nat's miscellaneous references

Discovered last year I couldn’t look at my 2015 MacBook Air without it triggering nausea and migraines, and figured the screen died. Have been getting by on my phone, but concluded I really need a laptop again.

Saved up, realised I could afford a brand new MacBook Neo, and got one.

-And I couldn’t spend more than five minutes looking at the screen without massive eye strain, nausea, vertigo, and if I pushed it, I-need-to-lie-down-in-a-dark-room-for-hours migraines.

Looking up MacBook and Eyestrain explained what is going on. The liquid retina displays that Apple currently has uses Pulse Width Modulation or PWM. In order to give the screens a deeper depth of colour and contrast, PWM flickers between several hundred to thousand times a second.

And there is currently no way to turn it off. There are settings and apps to reduce it, but there is no way to stop the screen from flickering. Checked Apple forums, called Apple Support, and the time I could look at the screen kept shrinking. Got the laptop Tuesday, returned it Friday, today is Sunday and I’m still dealing with a vertigo migraine.

For MacBooks, it seems to vary on the computer model and the software it uses. In retrospect, the issue with my MacBook Air started after a major software update.

And it’s not just an Apple thing. Current Windows and Android screens do the same thing. There’s even a Reddit for people who are sensitive to PWM flickers to help find computers and screens that won’t trigger eyestrain and headaches.

So, yeah. This week has been a learning experience. But for those who are prone to headaches and migraines, this may be something to be aware of, cause I was not.

I was trained in the dark arts of the cover letter by my mother, who is a hiring manager. And her training has paid off: I've been consistently told my cover letters are excellent. Let me pass on the wisdom.

The job of a cover letter is to give a prospective employer strictly more information than is on the resume. This is where you take the resume contents and put them into context. You look at the job requirements (you are looking at the job requirements before applying, right?) and look at your resume and ask the question (in your head) "why would a person think this candidate would be good for this job?" and your cover letter is the answer to that question. If you don't answer that question, the hiring manager is going to have to do it themselves, and you have way more information to work with than they do.

This is especially important if you're moving from one industry to another, because then the relevant connections aren't obvious. It's also very important if you're overqualified, because then you can use the letter to say "I know it looks like this job would be too entry-level for me, but I'm interested to pursue it for reasons x, y, and z". You can also use this space to explain away something that might otherwise be disqualifying, like job-hopping or a long break in employment. The tone to strike here is always matter-of-fact and constrained to topic - don't go into detail about health stuff or personal tragedy, just tell them what they need to hear: that this period of your resume was affected by [bad thing] but that it's now in the past and you're looking forward to the next chapter. Remember, one of the things they're trying to learn is whether you'd be content in this role, or whether you'd be miserable and leave after 2 months, which would force them to do all the work of hiring again. You're trying to establish that you will fit right in and not cause problems. Knowing what drew you to this job in particular (and don't just say 'money', that's true for everyone) helps with that.

Cover letters are your elevator pitch. Why you, over anyone else with the same qualifications? What things can you advertise yourself with that can’t go on a resume? It’s literally self-advertising. Tell an employer a persuasive narrative about yourself that will make them want to interview you.

For a quick example: this blog led to me getting my first fact-checking gig, which has become my Real JobTM.

My resume shows the blog, that first client (which I still work for, eight years in!), and subsequent professional advancement. It’s not a bad resume these days.

Every cover letter I send tells the story of how I tried to do education on the internet and got so frustrated by incorrect/contradictory/unsourced information that I taught myself how to fact-check to find some dang correct facts. That I’ve dug so deep looking for accurate answers that my work has been published in peer-reviewed journals, cited in law articles and other academic literature, and influenced the trajectory of legislation. And that I still love it! A decade later, it is a joy every single day to dig my teeth into the newest topic and make sure everything is right. This, I say, is what I will do for them.

That’s the story my resume could never convey.

I have a trick for this! It's called ask someone else.

No, really. Someone in your friends / family / favorite colleagues from that last job is going to be your biggest supporter, so make use of that!

Ask them how they'd pitch you to someone else. Insert theoretical scenario of them somehow socially encountering someone hiring for the perfect job for you - what would they say to make that person interested? What about your work history do they think would be compelling? What skills do they think you should promote?

It is really hard to figure out how to market yourself. Especially these days when there's a more performative aspect to job applications than just having the right skills. Make use of the people who love you want to see you do well.

I think this sort of thing used to be easier when written letters of recommendation were more common, honestly, because those were literally someone else advertising you to someone else.

