good thing that there are places where all of them can fit.
If I remember correctly, this is literally one of the points taken from the sabotage handbook. Is your job really making you so miserable, or is this some kind of organized propaganda campaign?
Management and HR departments are quite efficient on that kind of moral sabotage. It could be an organized propaganda campaign, at least those would make sense.
I totally agree with you that I don’t need to make friends at work. I 100% clock out at the end of the day and make a hard cutoff between personal and work life. I can even work with people I personally dislike just fine, as long as they’re not making things harder for others.
But OP was talking about camaraderie, which is mostly just about being generally pleasant to be around - as Merriam-Webster defines it, “a spirit of friendly good-fellowship”. Nobody likes to deal with the moody guy who doesn’t want to talk to anyone either, including the other moody guys. There’s definitely a minimum level of camaraderie required not to make things harder for everyone involved. You don’t have to lean into the “we’re a family” BS not to be unpleasant.
When I was single and living in a 1 bedroom apartment, I had my gaming rig next to my TV in the corner. I ran a long HDMI cable along the baseboard, around the corner, and into the TV. It was clean. I had this keyboard/touchpad combo in addition to my regular mouse and keyboard and that was how I turned my dumb TV into a smart TV running Windows 8.1 circa 2013/2014. I had a DualShock 4 that I’d use specifically for couch gaming because I didn’t always want to play at my desk. My PC has a BD drive so I used it as a Blu-Ray player, too.
I was real proud of that setup. I’m married and we work from home now and so we have to have an office, but I’d love to get an Ethernet cable run between our living room and our office so I can use my laptop to stream my games and couch game again. All I have for couch gaming these days is my ancient consoles (PS2 and Wii).
I just installed Kodi on my smart tv. No problems save for the cache growing to sizes incompatible with the limited memory of my TV, but I clean it periodically.
I believe Steam also has an app for streaming from your desktop, you just need a Bluetooth controller paired to the TV.
Unfortunately in this situation, where the ad requires active user engagement to resolve, a streaming service would have the ability to gate further access to content behind an authorization token they receive from the advertiser after the ad “clears”, like some dystopian Captcha prompt.
Solutions could be to find some way to trick the ad into thinking it had been engaged with to receive the token, or to find some way to crack the algorithm and and generate tokens as if the ad was engaged with…or just skip the bullshit and pirate the content.
A perfectly understandable reaction, but the company will be happy about that. If you willfully destroy a product you bought, they already have your money, and now you need to buy another one.
I get this one so much. I don't consider myself a developer because I tend to just touch code but that means I won't touch any for weeks. Worse I tend to do a lot of poc or boot strapping type of things and so its like there was a user story last pi to check the feasibility of something and now have a user story to get it regularly working in a poc env and I have forgotten everything about that particular system or language or whatever.
First, and I can’t believe I’m saying this, I think you should be just a tad bit MORE judgemental. Making excuses for people’s bad behavior is a bit like good people doing nothing and allowing evil to take over. You’re passively condoning the activity.
Second, the acceptable amount of littering is zero, not a cigarette butt is ok. I dropped my car off to be repaired and walked to work from there. You know what I saw along my walk. Thousands of cigarette butts. You don’t really see them from a car, but you sure see them on foot.
Third, I’m pretty sure this behavior is just trash humans. There are very few, if any, justifiable reasons not to hang on to your trash until you get to a trash can. This is my humble opinion.
I don’t believe in free will or the self. To me, there’s effectively no-one for me to be judgemental of. Wether it be littering, racism or violence, these people didn’t choose to act this way, they just do and couldn’t have done otherwise. If I was them, I’d be doing the exact same thing.
I’m just as non-accepting of their behaviour as everybody else. In my case there’s just little to none negative emotions involved in it. Me getting angry about someone littering, to me, is the same as getting angry at the weather.
And yes, I agree. If I were a smoker I wouldn’t want to throw cigarette butts in the ground either for the same reason you just mentioned. My point was that I have theory of mind for such people. I can imagine how someone could naively imagine there’s no harm to it. This just no longer holds true when we’re talking about trash that’s bigger; I can’t imagine what they could be thinking.
You misunderstand what he’s saying. It’s a very fundamental biology/physiology/brain chemistry, etc. idea that takes some time to understand, if you should so desire. Technically, in the most absolutely biological sense, there is a valid position that states there is no free will. That the precise pattern of the billions or trillions of synaptic connections in the brain form a distinct recipe for a specific behavior in any given scenario.
That being said, despite that it may be valid in one sense, it is just as invalid from the point of view that it is a very simplistic and also arguably not completely informed view. For the most part, therefore, arguing there’s no such thing as free will really is a vapid position, as it eliminates any and all concept of responsibility, of penalty, of society having a framework within which to coexist, and it also stops any discussion in its tracks. I understand the point of view but I find it useless.
I have informally studied this subject for years, and minored in developmental psych, and I’m on the spectrum and human cognition is one of my special interests.
