See, my crippled ass is going to squeeze through anyway. Even if that means the metal clasps on my shoulder bag grind against the vehicle, or even if the attachment point for the strap on my cane happens to dig in if I happen to stumble because of the tight space.
Will that result in dents and scrapes? Absolutely. Do I care? Absolutely not.
My non-crippled ass would possibly also have some issues. I might trip with my keys in my hand or something worse. Who’s to know what dangers parking like this could pose.
I’ll add that NewPipe is a great app, has a fork to support sponsorblock and can mix your YouTube subscription with other sources (eg. PeerTube), which could allow for a smooth transition.
You have to be willing to loose your personalized suggestions page, but when it comes to me it helped a lot to get less addicted.
Losing personalized suggestions was a plus for me, since youtube is so thrown off by one video and even when it recommends channels that fit into the genre you like it doesn’t seem to be able to understand why it is that you like certain channels.
For instance, video games. It should know not to recommend channels that don’t have really loud youtubers who are screaming at me to smash the like button and have the most obnoxious thumbnails. But, it just sees that I like games. And then it is horrible for spoilers where I might watch a video for a game review I’m interested in then next it does is start filling my feed with spoiler content from that video.
Yeah it’s the same for me. When I watch Youtube on my computer I often feel like I wasted a lot of time. On my phone I can only pick high quality content from the curated list of creators that I’ve maintained over the years, and it is a much better experience.
In 12 years, selfhosting will be so cheap and one-push-button easy that everyone will have their own instance and federated with each other. It will be called Neo-Geocities 2.0.
Well, not really the same thing but I saw this the other day. I think it is awesome, but that is probably only nostalgia talking. It is a geocities website for the current day!
Oh, I know. And I’m currently setting up audits on qualifications and alignment to our nation’s higher education standards…at a research university.
I’ve already had industry colleagues remind me of that time a major university here had a big grant puller non-chalantly say, “I never actually completed my PhD” thinking it was just gonna go down totally fine because of how much his reputation pulled research money in over the years.
Clearly a very smart human that contributed a lot, but that’s not how academia works and obviously an atomic bomb went off with fiends lined up for the scraps while the CFO weeps.
This is my big fear. If I stumble across something like this, I’m quitting for something less stressful like pest control, test piloting, or child care.
Clearly a very smart human that contributed a lot, but that’s not how academia works and obviously an atomic bomb went off with fiends lined up for the scraps while the CFO weeps.
I’m sorry, do you mind explaining this a bit further? I don’t understand what you mean. Thank you :)
The faculty member probably got nuked from orbit, sponsoring orgs would be horrified to learn that a PI (principal investigator) they funded had misrepresented their credentials that badly.
Is a PhD a required qualification in your uni? I know it’s expected, but there are quite a few well-respected academics, particularly in engineering and comp sci, who don’t have a PhD.
Here it is required for certain levels of “quality education to students” whereas those with lower tiers certainly are allowed to teach some units, especially lectures. But they’re not curating or a primary teacher in courses. If these aren’t met, your official recognition as a university is gone. It’s regulation protecting the quality of education in the nation.
Obviously research it’s entirely up to whoever’s putting the grant up. But most research journals these days are regulated by the academia version of a HoA, and such incidents as I mentioned are very dramatic.
Edit: Personally, I don’t agree with it and think it’s an archaic culture that holds back progressive and brilliant ideas. But it balances out in that a university can recognise an equivalent status. Any university or country that respects that system will recognise an “under qualified” person breaking such ground when an entire institute vouches for them. But that view isn’t shared around the world.
My personal opinion/experiences are that those that are the worst in their field are the ones that clutch onto their degrees the most and will think lowly of a mind that hasn’t amassed as much documentation; being officially recognised is more important than your hypothesis.
I certainly lean a certain way in my thinking, but it’s only because I believe the core of academia is meant to be for the advancement of knowledge and ideas. In modern academia, this no longer occurs as effectively as it once did, therefore it is failing at its core purpose. More and more younger generations are determining it’s not as valuable as it once was and are so far successfully proving that to be true.
It’s regulation protecting the quality of education in the nation.
I understand and agree with that logic (although personally I have experienced excellent teachers who had no PhD). But like you said, I don’t think it is a useful criteria in research.
My personal opinion/experiences are that those that are the worst in their field are the ones that clutch onto their degrees the most and will think lowly of a mind that hasn’t amassed as much documentation
This is the sort of weird back in the day post that doesn’t make sense. Boomers not understanding house prices and minimum wage, that is true.
