• originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    2 years ago

    health insurance != healthcare

    health insurance profits only exist at the expense of human suffering.

    but lets make sure everyone has insurance but not care

    • danhakimi@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      health insurance isn’t really insurance either.

      it’s like a health services subscription plan with a million convoluted rules.

      • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I wish more people understood this. Insurance is an extra cost paid to protect from catastrophe. Anything that saves you money on a regular basis is not insurance: where does the extra money come from?

        Pet insurance is another bizarre misunderstanding of this nature. Unless there are procedures you are unwilling to forego to save your pet, but completely unable to afford, you are throwing money away in the long run. The entire actuarial profession exists to ensure this fact. Take what you’d spend on premiums, and invest it in a good savings vehicle instead.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, there shouldn’t be health insurance, just health care. Some things are uncertain like whether you get in a car accident, or whether a weather event causes damage to your house. Health problems are not uncertain. People will all have them. Just spend the money on training and hiring doctors and nurses to treat these issues in a large enough quantity that the care is sufficient.

  • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 years ago

    Pitbulls are not more genetically predisposed towards biting or mauling than other breeds and the supposed “statistical data” on the subject is based around a confluence of inaccurate metrics caused by 1) people not being very good at accurately identifying dog breeds, 2) existing groups that hate pitbulls pushing bad statistics for political purposes, and 3) a self-fulfilling prophecy of pitbulls having a bad reputation and actively being sought out by people who want vicious dogs and who will treat their dogs in such a way as to encourage that behavior. And I say all of this as someone who does not own a pitbull and probably never will.

    • qooqie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      So I think your 3rd point is highly likely, but I do disagree about the genetic predisposition. If it can’t be genetically influenced then goldens are not more friendly than others, and smart dogs (poodles, Australian shepherd, etc.) are not actually smarter; they all have the same genetic predisposition.

      Having an aggressive breed is possible, but as I said earlier I think the 3rd point pushes up the numbers of maulings quite a bit. I’d add a 4th point of a lot of people being real shit dog owners and not knowing how to properly raise a dog to be socially capable without harming others.

    • jozep@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      On a tangent, I’ve seen many pitbulls breathing heavily. Is this normal for these dogs? Are other dogs races like this?

  • Xariphon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    2 years ago

    Young people are people and deserving of rights, including but not limited to the vote. There is no stupid thing a young person could do with their vote that old people don’t already do and we don’t require them not to in order to keep their vote.

    • qooqie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 years ago

      When I was mid 20s I thought young kids were too naive. I got older and saw how fucking stupid most adults are and think young kids are much smarter than their predecessors. They should absolutely have a voice in elections. 16 seems like a good age to me

      • charlytune@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 years ago

        That doesn’t stop an absolute fuck ton of people believing in it. One of my friends is quite deeply into it, she’s in FB groups about it, and decides what everyone’s type is upon meeting them. According to her I only think it’s nonsense because I’ve only done the free online tests, not the proper one. She wouldn’t listen the other day when I tried to put her right about flouride in the water, either.

        • kshade@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 years ago

          Sounds like the test itself isn’t the problem but how it’s used and how much people attach to the results, like with IQ tests. Neither that nor Myers-Briggs should be part of interviewing for a job either but apparently some US companies do it anyway.

          • FunctionFn@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 years ago

            No, the test itself is definitely the problem. Regardless of whether you believe a personality type test can be effective, the MBTI is particularly and provably ineffective in just about every measurable way:

            It’s not reliable. It has terrible test-retest reliability. If I’m X personality type, I shouldn’t test as X type one time, and Y type the next, and Z 6 months laters.

            It’s not predictive. If a personality test accurately judges someone, it should mean you now know something about someone’s behaviours, and can extrapolate that forwards and predict behavioural trends. MBTI does not.

            It fundamentally doesn’t match the data. MBTI relies upon the idea that people fall neatly into binary buckets (introverted vs extroverted, thinking vs feeling, etc). But the majority of people don’t, and test with MBTI scores close to the line the test draws, following a normal distribution. So the line separating two sides of a bell curve ends up being arbitrary.

            And finally, it’s pushed very hard by the Myers-Briggs foundation, and not at all by independent scientific bodies. copying straight from wikipedia:

            Most of the research supporting the MBTI’s validity has been produced by the Center for Applications of Psychological Type, an organization run by the Myers–Briggs Foundation, and published in the center’s own journal, the Journal of Psychological Type (JPT),

            • recarsion@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 years ago

              I risk sounding very “AKSHUALLYY” here, but online tests do a huge harm to the credibility of MBTI, no wonder it gets such a bad rep when the tests are so unreliable and people nevertheless base their entire personalities on it… Originally it’s not supposed to be based on the binary choices of the 4 letters but the “cognitive functions” as defined by Carl Jung, which a lot of people will find to be just as much non-sense but with the right attitude I think they’re a useful tool to learn about ourselves and others.