Another thing you can do - which will feel so awkward but is worth it - is to ask friends, colleagues from previous jobs (maybe not your current one), or past/current clients to give you a blurb! If you have a professional website, those are a great thing to use to flesh them out to prove you are a real person with real skills. If not, you can keep them to look at when you need inspiration or can't remember to save your life what you're good at and why someone should hire you.

My best suggestion if you're like uh, no, I cannot write something cogent is... don't. Barf everything vaguely relevant onto a sheet of paper. Do a free-writing exercise with no constraints. Write down all the silly, ridiculous, egotistic shit you'd like to tell an employer about why they should hire you. Get it all out on paper without censoring yourself so you can get any of it on paper - and this this important, do not send it. Read it back, and draw from it to make your actual cover letter. If you're struggling, show it to someone else and ask them what they think is important/interesting/marketable.

Drafting things like cover letters and even your resume with the support of your community will seriously make them so much better. You get eyes on for spellchecking and grammar, but also to help make sure it flows and that you're not using jargon or technical language a hiring manager might not understand. It can be hard to ask and I totally get that. It's something where I think it's worthwhile to sit with the discomfort. Applying for jobs successfully really isn't a skill that's taught these days! So we succeed best when we support each other.

I practice what I preach here. This is hard for me too - I am successful because I lean on community. I don't remember the last time I wrote a cover letter without having someone else preview it, even though I have a solid template I've worked from for years. I literally just asked @kaijutegu to help me cobble together a bio for a client that wanted to include me on their website (aaaaaaaa). I read and give feedback on cover letters for my friends as well, because it's got to be a two way street.

I have switched to using Startpage.com and vastly prefer it. for one thing, instead of displaying an "AI summary" at the top of the search results (unless you turn it off, yes I know), it displays the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article, with link, whenever it finds one that's relevant.

also a waaayyyyy better sense of design than duckduckgo

Search Engines

Infinity Search is an alternative search engine with a special focus on privacy

DuckDuckGo is a popular search engine for those who value their privacy and are put off by the thought of their every query being tracked and logged. Uses bangs, ![site] for in-page search (sells your data to microsoft and draws from fucking bing)

WolframAlpha is a privately owned search engine that allows you to “compute expert-level answers using Wolfram’s breakthrough algorithms, knowledgebase, and AI technology.” A data search engine.

Boardreader is a search engine for forums and message boards. It allows you to search forums and then filter down results by date and language.

Based in France, Qwant is a privacy-based search engine that won’t record your searches or use your personal details for advertising. Uses “&” as a bang search.

Another privacy-based search engine is Search Encrypt, which uses local encryption to ensure that users’ identifiable information cannot be tracked. Metasearch across multiple engines. 

Offering unbiased results from several sources, SearX is a metasearch engine that aims to present a free, decentralized view of the internet. Can be self-hosted. 

Gibiru’s tagline is “Unfiltered private search” and that’s exactly what it offers. Requires AnonymoX Firefox add-on for privacy. 

Disconnect allows you to conduct anonymous searches through a search engine of your choice.

Swisscows provides fully encrypted searches to protect your privacy and security. Built-in violence/porn filter cannot be overridden. 

MetaGer offers “Privacy Protected Search & Find” through its anonymised search. A plugin will allow it to be made a default.

Gigablast is a private search engine that indexes millions of websites and servers real-time information without tracking your data, keeping you hidden from marketers and spammers. Variety of filtration and refinement options for searching. 

Oscobo is a search engine that protects your privacy while you search the web. By not using any third-party tools or scripts, your data is protected from hacking and misuse. Has a Chrome extension to allow use in toolbar. 

https://search.marginalia.nu/ an independent DIY search engine that focuses on non-commercial content, and attempts to show you sites you perhaps weren't aware of in favor of the sort of sites you probably already knew existed. Use old-school searching rather than query-based for the best results. 

https://www.mojeek.com/ 

https://wiby.me/ - It’s goal is to index as many personalized websites as possible, and NOT commercial sites. 

https://4get.ca/ it works a lot like SearX, but honestly better. It doesn’t have its own index, but pulls from many others. I think it’s the best for research, since it allows you to search for answers from different indexes, is easy to configure, add free, and avoids censorship as much as it can.

https://www.searchenginemap.com/ for more on how search engines relate to each other.

https://yep.com/ is a crawler

https://www.etools.ch/ retrieves from Google, Mojeek, Bing, and Yandex, like Searx

https://www.dogpile.com/ 

https://searxng.org/ (next gen Searx)

https://luxxle.com/ - possibly conservative?

https://presearch.com/ - good for academic?

https://kagi.com/smallweb - free/randomised Kagi.

