Dance as though no one is watching Love as though you have never been hurt Sing as though no one can hear you They | Bi | 32 years old I block blank blogs
The anti-vax and anti-science propaganda is very real - and also, frankly I think doctors and nurses would've had an easier time getting people not to fall for it if they spent less time treating people like fucking shit
"im not saying feminism is for everyone but-" the fuck? well im saying that. feminism is for everyone. yes even cishet men will benefit from feminism and cishet men should be feminists because cishet men are indeed harmed by the patriarchy; nowhere near to the extent that women are, but having a culture that is fully equal and anti-misogynist benefits everyone. have we forgotten that lifting up the disenfranchised people in society helps all of us as a collective? "im not saying that universal and unalienable human rights are for everyone but-" YES THE FUCK THEY ARE LOL
Okay so actually letting a serious topic be vague and confusing is much more scary for a child than explaining it in calm language they can understand.
When you are in a safe place, explain the serious topic in a way the child can understand.
The fire alarm went off at school today because of a mistake, but your teachers did the right thing to take you outside to be sure it was safe.
Some people use wheelchairs because their legs don’t walk very well. It can happen because they are old and tired, or because they got hurt, or because they were born that way.
Your Uncle Jerod talked to mom and dad, and wants you to call her Aunt Kari now. We will call her Kari too, and we can all practice together if it takes some getting used to.
Anticipate age-appropriate fears the child might have so you can assuage those that are not a threat.
Yes, Kitty died at the vet, but that doesn’t mean that it’s not safe for Puppy to go to the vet.
Yes, Peyton and Jo are getting a divorce, but they are both still part of our family and love you very much.
Yes, Grandma has cancer, but cancer is not contagious, so you are not going to get cancer by visiting her.
Anticipate fears that are realistic, and give the child clear direction about what to do, and what happens next.
If someone asks you to get in their car without permission, find Mom, Mama, or a teacher and tell them right away. We will make sure you are safe.
If Sparky’s sickness makes him hurt very badly, we are going to take him to the vet and she will give him some medicine, and he will die, but then he won’t hurt any more. Because Sparky is very sick, we are going to spend some special time with him over the next few days.
If the fire alarm goes off at school again, follow the teacher’s directions. If the fire alarm goes off and you are somewhere alone, go outside, and ask a grownup to call 911.
Reassure the child that they’re safe and loved, validate their feelings, and see if they have follow-up questions. Give them the option to take space to process, or to stay near you to feel safe.
I’m sad about Sparky too. Do you think we could make his favorite peanut-butter treats, while we are spending special time with him?
I understand why Grandma’s cancer makes you feel angry. It doesn’t seem fair that people we love get sick. Would you like a hug?
You were worried about calling 911 if there’s not a grownup around. I wrote down some important things, like our address, and we can go over these together so you are ready if anything like that ever happens.
These things are principally the job of the child’s parent or guardian, but in some cases directing the child to that caregiver is difficult or impossible (parent refuses/confuses the child, parent is absent, child’s questions are specific and relevant to a situation their parent was not present for, etc.) so I think all adults should be prepared to have these conversations with kids.
The burning question of course is whether everyone is mice, or just the humans. Like are the salarians little frogs or is it Mice and Mice With Blue Tentacles???
Someone will say "as a queer person in the heart of empire, my life is in danger every day" and you'll find out they're a developer for Amazon and live in San Francisco or Seattle or some shit, and then you'll meet a trans girl from Alva, OK who's like "Yeah, things are pretty good. AutoZone moved me to full-time."
"I have never seen a cat that showed affection/love for it's owner"
is the pet ownership version of
"I don't believe in Female Orgasms they don't exist, after all, my wife has never had one"
hi can we talk about the candle i want to talk about the candle.
the fact that it is wrapped carefully so it does not shatter. the fact that it is decorated with a guardian angel. the fact that it is lit with someone else's match, with hermes' match. the fact that the fates blow it out in any way the wind blows. the fact that eurydice's candle is out of her hands for most of the show. the fact that when she dies, hermes is the one who blows it out.
that candle is her life, and it is in the hands of the fates and the gods of whether it stays lit or not.
