Jiggle_Physics

@Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works

This is a remote user, information on this page may be incomplete. View at Source ↗

⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Time to bash Americans again⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago⁩:
Well, if this wasn’t a troll account, it would probably be for work. The US has a military presence in the Netherlands, and we have a lot of corporate cross-over, especially in the tech industry, like the photo lithography involved in making CPUs. It isn’t that weird.

This is s troll though
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Who is the enemy?⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
Then you see the cardiologist at lunch pounding an energy, and stuffing whatever the fastest option in their hospital is, down their throat.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Taco Bell rethinks AI drive-through after man orders 18,000 waters⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
It crashed the system, and that is only one of many issues they are having
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨All while the skeletal, crumbling, dusty bones of an econ major pulls business backwards into hell.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
Oh, agreed. Retrospective economic research is valuable.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨All while the skeletal, crumbling, dusty bones of an econ major pulls business backwards into hell.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
Yeah, yeah, that’s the problems with you entrailists, always buying into the fantasy of deciphering the economy from some gore. Now a principled economic astrologer, like myself? Well, let’s just say MY portfolio has never hit red.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨All while the skeletal, crumbling, dusty bones of an econ major pulls business backwards into hell.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
I am glad you say soothsayers, I have been saying for decades, and even in this comment section before getting to this comment, that macro-economics is essentially astrology for MBA bros
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨All while the skeletal, crumbling, dusty bones of an econ major pulls business backwards into hell.⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩:
Yeah, outside of some very rudimentary principals, macro-economics is basically astrology for MBA bros.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨leading ai company⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Yes, that was my point.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Why aren't you creating more workers??⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
queing?
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨leading ai company⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Because the rate is more a sign of how often problems are found, rather than how many better new things you are applying.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
All of these reports use data from sources such as liars, and have built in factors that make it askew. So why believe any of it at all?
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
So, if all of these reports are so bad, why believe the 60k number is reasonable?
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
It is called a crime, and if you read further into what harvard talks about this.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
You gloss over the context of where most of that number comes from. It doesn’t come defending yourself against some third party who has targeted you for some form of victimization. It comes from people reporting how they used their gun to intimidate someone who they were arguing with, as defending themselves with a gun. Mostly people close to them. Which normal people don’t actually consider a valid reason to say they defended themselves from crime.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Daniel Webster SC.D.; Jens Ludwig Ph.D. 2000 is a paper just dismantling the methodology, and data, behind the Kleck-Lott study. There are, apparently, a lot of studies picking this one apart, but this is the one I was familiar with before this. Basically they manufactured their results to get the conclusion they wanted. Even the best studies acknowledge from suffering from things like the telescoping effect, significantly. With Kleck and Lott, they often make arguments even their own study refutes, but they are hoping most people never actually read it, especially people who have training on reading academic papers. This article has a pretty good, bullet point style, break down of how they report what their study vs what it says, and some of the underlying issues of it, and other studies of it’s type. Here is a paper discussing how this data is collected, confirmed, and reported, and why things like the National Crime Victimization Survey, always come up so much lower (recently mid 80k range). Basically a study on methodology in this line of research.

The Harvard number you cite comes from studies that estimate 60-120k DGU’s per year. They also caution that going to the higher end requires some very loose interpretation, and inclusion, of data. Their research leads them to the conclusion that MOST reported DGU’s stem from escalating fights, from arguments, between two people, and not from someone targeted to be a victim, like a robbery, etc., defending themselves. The majority of DGU’s in home held weapons are used to intimidate family, and close friends, rather than third party assailants, and the defenses here are super varied, and often make the person reporting the DGU the criminal actor. Here is what Harvard has to say about the subject.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
This conversation is not that it NEVER happens, it is addressing why the stats where someone defends themselves with a gun are so low. In practice, defending yourself from armed thieves just gets you killed, or badly injured, the vast majority of the time. If that person had a gun, was standing out initial grabbing distance, and you hadn’t pulled your gun yet, you going to touch that grip would have likely just gotten you shot, and left bleeding in that parking lot, as the person ran off.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
It doesn’t even take lengthy observation most of the time. Most people are bad at concealing that they have a gun, especially in a way where moving doesn’t make it obvious. There is also the issue that the better something is concealed the slower it is to pull, and more obvious it is you are trying to access it.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
And this is the problem. There isn’t a good answer for the victim, at the time. You are unlikely to be in a position to effectively defend yourself, even if you have a gun. The better concealed the gun is, the longer it takes to pull, and the better the response time with the pull, the more likely the thief is to know you have it and act on that knowledge.