This plane ticket stuff is wrong. For about the same cost as a ticket back in the day you get way more. In 1955, a one way transatlantic flight was roughly £5k. That’s $6.3k freedom dollars, one way. You can today buy a ticket on that type of route for half that price that includes a lie flat bed, amenities and pyjamas, 2 hot meals, unlimited snacks, unlimited drinks, lounge access on departure and arrival, priority check-in, boarding an ungodly amount of luggage, etc. And in the lounges you get free food cooked to order, free unlimited drinks, free second tier food like buffets, etc.
If you want to spend the equivalent money or a bit more, you could fly even better. You can have a private chef onboard making a meal for you anytime you want. You can take a shower in the sky. You can have a literal bedroom and attached private living room in a mini suite just for you. And that’s flying commercial.
The other side of it is that now people can also buy a ticket for $25. Which would be completely unfathomable back when civil rights weren’t a thing.
That entirely depends on how tall you are. Walking through those seats on my way to have my knees crammed into the seat in front of me in coach I realized that even in first class I’m too big for an airplane.
The old ones have seats with about 72in of lie flatness which is 6ft. But unless you sleep like a Victorian ghost, most people bend their knees or legs somehow. My friend that is 6ft4in has no issues and he’s tall and wide.
Most of the new ones are 76in to 82in. 6ft 10in is pretty generous. And if you need longer, there are first class seats which are full beds and you’d have no issue.
I fly in a pod every few weeks for 12hr+ flights and it’s very comfortable. I am hoping blimp travel makes a come back as I’d love to take the scenic way back with a full suite one day.
I’ve got a california king bed and frequently wake up with my feet dangling over one end and my arms over the other. I really, really doubt I’d fit on an 82 inch bed that has no space around it. And that doesn’t get into the constant light and noise and people on a plane which make it even harder for me to sleep, even if I could get comfortable.
Though many people have made it clear to me that airplanes are not supposed to be comfortable or nice, just something to endure to get to where you’re going.
Wild that we let a person cover their vehicle with signs that essentially say “I have severe untreated mental illness and no grip on reality”, and society at large says “sure, keep operating that heavy machinery in public”.
What’s the alternative? Locking up people who haven’t committed a crime if a doctor doesn’t like what they’re saying? This guy probably is schizophrenic but plenty of conspiracy theorists aren’t and people saying something true but unpopular sometimes sound like conspiracy theorists.
I said we shouldn’t let them drive a car, not lock them in prison. Calm down.
Ideally we would provide people like this with mental healthcare, and get them medicated so that they actually can operate a vehicle without being an inherent risk to everyone around them.
My point is that, in America, you can basically be screaming “I am extremely unwell to the point of being an elevated risk to myself and everyone around me”, and our usual response is to act like everything is normal and nothing should be done.
I don’t think this guy would take any pills you tried to give him unless you literally forced them down his throat. (They’re created with computer too.)
One of those signs says please spread this on the Internet. Person has a grasp on that, so it seems to me they’re basically accepting the “risk” to spread the “truth”.
I’m no expert on automobiles, but that truck would need to be 40+ years old to have no computers onboard. It doesn’t look that old to me, though maybe he just kept it in good shape.
It’s honestly hard to tell, because even a brand new equivalent vehicle would look very similar from the side. Pickup trucks haven’t changed visually much over the years.
Mental healthcare is currently unavailable as we wait for a replacement part that is on backorder. In the meantime, please accept these sign boards and this extra large sharpie for the inconvenience.
“I have severe untreated mental illness and no grip on reality”
(Emphasis mine)
That is a vast oversimplification of how people work. It is absolutely plausible to me that someone might believe obvious lies but is otherwise qualified to drive heavy machinery. Analyzing the society you live in is a totally different skill than driving.
For example, if I found out my bus driver literally believes that reptilians run the world, I would still trust them to drive my bus because driving a bus has nothing to do with lizard people. Conversely, I wouldn’t trust a bus driver who agrees with everything I believe in but is currently having a panic attack.
This is important to me because I am mentally ill (treated, but mentally ill nonetheless) and autistic (which is treated like a mental illness), and this is the kind of logic that tyrants use to manufacture popular consent to further marginalize mentally ill people.
Look, I understand the line you are trying to walk here, but encountering a vehicle like this and thinking “this guy just has different ideas than me, but is otherwise trustworthy” is not rational thinking.
There’s a difference between believing in conspiracy theories and covering your van with warnings about the nanochips on your body that give you computer generated diseases.
If I learned that someone suffering extreme paranoid delusions like this were in charge of operating a passenger vehicle, I would be extremely concerned with the safety of those passengers.
This isn’t some unreasonable thing. I have a lot of compassion for those who suffer from mental illness, but I also think that public safety should take precedent when it is clear that someone is mentally incapable of being trusted with things like heavy machinery.