I don't need the chatgpt random algorithm to write emails for me because I already have a custom and 100% flawless algorithm called "writing the exact same three emails with the names changed"
#1: "hi [landlord], hope you're doing well! [apartment thing] is [broken/a problem]. we need it [fixed/replaced/handled] by [date]. let us know when you'll send someone over so we can be here to let them in. thanks so much, [op]"
#2: "hi [professor], hope you're doing well! unfortunately, I'm [sick/stuck at work/dead] and won't be able to submit [assignment] by [due date]. could I please have an extension? if not, is there anything else I could do to make up this credit? thanks so much, [op]"
#3: "hi [customer service person], hope you're doing well! unfortunately, [product] [didn't arrive/is broken/wrong color/gave me a rash/poisoned my crops] and I'd like to receive a [refund/replacement]. here is the documentation of the order and photos of [broken thing/wrong thing/my rash/dead crops]. thanks so much, [op]"
Writing an email is so easy and I will tell you how it's done. This is the advice is for everyone with an email job, but you can apply it to normal human interaction.
The FIRST SENTENCE is the thing you want the recipient to do. Do not make them guess.
I want to let you know about ... (This email is to inform someone of something not to ask them to do anything)
Could you please do ... (This is a request. You want them to do something).
I'm looking into x and wondering if you can help me (this is also a request but for information instead of an action).
People do not want to read an email and even if they do read it, most people are skimming and not interested. Tell them what you want first, then provide context or other information (when you need a thing is often key). If the email is informational, you can even add "you don't need to do anything, this is just to keep you informed!" People will appreciate not having to figure out what you want from them.
If you can't articulate what you want the recipient to do with the message, you are not ready to email them. I read too many emails where I have no idea what the person wants from me.
Put the most important thing first and everyone will be impressed! AI cannot do this for you because it can't tell what's important! Only you know that, which is why you must write your own emails.
to everyone who wants help with emails: go through the notes of this post. there are ideas I've never thought of and plenty of scripts for all kinds of situations/jobs
apparently my wife and i accidentally set a precident of "just get married and tell people about it afterwards" for my in-laws with our wedding XD So we got legally married in 2013 after our state at the time legalized same-sex marriage, but somehow she kind of forgot to tell her family until like... 2021 or so? It was very funny, we all had a good laugh at her (I hadn't realized they didn't know) that's it right?
Well then a couple years ago now, we found out that her dad and step-mom, who've been together most of her life and even iirc most of her childhood, but had never gotten married for various reasons, had gotten married a few months prior and they hadn't told people.
And now TODAY apparently my little brother-in-law and his fiance got/are getting married and we're just now finding out about it in part because the best way to sidestep some family drama (apparently, on her side) was to just not have family there or aware it was happening, and it's not like this is out of character for HIS family at this point, right? XD
Absolutely peak, no notes, this should just be a family tradition now. You get married and THEN you tell the family. Also BIL's wife(!!!) is a very sweet young woman and I support her flat saying "not today, thanks" if her family was causing issues. happy for her that her new in-laws are, for the most part, pretty chill, and apparently have a habit of doing exactly what they're doing today lmao
We got photos of them from outside the courthouse which i obviously will not share for privacy reasons, but they were adorable and looked very happy and that's all a guy can ask for when his little brother is getting married right?
Hadestown has MASSIVE cultural capital with the success of the proshot. Everyone is talking about the show. And what do they do next? Cast a certifiable piece of shit as Hades.
The stupidest imaginable excuses for surveillance pricing
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
With "surveillance pricing," businesses have finally found something AI can do way, way, way better than people: price gouging.
As the name suggests, "surveillance pricing" is the practice of charging every customer a different price for every transaction, based on the massive surveillance dossiers that Big Tech companies and data-brokers have assembled on everyone in the world. Congress hasn't updated federal consumer privacy law since 1988 (when they passed a law banning the disclosure of VHS rentals), so pretty much any form of consumer surveillance is fair game.