It’s all predicated on a bullshit misinterpreted experiment that has blown out of proportion because ‘publish or die’ is the only law of the land.
In Libet’s experiments he either was unaware of, or actively chose to ignore the existence of visual saccades when interpreting his results, and no one has had the balls to call him out on it because so many fuckdamn academic careers hinge on this being a tenable field of study, which it isn’t.
Your condescension has sent my IED absolutely through the roof and I am very thankful for my own continuing freedom that we were not in the same room as I would have had some well thought out and egregiously unkind things to say about your parentage and education.
The fact that the self exists is self evident, and the fact that I am capable of writing this to you is literal proof. The odds of randomly colliding atoms eventually producing a machine that can lie to itself about being free willed is greater than the number of estimated atoms in the known universe, let alone this tiny speck orbiting a tiny ember dancing in a rather obscure arm of just one of ten trillion galaxies.
NOTE: I am not saying the ‘self’ is a mystical eternal force that exists beyond our death, I’m just saying that every single scholarly work I have seen trying to disprove the self has been some of the most ridiculous navel gazing I have ever seen and I used to be an alt.philosophy usenet user.
Yeah I don’t have a clue what triggered him but now that I look again at his username, I think he acknowledges he’s just always angry? I don’t know. All I was doing was trying to be helpful but as the saying goes “no good deed goes unpunished.”
I dunno how you felt condescended to; whatever demons you have triggering you, I can sympathize, but rest assured that was never my intention. In fact, I worried I was mangling it and not expressing my thoughts clearly.
I hope you sort out whatever made you so livid over what was at worst a poorly articulated explanation of something that is hardly meaningful enough to bother with. As I said, I find it without utility so who really cares.
Hoping you feel better. Oh, for the record, that sentence was condescension :-)
Dr. Benjamin Libet in the 80s did a series of tests on human cognition, involving people reporting when a certain configuration of a clock face occurred. This experiment is literally the watershed moment when psychologists and neurologists misinterpreted the results to be that “Humans actually act before they consciously choose to act” which is what started this entire faddish exploration of a nonexistent corner of the neurology and psychology fields.
Saccades are moments when your brain fills in your visual experience with false and blending data, usually during rapid eye movement. This is why sometimes when you look at a clock the second hand may seem to tick backwards one tick. It is your brain filling in the places where the movement of your eyes or other interruptions (like the hole in your vision your optic nerve makes but you almost never experience).
All of Libet’s ‘surprising’ findings are more reasonably and experimentally explained by saccades during the measurement steps than the explanation being that we are all deterministic self-modifying chemical cascades that can make more of ourselves and bear the illusion of selfhood. This concern was brought up before he published but never again and never since.
The reason why it makes me SO BLINDINGLY INFURIATED is that YOU ARE RIGHT NOW EXPERIENCING THE PROOF OF YOUR SENSE OF SELF’S EXISTENCE!
But because so many self-satisfied academics and rottube ‘surprising facts’ content creator’s careers now depend on that avenue of research being a valid path of study, all based on a near-as-self-disproving-interpretation as could possibly exist, no serious criticism of his methodology or interpretations is allowed in ANY level, academic, layman, or even just a fucking chat over a beer.
And it’s always some knowlessman making calming gestures while having zero basis of understanding other than that it’s the new edgy topic that comes in to quell discussions and both sidesism the whole thread to irrelevance.
Congrats for doing your job, I guess.
150 years from now when we really start to get a firm grasp on consciousness, the academics of that future (if we survive) will consider the denial of consciousness as a curious and misguided fad that led so many bright minds astray.
Jesus, dude, you’re blowing everything I said way out of proportion and also completely missing my point.
I think you just wanted to give someone a lecture while also grinding an axe or two. Have at it, enjoy.
You’ve already completely disregarded what I was talking about and have gone on to just unload whatever crap you’ve been wanting to.
Glad you got the opportunity to vent. I am way beyond done with this because it has never been a conversation. Feel free to keep going, I’m sure some readers will find it entertaining.
One evening, a man walks along a dimly lit path. He suddenly halts, his heart pounding with fear. Before him, on the ground, lies what appears to be a venomous snake. He freezes, paralyzed with dread. Only when a friend comes by with a lantern does the true nature of the object come to light: it is merely a piece of rope.
I learned this story from Thich Nhat Hanh, a Buddhist author. He would indicate with stories like this that our perceptions shape our reality. Often, we react out of fear and misunderstanding, seeing snakes where there are none. He said that mindfulness and deeper understanding can act like the lantern, illuminating the true nature of our experiences.
I’m pretty much the same way. You gotta remember though that anger is not a negative emotion. An irrational amount of an emotion is a negative emotion.
An emotion is just a driving force of your behavior. “Angry” is mostly there for us to take action about unacceptable situations. Thus getting angry at the weather doesn’t make sense, since you can’t change it.
