executed for youtube crimes

Culturally, it has a ton of unspoken rules that, politically, must remain unspoken, and this is combined with the conviction that people only ever break those unspoken rules through conscious malice.

In any kind of subculture, there’s going to be differences between the stated values and principles of that subculture, and the actual values that people put into practice.

I really believe that American leftism has a higher seperation between stated values and actual values than most other subcultures, and a higher number of unstated values.

Like, I’ve said this before but for a long time I genuinely thought, “Hey, literally everyone in my social circle loudly agrees with me that gender roles are just arbitrary stereotypes, often based on sexist double standards, so that must mean that I can just wait for women to ask me out, and that ought to be a perfectly viable approach!”

This, of course, is not true.

I’m still incredibly pissed off, and it’s not so much that I’m pissed it isn’t true, I’m pissed nobody told me until I thought to ask.

And after asking multiple people, they all explained that they came to this conclusion more or less instinctively. It wasn’t explained that heterosexuality means men do almost all the asking, it was a conclusion that they had to “pick up on” or “realize”.

The stated values of all my peers were, “Gender roles are meaningless and we need to constantly, explicitly examine gendered behavior” and the actual values they were, “But come on, everyone knows that guys initiate, and since everyone knows it would be weird to, like, bring it up in conversation or get too hung up on it.”

I have a lot more examples.

Don’t get it twisted, this is not a proxy for “virtue” or “kindness”. A Nazi might have a very close match between his stated anti-Semitic values and his actual behavior in the world, that doesn’t make him a better person than your average vaguely woke leftist.

Vegetables you plant in mid-summer and harvest in early fall!  also called “Late Season”, “Fall” or “Cool Weather” vegetables.  In mediterranian climates, you plant them on like, Halloweenish and harvest them in the middle of ‘winter’/February, and since I grew up in CA, I still call them ‘winter vegetables’. 

Winter vegetables include: Pumkins (tho they’re slow-growing so it’s better to put them in a bit early), other Fall/hard Squash, broccoli, Brussel Sprouts, cauliflower (really, the whol wild mustard family), Carrots and in general, the tougher, non-leafy vegetables. 

In CO, there’s really 4 growing seasons, which are:

“Start indoors and play frost chicken until early summer (March-early june)”: Plant Lettuce and other leafy greens that will grow under a light, herbs from seed, tomatoes from seed, other things that normally harvest mid-summer

 “Early Summer (Early May-early July): Tomato starts, peas, Potatoes,Corn, Herb starts, summer squash, zucchini (don’t), melons, Millet, Summer Wheat, Spelt, and other things sold in inviting little containers around mother’s day

“Late Summer to Fall Frost Chicken”: Fall squash, broccoli, brussel sprouts, Kale for some reason, potatoes if you want the bitty ones in fall, stuff from the greenhouse discount rack, Carrots, Winter wheat, Rye

“This Is Actually A Perenial (Next year)” : Some things you put in the dirt and harvest Next Year: Garlic, Big Onions, Potatoes that you didn’t dig up last summer, fruit trees etc

“ABSOLUTE HUBRIS” Keeping Tropical Plants in pots and playing year-round weather-chicken/taking them indoors and yelling at the cat to stop eating them all Winter:  Lemon Shrub, Vanilla Orchid.

It seems like noting the Barmol effect here is kind of restating the problem. Even if it is true that most of the cost rise is an artifact of education etc not being automated as quickly as the typical sector of the economy, it’s not really an explanation of what is really the root cause.  

It is more interesting to ask WHY these sectors are unusually resistant to automation, or swapping highly trained workers, for a mix of automation and less training.  

It does not really seem apriori true that these sectors should be wildly impossible to automate. One would guess that e-learning, particularly at the high school and college level where education is not in large part a childcare service, would have widespread impacts. Similar with housing or healthcare.  

My guess is that regulatory capture is probably a large part of the explanation for why these particular fields are automation-resistant.  

A lot of the authors in the above-linked discussion seem to be assuming a model of regulatory capture where the primary method used to benefit incumbent workers is supply restriction. Ie. Lobbyists push to have very restrictive regulations on who can enter the field enacted. This causes prices to rise. But there does not seem to be extremely disproportionate increases in wages in many of these fields. Which would seem to suggest that this is not occurring.  

But it seems to me that regulatory capture can just as often work through boosting demand artificially, not merely constricting supply. It can work by increasing the job security of those in the regulated field, or by increasing the number of people in the field that are required to do common tasks through artificial inefficiency. Policy can serve to restrict the introduction of potential new modes of automation. Policy can create artificial inefficiency by mandating in that useless tasks be done along with the productive work.  

And if in the long run workers in the restricted fields are highly fungible with workers in other fields (ie. doctors, teachers, construction workers and so on could easily have chosen a different profession over the course of their career or vice versa), than it seems like this should not cause extreme salary rise in the affected fields.  

And that in-fact there are many cases where lobbyists would find it more in the interests of those who they represent to behave in this way.

It might be that the main ways of restricting labor supply will also put those currently in the field at risk of exclusion also

Job security, not income might be the main priority.

It might be easier to conceal demand boosting regulations as beneficial

There may be overlapping interests between companies and workers in the demand boosting case but not the supply restricting case.

https://siderea.livejournal.com/1200003.html

https://siderea.livejournal.com/1202866.html

https://siderea.livejournal.com/1197853.html

https://siderea.livejournal.com/1204154.html

https://siderea.livejournal.com/1207401.html

https://siderea.livejournal.com/1213000.html

I am inclined to say nuclear families because, from what I’ve heard from my parents, extended families in the Old Country were p awful.