This is where the AI comes in. One thing AI is indisputably great for is multivariate statistical analysis. You can feed an AI "behavioral data" (information about where you go, what you do, what you buy, who you talk to and what you say) about all of your customers and ask it to cluster them according to their shared traits. Then you can direct the AI to automatically run a series of small experiments to discover the maximum markup each group will stomach under which circumstances.
This works without you having to direct the AI to rip off certain groups of people – it will simply find the most vulnerable people and rip them off the most. If you're hiring in an industry that practices a lot of tacit racial discrimination, a system like this can figure out on its own that people of color typically accept lower wages because there are fewer employers bidding for their labor, and recommend lowball salary offers, all without you ever typing "please be racist" into your AI prompt.
This works so well that Google has announced that it is their plan for making a profit off of AI, after losing hundreds of billions of dollars on chatbots:
In the before times, marketers and demographers had to dream up demographic categories based on limited data and run focus groups to figure out how to maximize revenue from each market segment. Now an AI can segment the data to any degree you choose, and continuously, automatically experiment on each segment to find their weak spots.
It's "theory-free." You don't have to discover why a group is willing to pay more under a given set of circumstances, you merely have to observe and weaponize this fact. You don't have to know why one group of purchasers consistently accept higher prices between 6AM and 8AM – you can just automatically jack up prices on them without knowing or caring that you're gouging parents of young children who are re-ordering essential supplies while trying to get their kids to school in the morning.
I thought up that example. I don't know if it's really happening. But here's something that really is happening: ecommerce sites charge parents of newborns extra when they order thermometers in the middle of the night. I'm not saying that anyone ever sat down and said, "Parents with sick children will pay whatever we charge for a thermometer at 2AM." They didn't have to: this is the kind of thing an automated system can do without any human intervention:
The goal of surveillance pricing is to shift all the "consumer surplus" (the difference between the highest price you're willing to pay and the price you actually pay) to companies. It's a form of cod-Marxism where you are gouged according to your ability (to pay) and charged according to the desperation of your need:
The problems of surveillance pricing are well documented. Under Biden, the FTC did a landmark study on the practice, developing a rich factual record that documents the role surveillance pricing plays in the affordability crisis:
Companies are already using this technology to rip you off, and they're slavering for the chance to do more of it. Instacart was recently caught marking up some shoppers' items by as much as a third:
The problem is that as much as companies love this, shoppers hate it. Last summer, Delta announced that it was going to surveillance price every seat on every flight, only to face such a massive backlash that they had to make another announcement bemoaning the fact that we'd all misunderstood their (unambiguous and extremely damning) announcement and they were actually going to do no such thing:
One thing the Mamdani campaign impressed upon every politician in the country is that people are pissed about affordability and they will support anyone who stands up for the public against AI-equipped price gougers. The problem of course is that those price gougers are highly organized and have deep treasuries (stuffed with money they stole from us). With surveillance pricing, politicians face a familiar conundrum: if they do the thing that's popular with voters, they'll enrage donors.
One way to cut this knot is to enact legislation that seems to address the problem, but stuff it with so many loopholes that it does nothing. This lets you declare yourself the people's champion without doing anything to protect them from the donors who prey on your voters. That's the approach they took in Maryland:
But in California, they're actually doing something about surveillance pricing. AB-2564 is a smart, well-written bill that bans surveillance pricing. It contains an easily evaluated test for surveillance pricing and carves out legitimate reasons for offering different prices for the same purchase (for example, when it costs more to deliver the product or service):
Now we're in for the hard yards of turning this bill into a law. That's where California's cities come in. When municipal governments pass resolutions supporting a state bill, it makes it much easier to get that bill through the state legislature (and conversely, without support from major cities, it's that much easier to kill the bill before it becomes law).