This is why anyone not bullshitting you tells you to do the thing that is least likely to get you killed, and that is just peacefully hand over the stuff, and let them go, then call the cops, and let them do nothing. The real way to reduce crime is to fix systemic ills.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
You might be surprised how often it is easy to tell someone has a concealed gun, if you know what you are looking for.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Is empathy a sin? Some conservative Christians argue it can be⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Well, if Jesus actually comes back, he isn’t here to do discipleship 2.0. He is here for judgement day, and those Christians might be shocked to find out which side of the holy law they are on.

Lucky for them, this isn’t happening.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Unless you are in a position where you are aware something worth defending yourself with a gun is happening, and you have enough time to access that gun, and ready yourself, you will likely not get to use it to defend yourself. In fact, if someone, willing to do a stick-up, notices something that tips them off to you having a gun, you become a more desirable target, guns are expensive, and easy to fence. They will have their gun drawn before you really notice they are there, then it is very unlikely trying to defend yourself will do anything but get you shot.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Concealed Handguns Create a Climate of Fear, Gun Industry Research Reveals⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
also the CEO of blackstone was assassinated and they are trying to make it seem like he got the wrong people going after the NFL. The lobby labeled what was on what floors, and which elevators to use. Guy didn’t wander aimlessly, he went straight to blackstone, killed the people that got in his way, killed the ceo, then himself. Sure, looks like he had a problem with the NFL, but this was an assassination target the ceo.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Anyone else from Europe feels the same while browsing the "All" feed?⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Yeah, with a few exceptions, if you are in Europe you can likely look at our new media and be like “Ha, well, at least I am not there”
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
I do not believe that stripping them of IP rights can go off without disrupting the system in place. I am not saying we should never do anything again. I am saying we are going to have to shift ownership from the private entity, to the public. This will cause a lot of corporations to shut down, leave industries, etc. They will also use their ability to manipulate vital technologies, like drugs, and dialysis, etc., to cause pain in order to scare people into compliance with them. The longer we wait to stop them from owning everything, the more catastrophic this change could be.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
That is also not what I said. Like, it is almost the opposite of my argument.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
No, that is not what I am hearing, I am hearing “we should change IP law, but not if it interrupts development/production of medical tech”
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
So where is the threshold? Also, you are talking to someone who is likely to die from the government’s recent bill stopping the supply of medicine, and other treatment, I will need. This is the result of private ownership of the medicines, and machines, needed to deal with this, and their power to affect the government. So I am currently in the situation I propose will happen, in a much larger manner, in the future as these technologies develop, and society becomes more intertwined with it. So, where is the threshold were we stop this, and change our laws on owning ideas? I propose that we crossed it some time ago, and this shift into IP law is long over due. I would rather get this done earlier, rather than later, because the only thing that will happen is this dependency will grow. Your appeal to emotion with your anecdote about your diabetic will only worsen the type of situation I find myself in, as society becomes more dependent on the tech. The longer we wait the more catastrophic it will become due to pussy-footing around, and kicking the can down the road, as people don’t want to make hard decisions.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
Tell me, what exactly is the threshold where a private entity owning society directing technology crosses to where it should no longer have that control over it? Define when allowing technology to be privately owned goes from where we are, to “oh shit, they already have complete control”? Because I would prefer to restructure how ownership of ideas works before we have to destroy society in order to course correct.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
yes, I have been trying to express that what we have at the moment is not so much the problem as the advancement and what is to come. I am also not saying that we should not do these things, I am saying when do do them we must not allow it be controlled, via IP ownership, or otherwise, by a private entity. As things stand the medical industry holds far too much sway with their ownership of things people need to live, or live well. They are also actively working against social medicine, with a current focus on the UK, and a variety of developing nations. They should not be afforded the power imbalance such ownership allows them now, and as things like this progress, it will only make that power imbalance worse. Every technology is a double edged sword, and the more one affects society the more we need to prevent the cutting edged aimed at us. I could not dare to guess the ways in which we could be impacted by future technology, much how people in the 90s could not have envisioned the societal issues that are arising now, such as the loneliness epidemic, and the structural loss of actual ownership, or any rights to anything we have. Sure we had a pretty good guess that propaganda would run wild, and it has, but many other things that have huge impacts are things no one was thinking about even 20 years ago.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Iron⁩ ⁨⁨4⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:
No, because very advanced levels of genetic engineering are unlike anything we historically have done, as is automation that basically replaces all human as the general work force. They are not apples to apples comparable.