In the Kofun period, as the early Japanese courts adopted Chinese culture, plant-type pokemon rose to social prominence, as Chinese philosophers glorified plant-type pokémon for their value in cultivating land, sustaining civilization, and promoting social harmony with their aesthetics (and, as would be later understood, chemical manipulation of the human brain). For this reason, the bulbasaur, a ubiquitous pokemon in China, was adopted as the chief pokemon of the Japanese imperial courts, despite the creature being alien to Japan. Later Japanese emperors would enshrine the mountain-carving Korean Blastoise and, much later, the European Charizard as equal symbols of Japanese cultural reach, but Bulbasaur always held the position as the primal pokemon of Kanto.

This “plantmania” did have a literally toxic knock-on effect, as the Kanto population of plant-type pokémon are entirely poisonous, unlike those found in other regions (including the imported Sinnohan Tangela; note that Tangela only dwells in a patch of grass near the aging port of Pallet Town, and in the Safari Zone). This led to a disproportionate amount of power concentrating in the hands of the psychic-training mediums in Kanto society, including the notorious “shadow regime” of the Itako of Mt. Osore.

Due to the psychic stranglehold on Kantese politics, the people were unusually ignorant of Ghost-types (with their existence only confirmed with the Sylph Co.’s work at the end of the 20th century), and Dark-types had been completely exterminated from the region despite their presence in neighboring Johto (with the dark variants of Kantese pokémon establishing roots in Pacific Island chains such as Alola).

Oda Nobunaga introduced Steel and Dark-type pokémon into the region in his attempt to unify Honshu and wrestle power from regional psychic priesthoods; While these types remained in Johto, their population never stabilized in Kanto and faded quickly after Nobunaga’s death in Honnō-ji at the hands of Akechi Mitsuhide‘s Portuguese Charizard Kapadokya.

At the end of the Kofun period, the Emperor established a rule to curb similar excesses; the peasantry could only own normal and bug Pokemon, while those of the merchant class could use water and flying, and no more than three. The other types, especially the “heavenly,” were the domain of the nobility; a noble could train up to six pokemon, but they must be of the type of their house. The Dragon-class was the sole domain of the Emperor and his household, who alone could raise pokémon of any type, without restriction. The Dragon-class privilege was later extended to the shogun in the Tokugawa period, leading to the eradication of the Fairy-type from Japan, with most local varieties of those species bred into normal-types.

This legally enforced connection of the poke to the symbolism of the noble and imperial houses lead to their conceptual merger with the Japanese system of heraldry, the mon.

In the Kamakura period, Johto became a major cultural and commercial center, as its rich soil allowed the production of Apricorns, which could be ritually altered with carving and mercury inlaying to seal away pokemon in a small, weightless space. These sealing spheres allowed the development of a far more efficient and mobile pokémon warrior class, leading to the ascension of the pokésamurai and a strong ronin underbelly, with Minamoto no Yoritomo generally acknowledged as the first pokemon master.

Anyone can play a princess. Anyone who says otherwise has a small imagination.

Photographer: Lily Andrui

So I think this is an unusually candid explanation of why people hate people who work in tech, and I appreciate that. It’s also not true, though. 

Accommodations for some disabled workers do not come at the expense of workers in different industries. There’s no real way that could be the case - Google’s budget for nap rooms and food served in the office comes, like the rest of Google’s budget, from selling ads, and is part of Google’s employee compensation, and also for many disabilities is required by law. People who get accommodations at work are not stealing them from you.I didn’t make widgets; I worked at a company that does background-blind hiring. You take their coding test, and if you can demonstrate coding skills you get a referral to tech companies with open roles that are a fit for your skills. We got jobs for people who were, yes, putting in 12 hour shifts as a delivery driver or warehouse worker. It was pretty great.

Here’s the kind of thing that the tech workers I know actually do: automate biological sciences so we can develop new medicines more cheaply and more efficiently; develop better payment processors for small businesses; make it easier to order skincare products; show people news articles; teach people to code; work on mitigating AI risks; make websites for nonprofits; make websites for for-profits. Some of these are incredibly noble endeavors, some of them are just small, reasonable things that people do because they make a particular kind of need easier to fill or product easier to access. None of them are automation of blue-collar work, because automation of blue-collar work just largely isn’t commercially viable or a good idea right now. I know far more people working on automating aspects of law, recruiting or accounting than people working on automating waitressing or security or cashiering.

You know who’s to blame for long shifts and shitty workplace conditions? Society, which is finally rich enough to make things better but mostly hasn’t. You know who is not to blame? Disabled workers whose jobs don’t suck. 

And do you know who’s to blame for the catastrophic rise in housing costs? City governments that have eagerly brought in jobs without building more homes, thrown in restrictive laws preventing people from building homes on the land they have, and parking and land-use requirements that make cheap housing for everyone unviable and nonexistent. They’re fucking over all of us and you should absolutely be angry about it. 

So here’s what I think happens. I think that people hate tech people, and have tough lives, and I think that they decide that this is because the tech people are stealing our workplace disability accommodations at your expense somehow, or that our jobs are destroying your jobs, or that immigrants to a city have no right to live there and cities are only for natives.

It’s just… this is what grinds my gears the most about rattumb. There are people whose obvious and abundant concern for human wellbeing—and in particular the wellbeing of the disabled—can be converted seemlessly into a defence of the biggest current threat to privacy, equitable employment regulations, the future of free expression, and organised labour. At least when they and those they love stand to benefit from it.

Cycling is the only non-painful form of transit available to me. Disability is not a continuum from abled to broken. I am, in fact, unable to walk, and cycling is a useful accommodation.

I suggest OP to redirect their anger from cyclists to the apparently inadequate local transportation council. If the bikes had sufficient lanes to accommodate the volume of cyclists, they wouldn't be in the way of pedestrians.