    • Captain Poofter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I used to think this, but I think the new posh astrology is mental disorders in general. It costs thousands of dollars to get professionally assessed, whereas MBTI is a free quiz online. Crippling anxiety, depression, OCD, panic attacks, etc., are the new ENFP

    • recarsion@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      It shouldn’t be taken as scientific truth but it can help you know yourself and others better, and it’s an insult to compare it to astrology because at least it’s not based on completely random things like the position of the planets when you were born. The issue is that most people only know MBTI as online tests, which are self-report and have extremely vague and stereotypical questions that can very easily be manipulated to get whatever result you want, with the worst offender being the most popular one, 16personalities, which isn’t even an actual MBTI test but a BIg 5 one (which is not to say Big 5 is bad, but it’s very misleading to map it to MBTI types). In reality to use MBTI somewhat effectively is going to take studying Carl Jung’s work, how MBTI builds on that, lots of introspection, asking people about yourself, and lots of doubting and double checking your thinking. And very importantly you have to accept that in the end this all isn’t real and just a way to conceptualize different aspects of our personalities and it’s in no way predictive, you have to let go of stereotypes, anyone can act in any way, it’s just about tendencies.

  • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 years ago

    Copyright is far too long and should only last at most 20 years.

    Actually, George Washington would agree with me if he was still alive. He and the other founding fathers created the notion of copyright, which was to last 14 years. Then big corporations changed the laws in their favor.

    • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I disagree. Lemmy is a very small group of individuals and these type of threads are going to have similar minded people finding eachother. In the grand scheme of things we are next to nothing in scale of the billions of people on this planet.

  • Swallowtail@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    I don’t mind paying for YouTube premium because I think YouTube is a valuable service and recognize it’s expensive to host videos.

    • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Plus creators get paid more per premium view than per ad-supported view.

      The subtlety that people fall into with the YT hate wagon is that yes, Google is shitty and needs to be held accountable for it, but running a video site on that scale like some loving small community simply is not possible.

      I love Nebula, the online video ecosystem is much richer for it, but every time I hear people hoping it can materially compete with YT I have to laugh. Not only do their quality controls not scale at all, but YT having such a low barrier to entry for anyone makes it inclusive in a way no curated community can be, especially over the long term. Nebula is literally an offshoot of YT, it won’t be the last, and that’s part of what’s great about YT.

      Now, if only we could convince some other conglomerate to light piles of cash on fire for over a decade to bootstrap a proper direct competitor, then Google would be forced to be somewhat less shitty.

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    TikTok and YouTube shorts are brain-rotting garbage, and if you use them regularly you need to stop now. Yes, even if you claim you only watch educational stuff.

    Also giving a child under the age of 8 or 9 a personal internet-connected device should be seen on a similar level as neglect if not full-on abuse.

  • AmberPrince@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    Zelda BotW and TotK are not fun. The stamina system is pointless and the weapon durability is frustrating. On top of that, the world’s are just sooo empty. There’s really nothing in them. Oh look, an interesting ruin… it’s another repetitive shrine. Oh, that geological formation is really unique aaannnddd it’s another fucking korok seed. That’s all you ever got for exploring. Shrines and korok seeds.

    I did like slapping random shit onto my weapons in tears of the kingdom though. All in all to me the games are fine but not really Zelda games.

    • bi_tux@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      shrines bad

      Most people agree with you there

      To the geological formations and all, it’s just nice to explore them. For me the fun about them weren’t potential rewards, but for the purpose of exploring itself, but I get that it’s not for everyone I don’t think the world is empty though, there are plenty of nice sidequests, easter eggs and items to find, especially if you haven’t read any guides.

      not really Zelda games.

      They are, but Zelda games have changed due to better technical possibilities, ooc wasn’t anything like the 2d Zeldas for example

  • Xavier@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    Copyright should have stayed the original initial 14 years with possible renewal to 28 years. But like in France back then, also include the original authors (last one alive, if several) lifespan. Hence, a copyright would last either the authors lifespans or 28 years, whichever is longer.

    Moreover, the patent system is being abused and does not serve the original goal of “any useful art, manufacture, engine, machine, or device, or any improvement there on not before known or used.” It granted the applicant the “sole and exclusive right and liberty of making, constructing, using and vending to others to be used” of his invention.. It needs major changes, including the requirement to have the “invention” be under examination by reputable third-party laboratories (such as Intertek, SGI, Underwriters Laboratories, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Technischer Überwachungsverein, SGS - Société Générale de Surveillance, etc…) before being granted a patent. Nowadays, patents are given almost willy-nilly to anyone no matter how vague or obvious the supposed invention.