Other Searchers

www.refseek.com - Academic Resource Search. More than a billion sources: encyclopedia, monographies, magazines.

www.worldcat.org - a search for the contents of 20 thousand worldwide libraries. Find out where lies the nearest rare book you need.

https://link.springer.com - access to more than 10 million scientific documents: books, articles, research protocols.

www.bioline.org.br is a library of scientific bioscience journals published in developing countries.

http://repec.org - volunteers from 102 countries have collected almost 4 million publications on economics and related science.

www.science.gov is an American state search engine on 2200+ scientific sites. More than 200 million articles are indexed.

The Trump administration is ending a key health insurance subsidy program that aimed to keep premiums for seniors’ prescription drug plans in check, claiming that it benefits corporate insurance companies, according to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz.

Medicare Part D – the government health insurance program’s prescription drug benefit – is used by tens of millions of older or disabled beneficiaries.

The program’s subsidies are set to expire at the end of the year, the administration announced Tuesday.

That move will likely result in higher prescription costs and increase premiums for about half of recipients, according to an administration official.

Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo - PHOTO: Mehmet Oz

Eligible seniors can get GLP-1s for $50 a month for weight loss alone

The changes are anticipated to happen in 2027 and enrollees will find out the new monthly cost later this fall, administration officials said.

Currently the government pays billions of dollars to insurance companies as a subsidy to keep prescription drug insurance at an average of $36 per person per month, according to KFF, a health policy nonprofit.

Ending the subsidies may increase premiums for some by as much as $20 a month, according to KFF.

Ah, so after the midterms. Smart.

Do me a favor! Anyone can do this.

In the US there are some national historical sites going to be shrunk down and used for gas/oil production. Look on the site: https://www.blm.gov/programs/energy-and-minerals/oil-and-gas/leasing

Click any state, look up the region, and find out what is there. Make a comment! You can leave as many as you want and can add information (files) into your submission. Word limit is 5,000.

I did it with the Chaco Canyon, telling them to not shrink a historical site for greed. Please help! We need to protect these lands for future generations and for indigenous people!

go to About:config find media.mediasource.enabled and toggle it to false find media.cache_readahead_limit and change it to 9999 find media.cache_resume_threshold and change it to 9999

additionally if you'd prefer mp4 to webm

also in about:config, find: media.encoder.webm.enabled media.mediasource.webm.audio.enabled media.mediasource.webm.enabled media.webm.enabled and toggle them all to false

note! this will limit video to 1080p

https://www.timesofisrael.com/report-alleges-ngos-pushed-gaza-suffering-to-raise-funds-dismissed-antisemitism-claims/

(I was looking into making stronger ties with human rights watch after some successful contributions earlier on local issues but decided not to for this very reason.)

EiGHT takes its name from five core values: Equality, integrity, Governance, Humanity, and Transparency — with a lowercase "i" emphasizing the integrity these institutions must reclaim.

^exact same thing had happened in our small grassroots group until there was nothing else to do for me but leave

I really recommend checking these resources for those well-meaning people who have let their positions be informed by their trust in these organizations. I've heard so often that it is unimaginable that so many of the institutions we respect would be misleading us in their communication about this cause. ngos, news outlets, public officials of established democracies. I can understand that you'd be more trustful of them than of a handful of strangers arguing against them on the internet. but you can now look at how the positions were distorted at the source. at the watchdog institutions everyone looks to explain the situation and create a coherent values-based assessment in a conflict. you have listened to these organizations - now please listen to the individuals as well who have been working for them

Stumbled across this:

@ZubyMusic: Politics can rot people's brains to the point that they'll oppose good ideas if they come from the 'wrong people' and support bad ideas if they come from the 'right people'

Tumblrino: I heard someone say the other day that most people's brains don't separate information into "true" and "false" but rather "us" and "them": will the people of my tribe approve of this? Then it's true. Will the people of my tribe disapprove and cast me out for expressing it? Then it's false.

This grabbed my attention because they're definitely referring to Dan M. Kahan's research on "Identity-Protective Cognition."

Most people think they update their beliefs based on evidence, but Kahan's research suggests otherwise and it's fascinating.

Identity-Protective Cognition is the tendency to selectively credit or dismiss evidence based on what your group believes, not what the evidence actually shows.

Among the ideas in this paper:

Being wrong is often the rational choice

If you change your mind on a "tribal" issue (climate change, gun control, vaccines, etc.) you risk social ostracism, family conflict, loss of status.

(Does that sound familiar?)