A few days ago, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors was on the verge of passing a resolution in support of AB-2564. Now, that vote is stalled, thanks to a letter sent by the San Francisco Chamber of Commerce, an organization that has been pissing in San Franciscans' faces and telling them it was raining since 1850:
The Chamber's letter is – to use a technical term – flaming garbage. It raises the most spurious objections imaginable, claims about the bill's language that are belied by its plain, easily understood text. These objections are demolished in a letter the Electronic Frontier Foundation sent to the Supervisors:
In the letter, EFF explains that claims that surveillance pricing will lower prices are overblown and not borne out by evidence. But more importantly – as EFF points out – privacy is a human right, and the idea that you should have to give up your privacy to get a fair price is just a fancy way of saying that privacy should be the exclusive preserve of people who can afford to pay more:
EFF's letter goes on to address the Chamber's objections. Far from creating uncertainty about which conduct the bill addresses, AB-2564 crisply defines surveillance pricing as:
a customized price for a good for a specific consumer or group of consumers based, in whole or in part, on personally identifiable information collected through electronic surveillance.
The Chamber raises other tired objections, falsely claiming that banning surveillance pricing will end common discounting strategies like offering seniors cheaper movie tickets, or giving cheaper rates to retain customers who call to cancel their service. EFF replies by pointing out that all the Chamber's concerns are covered by the three comprehensive carve-outs in the bill: the ability to charge higher rates when it costs more to service a given customer; offering discounts to retain customers who want to cancel their service; and finally, discounts for criteria anyone can meet (like an "early bird special"), for membership in a broadly defined group (like "seniors"), or for participation in a loyalty program.
The San Francisco Supervisors could have figured out at a glance that the Chamber was bullshitting them. All it takes is a cursory read of the statute. But now they don't even have to do that: EFF has painstakingly debullshittified the Chamber's FUD.
Surveillance pricing is grossly offensive. When a company charges me $0.50 for a product that it charges you $1 for, they're essentially saying that your dollars are worth half as much as mine are. Companies shouldn't be able to reach into your wallet or your bank account and chop your money in half:
I'm taking an intro to economics class. For one of my essays about the demand/supply curve I wrote briefly about how surveillance pricing was a useful tool for companies to most accurately predict the demand curve per-customer and thus set their price as close to the per-customer equilibrium price as possible. I intentionally ignored my ethical objections to surveillance pricing since I've gotten bad grades for "voicing my opinion".
That's the problem, on paper in pure economics terms surveillance pricing makes sense. There's some magically negotiated price for goods determined by ability to pay and need for the goods. Surveillance is just communication from the customers to the business. But that communication is not controlled by the consumer. Under surveillance capitalism the consumer has no ability to lie about their demands or willingness to pay. The equilibrium point maximizes profits and goods received. The approximated equilibrium point merely maximizes for profit at the expense of the consumer.
I feel so insane about ai. I've had face-to-face conversations with people who use it for therapy, who use it to calculate the safety of pill interactions, who use it for all their emails and grant applications and legal documents and academic papers and finance sheets and for every single question they have about the world, and if you tell them about the ecological costs they just laugh and say "I guess I've used a lot of water." and I've been in multiple gatherings of 10+ people where I'm THE ONLY PERSON who doesn't use chatgpt. it's turning me into a ranting raving pariah, because how don't you people see??? why don't you understand??????? this bullshit didn't exist five years ago, you absolutely do not need it, and it is destroying everything
my friend just had an art show and they were communicating with the gallerist over email. They could clearly tell that the gallerist was using AI to respond to their emails, but just rolled their eyes and moved on.
and then on the day of the show, my friend asks, "where is the camera I requested?"
gallerist: "you didn't request a camera"
my friend: "I did, and you confirmed that you would have one here."
gallerist: "that isn't true."
and then she proceeded to pull up the email thread, and my friend could see that every single email they had sent had been summarized by AI, and that the gallerist had then had AI write a response to them based on the AI summary, and that the AI had detected that they needed a camera, and confirmed on behalf of the gallerist that they would bring a camera, but because the gallerist had offloaded the work of actually reading and responding, she simply hadn't actually made any note of it herself, therefore didn't bring it, nor did she even know one was needed.
so my friend had done all of this communication about their needs and expectations to be able to make the show possible, and the person whose job it was to read that information and get it done had simply.... not read the information and not done it. because AI.
Dance Love Sing Live @absolutlysara - Tumblr Blog | Tumgag
kianamaiart
titsay
s-u-f-j-a-n-s-t-e-v-e-n-s
izzy806
andulkaphoto
gummygunk
dailybridgerton
origamiaround