    Nowadays, patents are being misused in Patent Ambush mechanisms and scenarios, meanwhile Patent Trolls and Hoarders whole existence is are to impede/obstruct legally and impose exorbitant levies/fees onto organization and companies actually innovating and developing useful art/process/devices. Even more incredible, there are Submarine Patents being hidden away to suddenly take hostage existing products and process of various companies by imposing extortionate royalties.

  • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 years ago

    Not a single one of the Marvel movies are good. They just use dopaminergic techniques to teach brains to enjoy them.

    • Swallowtail@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Have you watched the first two Raimi-directed Spiderman movies? I think they stand alone well even for someone that doesn’t typically watch superhero movies.

  • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    People are crazy when they promote closed-source AI (okay, okay, generative model) projects like ChatGPT, Bard etc.

    This is literally one of the most important technologies of the future, and after all the times technology companies screwed them (us) up big time and monopolized the Internet, they go into the same trap again and again.

    First they surrendered the free Internet, now they surrender the new frontiers.

    Wake up, people. Go HuggingFace, advocate for free AI, and ideally - for a GPL one. We cannot afford for this part of our future to be taken away from us.

    • HiddenLayer5@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      Abso-fucking-lutely. Time and time and time again proprietary technology fucks us over, this is no different.

    • Sunrosa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I pointedly avoid ChatGPT for that reason. When the NovelAI leak happened, it was amazing, and the open ecosystem flourished in response. I just can’t believe they call themselves OpenAi.

      • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Ah, that name was left from when they’ve been open-source, which us why I advocate for the emergence of GPL-licensed projects.

        The open-source license for GPT model was very relaxed, which OpenAI took advantage of and, once it could afford their own programmer staff, closed the code with all the contributions all the programmers from all over the world have made.

        It’s an extremely dick move, and it was repeated by Google, too.

    • Jessica@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      I don’t use the current AI, specifically because it isn’t open source. Could I audit the code of an open source AI? Certainly not; it’s way over my head. However there would be an opportunity for experts to examine the source and report their findings. Currently? Black box, so no thanks.

      There are so many projects that could become possible through novel use of an open source AI (or whatever it should actually be called).

      Judging by the seemingly exponential improvements and integration, opinions such as ours are a grain of sand in Death Valley.

    • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      99% (likely more even) of the people out there don’t have a clue what software is, or remotely how it works, what it does, and what open or closed software is, let alone why it’s important.

      Most people are seriously ignorant about these topics, so obviously everyone runs with closed source.

      All the open source gods are getting older, the eff founder has cancer… I don’t really see a next generation step up like the previous one and that one was already a miracle that it had gotten us this far. We’re screwed on the software front. Eh, humanity is screwed in so many ways anyway

      • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        It’s true that majority is unaware and doesn’t care, which is sad.

        But we shouldn’t give up. There is plenty of youth going for freedom, and while we don’t yet have RMS of our generation, we will.

  • Hundun@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 years ago

    We learn and teach inferior personal computing practice, and most people don’t realize how much they are missing.

    The vast majority of people outside of enthusiast circles have absolutely no idea what a personal computer is, how it works, what is an operating system, what it does, and how it is supposed to be used. Instead of teaching about shells, sessions, environments, file systems, protocols, standards and Unix philosophy (things that actually make our digital world spin) we teach narrow systems of proprietary walled gardens.

    This makes powerful personal computing seem mysterious and intimidating to regular people, so they keep opting out of open infrastructures, preferring everything to come pre-made and pre-configured for them by an exploitative corporation. This lack of education is precisely what makes us so vulnerable to tech hype cycles, software and hardware obsolescence, or just plain shitty products that would have no right to exist in a better world.

    This blindness and apathy makes our computing more inaccessible and less sustainable, and it makes us crave things that don’t actually deserve our collective attention.

    And the most frustrating thing is: proper personal computing is actually not that hard, and it has never been more easy to get into, but no one cares, because getting milked for data is just too convenient for most adults.

    • anothermember@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Completely agree. Now my hot take for this thread:

      If governments some time in the 90s had decided from the start to ban computer hardware from being sold with pre-installed software then we wouldn’t have this problem. If everyone had to install their own operating system from scratch, which like you say isn’t hard if it’s taught, it would have killed the mystery around computing and people would feel ownership over their computers and computing.