Being correct about a global scientific fact, meanwhile, has essentially zero effect on your personal life or the global outcome.

So your brain runs this calculation...and chooses the tribe.

Smart people are worse, not better

Kahan found that higher scientific literacy and reasoning ability actually increase polarization.

Smarter people, he says, are better at cherry-picking evidence and finding flaws in the other side's data. Their intelligence becomes a weapon for motivated reasoning, not a cure for it.

We don't just ignore inconvenient facts, we actively embrace misinformation that flatters us

Identity-affirming misinformation (stuff that makes your tribe look good) gets a free pass. Identity-threatening facts (stuff that makes your tribe look bad) get fought tooth and nail.

Kahan's proposed fix is information decoupling.

He says we need to separate the fact from the identity signal it carries.

Presenting correct information alone is useless and often counterproductive.

Kahan says you have to make the truth feel safe for someone's existing identity without implying they need to defect to the other side to believe it.

But...how?!

What Kahan is really describing is that humans are social animals before they are rational ones.

We evolved to survive in groups, not to optimize for abstract truth (to varying degrees.)

So our brains aren't broken, they're just running software thousands of years old in a world they didn't evolve to cope with.

None of this means minds can't change - they change constantly - but Kahan's research suggests the mechanism of change isn't argument or evidence. It's identity shift.

People change their minds when they find a new tribe, a new role model, or a way of seeing themselves that makes the truth feel like theirs.

And that insight might explain why identity politics tend to backfire

If you organize persuasion around group identity, you deepen the very grooves that make minds hard to change. You grow only rigid ideologues engaged in purity tests who are good at chanting on rhythm. They won't be created, nuanced, pragmatic, diplomatic, or effective communicators.

Yascha Mounk's The Identity Trap makes this case from a different angle.

When well-intentioned people make identity "the all-encompassing dividing line of American life," they aren't dissolving tribal thinking, they're institutionalizing it.

The result, Mounk argues, is an ideology that denies that members of different groups can truly understand each other. It squashes liberal pluralism.

That's precisely the condition that makes Kahan's trap inescapable.

The alternative Mounk points toward is very much like Kahan's: universalism.

Mounk says we need identities large enough to contain disagreement without triggering tribal self-defense.

His argument is that universal values, not group solidarity, offer the surest path to justice, fairness, and enduring social peace.

The model he holds up as effective is the civil rights movement. It wasn't an appeal to Black identity alone, but to a shared American identity, shared moral values, and a vision of humanity big enough that even those outside the group could feel called to it, not accused by it.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. didn't tell white Americans they were the enemy. He told them (and showed them) that they were falling short of their own ideals.

Which makes discussion impossible, because “accept a rule without any justification” isn’t something I can make sense of. The next step is “God made the world with a specific order, which includes reproduction,” but I can’t get much more out of them about how the order works, why the things in it fit together the way they do, how this improves things more than live and let live does, etc.

Some of that is just… they’re actually wrong. There *isn’t* evidence that the order they prefer is associated with better outcomes. I know this because I’ve seen how repressive governments affect LGBTQ people, and I’ve seen that cishets’ lives don’t actually improve because of it. No one is ACTUALLY the Omelas kid.

But it makes a lot of sense that they can’t even get to talking to me about outcomes if I am queer. Because that means (to them) I’m not actually rational. I’m just liking orgasms. So why listen to me, if all I want is more orgasms? I’m selfish and emotional.

Yet these hypocrites eat bacon, wear clothes made with more than one fiber, and turn things on/off during the sabbath.

Their objection has nothing at all to do with obeying the commandments of the Hebrew Bible.

"...Some of that is just… they’re actually wrong. There *isn’t* evidence that the order they prefer is associated with better outcomes...."

Evangelicals are not moved by evidence, logic, or reason. To them, this isn't a flaw, it's the foundational feature of their worldview.

"But how do we get from a leftism that grounds itself deeply in “we must work for specific marginalized groups, by looking specifically at the things that affect each of them” to a leftism that isn’t about identities?"

for any address to twitter you can replace the “x.com” with “nitter.net” and you will be able to browse as if you have an account. Lifesaver.

An interesting game where you are presented with 10 artifacts from the MET. You have to place where the artifact is from and what time period it is from. Each artifact scores up to 10,000 points, and you lose points the further away your guess is and how far off in time you are. You can only play once a day. Thanks to @baebeylik for showing this to me.

Today I scored really well. Yesterday ... not so much.

Anthropeum.com · Jun 9 2026

🟦🟩🟩🟩🟩🟥🟨🟩🟦🟨