However, someone littering is in a limited way under your control. Like you said in another comment, you can confront them and use your power for them to pick up after themselves. Saying you’re not getting angry/irritated at all is the equivalent of not doing anything about it to most people. And I do think you’re at least getting irritated (which is a low form of anger) at people littering, which is why you do something about it or post this topic.
It seems to me a bit that you see any kind of anger, including being irritated, as bad, and thus show no sign of it/deny it even though you have it.
It’s obviously a negative feeling in my view. It can be used as motivation for changing things to the better but I can’t see it as anything else as negative. It’s not a pleasant feeling.
Ofcourse I’m not immune to it myself either but being such a strong emotion it’s nearly impossible to not notice and thus it acts as a kind of mindfulness alarm. When I catch myself getting angry at something I immediately realize how that is in conflict with how I see the world and then the anger basically dissapears. It’s kind of like waking up at the morning and being irritated that it’s raining outside but then at the same moment realizing that I can’t change the weather and I’ll rather just be wet than wet and angry. It’s the so called second arrow.
Unlike weather I can affect other people however, and I do. No disagreement there. I simply just don’t see the need to feel anger while doing so. It’s done and can’t be undone. They couldn’t have done otherwise so no need to get angry and pretend as if they could have. My intention is to encourage them to not act that way in the future.
I guess it depends on how much trouble you have with too much anger. Very often, anger is counterproductive, not only for yourself, but for actually effecting the change in others you desire.
In that case, it’s often good to “overcorrect” and rather try to feel less anger than appropriate, so that your troubles get reduced.
However, I still think it’s an overreaction and an appropriate amount of anger at the appropriate things is healthy, as in the end it’s actually a conflict within yourself to have less anger than appropriate - you’re forcing yourself to spend more energy suppressing/letting go of the anger, and then having less energy to effect the change you desire.
When I was a smoker, I’d roll the cherry off my cigarettes and carry the butt until I found a trashcan.
People who throw trash on the ground are some of the most thoughtless and selfish pieces of shit in this world. They think that because other people get away with “bigger” or more noticeable wrongdoing, this little thing that they’re doing isn’t such a big deal. That’s it. “It’s not like I committed a murder, gaw!” Fuck you. You made the world worse for everyone else because you couldn’t be bothered to be inconvenienced a little bit. At least a thief has the motivation of profiting from their crime. You just fucked shit up because there wasn’t anyone there to stop you. Assholes.
I didn’t think they were accepting cigarette butts but understanding those litterers. Cigarette butts are tiny and disappear after just a couple steps. They’re “no big deal”. Those things rolled have no concept how long they last nor how they add up.
The simple answer? You declare it at customs and make sure to follow the relevant laws.
Any questions you might have can be answered by the appropriate embassy/state department. It’s part of the job, after all.
One thing to note. Always, always clear out your bags- everything you’ll be taking and pack them carefully. Make sure not to have anything that would be illegal to where you’re going; even if it’s legal where you are. (And this includes countries you’ll pass through.)
You will be searched and more than likely it will be found. You don’t want to be the next Britney Griner only to find out that you’re not enough of a superstar to illicit media interest.
It was bullshit that she was arrested for something stupid, but she did break their laws, and it's also bullshit that she got out of it just because she was some semi-well-known athlete. Oh, and it's bullshit that an arms dealer got released to secure her return. She really fucked up.
The test is 90% accurate, thats still pretty useful. Especially if you are simply putting people into a high risk group that needs to be more closely monitored.
“90% accurate” is a non-statement. It’s like you haven’t even watched the video you respond to. Also, where the hell did you pull that number from?
How specific is it and how sensitive is it is what matters. And if Mirai in www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.aba4373 is the same model that the tweet mentions, then neither its specificity nor sensitivity reach 90%. And considering that the image in the tweet is trackable to a publication in the same year (news.mit.edu/…/robust-artificial-intelligence-too…), I’m fairly sure that it’s the same Mirai.
Also, where the hell did you pull that number from?
Well, you can just do the math yourself, it’s pretty straight-forward.
However, more to the point, it’s taken right from around 38 seconds into the video. Kind of funny to be accused of “not watching the video” by someone who is implying the number was pulled from nowhere, when it’s right in the video.
I certainly don’t think this closes the book on anything, but I’m responding to your claim that it’s not useful. If this is a cheap and easy test, it’s a great screening tool putting people into groups of low risk/high risk for which further, maybe more expensive/specific/sensitive, tests can be done. Especially if it can do this early.
Yeah, machine learning actually has a ton of very useful applications in things. It’s just predictably the dumbest and most toxic manifestations of it are hyped up in a capitalist system.
Thats like saying your favorite type of cheese is American, sure its technically cheese but its so processed and removed from cheese that its just not the same as mozzarella.
I made grilled cheese for my father in law in India where it was not insignificantly difficult to find “American” bread and processed cheese. It’s comfort food that crosses borders and cultures.
Edit: You United Statesians got that weird cheese thing right and I will die on that hill.
kbin.life
Hot