    • ChiwaWithMujicanoHat@mujico.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      I think the main issue is the fact that learning about how every single component in a computer works, would take an enormous amount of time and dedication, you cannot just inspire the interest in people to learn about something they are completely uninterested about.

      You may see others as blind, careless individuals that want to get their data milked, but we all have to make sacrifices for convenience. We just cannot be interested in every single thing.

      At a societal level, we all cannot and shouldn’t be knowing what the Unix philosophy is and what it represents for software design.

      That being said, I do agree with the main point of being taught inferior PC practice, education in the schools I attended was mostly done via rote learning rather than explaining the tools that we have created to solve which problems or situations.

      • anothermember@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Given the importance of computers in our time, isn’t it only proportionally justified to spend an enormous amount of time and dedication in teaching it properly?

        • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          Only computer nerds think this way. People have a finite time and capacity for learning, and if computers can serve their needs without spending a large fraction of that precious resource it would be terrible to mandate such an expenditure anyway.

          I wish we could all be completely educated and independent in every way that matters, but it’s not possible.

          This is why people on lemmy are confused about a lack of adoption. Federation is significantly confusing and subtle; we’re just mostly dorks with the pre-inclination to get it.

          I too have to watch myself to keep from falling into the hole of blaming the dumbing-down of computing systems on a moral failure of users. It is not.

          • Hundun@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            I might have phrased my thought too bluntly: I never intended to frame the problem as any sort of moral failure on the end users’ part. I view this as a failure of our educational institutions.

            In my mind, preferring to spend time on (e.g.) MS Office in class, instead of teaching proper computer literacy, is like trying to teach meal-prep with Philips air fryers instead of teaching how to cook.

            I hear you, and I too feel like it might be just my aspi-nerdiness speaking, but the same argument could be said about any subject that is considered fundamental to highschool ed. We don’t skip on philosophy, sciences, languages and arts just because they seem less applicable than math or econ, or because “it’s impossible to learn everything”.

            Our civ made progress, having invented a fundamentally new tech that is accessible to everyone and now underpins everything. Allowing people to acquire the basic literacy needed to interface with this tech sustainably is the bare minimum we should be doing. I am not talking about turning kids into cyber wizards - just getting their computing up to a level that allows them to make relevant informed choices.

            • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              I’m totally with you. I just think the level of informed choices that we nerds seek will not be attainable through a reasonable gen ed curriculum. It would be an improvement, though!

          • anothermember@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            I was playing a degree of devil’s advocacy there because I was interested in how the person I replied to would respond.

            I don’t think it needs to be as intensive as that, I think a small amount of education would go a long way. Like teaching school classes how to install an operating system on a blank machine as a basic entry point - that would do wonders for gaining a basic appreciation for ownership over computing.

            • ChiwaWithMujicanoHat@mujico.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 years ago

              I think the other user replied what I would have said as well, we have a finite amount of time and we are seeing things from a computer-centric perspective.

              I do agree that computer literacy is incredibly important and people should have the means to know how to properly operate the things they use on a daily basis but we could make the exact same argument over a myriad of things, take for example interpersonal skills or even emotions, we barely go over them in most educational systems and something as simple as communication is one of the biggest bottlenecks you can find while working, I’ve personally seen big projects go down in a big ball of fire all because of people miscommunicating or because someone can’t control their emotions.

              As a TL;DR, we have more pressing issues as a society.

              Hopefully we can continue moving forward as a society though, and we can have better education in more aspects, I’ve been a teacher in the past and I can tell you some that students are really hungry for knowledge. So not all hope is lost in that sense.

            • zagaberoo@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              There is a middle ground for sure. Installing an OS sounds like a solid unit in such a curriculum.

    • ElTacoEsMiPastor@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 years ago

      How to learn this? The way it’s taught is so people don’t know they don’t know. What are good starting resources?

      • Hundun@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        I am not a professional educator, but in general I think it is worth to start with basic computer literacy: identifying parts of a PC, being able to explain their overall functions, difference between hardware and software, and what kinds of software a computer can run (firmwares, operating systems, user utilities etc.). This would also be a perfect time to develop practical skills, e.g. (assuming you are a normatively-abled person) learning to touch-type and perform basic electronics maintenance, like opening your machine up to clean it and replace old thermal compounds.

        After that taking something like “Operating systems fundamentals” on Coursera would be a great way to go on.

        It really depends on your goals, resources and personal traits, as well as how much time and energy you can spare, and how do you like to learn. You can sacrifice and old machine, boot Ubuntu and break it a bunch of times. You can learn how to use virtualization and try a new thing every evening. You can get into ricing and redesign your entire OS GUI to your liking. You can get a single-board computer like RaspberryPi and try out home automation.