It’s not the ideas expressed on this vehicle that concern me. It’s that every part of this indicates a serious and untreated mental health problem. The only way my opinion could be redeemed is if the owner of the van came forward and said it was a joke, or a prop for a movie or something, because nobody with a connection to reality is going to write those things all over a truck and parade around town trying to spread the word if they aren’t severely dissociated from reality.
And I cannot stress this enough, nothing about this story has anything to do with Autism. Paranoid delusions are not a typical issue for Autistic people.
And I cannot stress this enough, nothing about this story has anything to do with Autism. Paranoid delusions are not a typical issue for Autistic people.
Agreed, but I am autistic and I have had this language used against me to argue why I shouldn’t be allowed to make my own decisions. I.e., it is a popular misconception and form of rhetoric that autistic people have paranoid delusions because we perceive the world differently. I brought it up because I’m arguing from my lived experience as a mentally ill and autistic person, i.e. I’m not just being an internet contrarian.
I did not mean to imply that autistic people typically do suffer from paranoid delusions. However, (at least in my view) we do suffer from neurotypical people believing we suffer from paranoid delusions.
encountering a vehicle like this and thinking “this guy just has different ideas than me, but is otherwise trustworthy” is not rational thinking.
I don’t have to find someone completely trustworthy in order for them to be an acceptable driver. Actually, I typically don’t fully trust the people I get in cars with. I only need to trust them enough to know that they’re not going to veer into traffic, they’re going to drive reasonably, and that they will take me to the place we promised to go. I think that the kinds of decisions that go into driving are completely different from those that drive a person to mark up their car.
Look, I understand the line you are trying to walk here
Yeah, I am trying to “walk a line” here and I think I understand where you’re coming from, so I’m absolutely willing to agree to disagree.
“Where an objection to a belief is made, the assertion of the right to an opinion side-steps the usual steps of discourse of either asserting a justification of that belief, or an argument against the validity of the objection. Such an assertion, however, can also be an assertion of one’s own freedom from, or a refusal to participate in, the rules of argumentation and logic at hand.”
So, unlike you, I am not willing to “agree to disagree”, because this is an intellectually bankrupt position. You are overreacting to concerns regarding schizophrenic people and being irrational because of a personal concern about perceptions of Autistic people, despite nobody saying anything about Autism (but you).
I am also on the spectrum, and I wish you would think before you drag Autism into this conversation, because Autistic people like us don’t do crazy shit like this.
The guy driving this van is probably about as functional as someone in the middle of a panic attack. Very likely erratic and on meth I would not trust to drive.
The guy driving this van is probably about as functional as someone in the middle of a panic attack. Very likely erratic
I would have to talk to them first (or watch them drive if I’m in traffic) to see if that actually is the case, just like I would if the person’s car was clean.
If you’re a crazy enough that this makes sense, I don’t think you should be driving a vehicle even if you’re technically capable of doing so. At least not until you get diagnosed and treated.
I know this is a shitposting sub but this is the exact kind of comment I’m pushing back against. No, I do not deserve to lose my driving privileges because I believe that people with paranoid delusions may be safe to drive.
There’s a big difference between a danger that is tangible and immediate, such as a collision with another vehicle, and something that cannot be seen or interacted with, like electricity or a virus.
There’s nothing about this that tells me this person can’t drive safely.
So where I live if you have a disease, physical or mental, you go to a doctor and they decide if you’re ok to drive or if you need to pass an extra test first where you are judged if you’re able to drive safely with whatever disabilities you have. This is besides the standard driving test and written test. Also everybody has to take lessons with a professional.
It’s however not perfect because the government doesn’t have access to your medical records (which is good). But that means you have to be honest on a form about your disabilities. Plus the doctor visit is not covered by insurance and costs around 200 euros.
Plus if you already have your licence there isn’t really a system in place to prevent you for driving if your health declines.
What’s nice here is that the upvote to comment ratio is pretty low compared to reddit and other platforms, meaning one upvote here means a lot more than one upvote on reddit.
Also each post sparks cool and unique discussions so you get more out of reading and participating in the comment section.
aww. ya I have complete conversations with my ragdoll, I’ll say you have a nice nap?! and he’ll go YA!!! and he’ll sit by his treat box and do a really hi pitched beg like PLEASE!!! they’re really entertaining animals
That's more like a gamified Rorschach test. If you need sexual rewards to decide whether you should save a human life instead of the life of unprocessed salami, you are a psychopath.
How is this a regular occurrence? Are they factory farming donkeys alongside cows for some reason? That would have no profit motive and I don’t think you’re talking about when a family farm’s donkey dies and they sell it to be used in dog food, so I’m honestly interested in how this has become such a widespread practice.
But this “unprocessed salami” can speak. Kinda puts them on level playing field.
Unless, of course, salami is voiced by Eddie Murphy, in which case it’s an easy pick.
lemmy.world
Top