You are definitely right. I would like to add that what we need to make this happen is empathy for each other.
974 karma · joined November 12, 2020
I can’t get over the fact that we all must die. Everybody you ever knew and could be able to know will. You who are reading this message, I, all the other significant people in our lives, all the users on this platform. Everybody who is right now experiencing their consciousness in this universe. All the consciousnesses before - the person in the article who asked to tell the bees about their dead.
It’s as if whatever is and ever could be completely collapses once your consciousness is gone. Saying it doesn’t make sense to try to make sense about it makes no sense because once it’s over it’s as if there never was and will be no sense to begin with.
It’s filling me with nothing but deep dread, tears, pain and suffering all over my body.
Still, beautiful to see how others tried to cope with it by telling the bees.
What's your sentiment after hearing about a story like this?
Unions.
I would still like to give some response on your content in hopes that you can benefit from it.
Psychology, or the part of what is accessible to the non-academic public, and Clinical Psychotherapy are related but different fields. Psychology alone can be very disappointing to people in pain - I can relate, and shared your sentiment, as I was in pain back then, too. Since I dug deep into the academic literature of Clinical Psychotherapy and the books for the general public, I realized I was just looking in the wrong corner of the library.
Compare Psychology being talking about what a nail is, to Clinical Psychotherapy being talking about how to construct a hammer and hammer the nail correctly into the wall. It’s related but not the same. And only one is really useful for us if our goal is to hang a beautiful painting on the wall.
Hope you find some inspiration from this. Whenever it comes back, please remember to get help quickly before the wounds get septic and require much more difficult intervention. There are good people out there.
Why argue with that one pretty girl and give in into her needs, if there's more than 10,000 other girls who look literally identical, have the same gymed up bodies, have the same personalities, same preferences and fall for the same jokes?
To me, devaluing other people like this is abhorrent, but for him it's no problem.
Do the PR people have technical knowledge or does some tech person write
“I accidentally screwed up and put the key public so we have to replace” and the PR glosses over it and rewrites “Out of an abundance of caution…”?
Did you try Buddhism?
Of course, these concepts are very difficult to teach in the very early years, but it is the very first years that are very formative for all the schemas that will haunt your child throughout the rest of their lives.
But again, I don’t have children and I’m no expert on this so please don’t follow my advice.
Why do people say it’s not pure? How does it affect me? So far everything seems nicely enough documented and works mostly conveniently out of the box.
But, how does it come, that these procedures to get building permits have been slowed down/bureaucratized to the point that it almost seems intentional?
Also, the anger is not about them intentionally shortening supply - it’s about them intentionally asking and taking the higher prices. Nobody forces them to take more than e.g. a 10% shortage signal markup, but we force people on the other side to wipe the floor with their dignity.
if somebody asks an overinflated way-over productivity wage for cleaning toilets because of a supply shortage, this is considered being unethical and "unwilling to do the dirty work, while receiving benefits",
but asking a way way overinflated price for housing because of a supply shortage is considered good and healthy for the market and drives investment without shaming the investors for receiving undue housing benefits?
Why do we yell at people artificially shortening toilet cleaner supply, while at the same time not yelling at developers for artificially shortening housing supply?
Don't people need to live AND shit?
Looks like it is not about an economic argument after all. Seems like it’s again a pattern of abusing less privileged, weaker, less defensible people. Shaming them for what they naturally and humanly want - and which is the same what the privileged naturally want: To be able to say no, when they want to say no.
Where do these schemes of maliciously founded shame on false grounds come from? How did we start to listen to the voice of the psychopaths which want to divide us?
Could it instead be that the environment (or, to speak in your words: “the western mainstream hidden forces”) has altered your perception?
You can always exit the Matrix.
Meanwhile, if you read the paper, the author makes quite the opposite statement, that money and medium of exchange emerge as credit in cooperative societies and they rather focus on solving the problem of finding a unit of account on some commonly used good - which resembles a more Chartalist account of the emergence of money in societies.
Hence, this paper is actually a counter argument to monetarist ideas, and gives more credence to the Keynesian assumption that debt/credit relations between economic actors play a non-neglectable role in the behavior of agents.
Supply moderation of psychoactive agents never worked. People have a demand to alter the state of their consciousness, and we should try to moderate demand in effective ways. The problem is not the use of psychoactive agents, it is the abuse. And the same applies to social media interaction which is a very strong psychoactive agent [1]. Nevertheless it can be useful. Therefore we want to fight abuse, not use.
I would like to put up to discussion the usage and extension of techniques for demand moderation in the context of social media interactions which we know to somewhat work already in other psychoactive agents. Think something like drugs education in schools, fasting rituals, warning labels on cigarettes, limited selling hours for alcohol, trading food stamps for drug addicts etc.
For example, assuming the platform could somehow identify abusive patterns in the user, it could
- show up warning labels that their behavior might be abusive in the sense of social media interaction abuse
- give them mandatory cool-down periods
- trick the allostasis principle of their dopamine reward system by doing things intermittently, e.g. by only randomly letting their posts to go through to other users, or only randomly allow them to continue reading the conversation (maybe only for some time), or only randomly shadow ban some posts
- make them read documents about harmful social media interaction abuse
- hint to them how abusive patterns in other people look like
- give limited reading or posting credits (e.g. "Should I continue posting in this flamewar thread and then not post somewhere else where I find it more meaningful at another time?")
- etc.
I would like to hear your opinions about this in a sensible discussion.
_________
[1] Yes, social media interaction is a psychoactive and addictive agent, just like any other drug or your common addiction like overworking yourself, but I digress. People use social media interactions to among others raise their anger, to feed their addiction to complaining, to feel a high of "being right"/owning it up to the libs/nazis/bigots/idiots etc., to feel like they learned something useful, to entertain themselves, to escape from reality etc. Many people suffer from compulsively or at least habitual abuse of social media interactions, which has been shown by numerous studies (Sorry, to lazy to find a paper now to cite). Moreover the societal effects of abuse of social media interactions and their dynamics and influence on democratic politics are obviously detrimental.
Why don’t we call this disinformation?
Obligatory xkcd post
How come these things are not secured against at the LCD controller side? Why would a general purpose controller be designed to accept e.g. too high voltage levels?
I mean, doesn’t the atmosphere in our big greenhouse always retains a non-zero amount of energy, no matter the CO2 etc. in the air? If that is true, then so far the net energy out flux was positive, but now we see with rising greenhouse concentrations that it’s turning. If we then raise the stock of energy inside the greenhouse, it overheats, no?
One person describes what the person sees, which the other can’t, klicks through the Google street view, and the other see’s the global map where they put hints for themselves and together they try to find out where they are.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jul/19/footage-sole-s...
And how the porn industry was able to find so many and which are willing to become pornographic actors.
The M2 is there. Why can’t we have this?
> Could the worldwide inoculation with fairly new mRNA vaccines be an impacting factor in this development? “No, that is unlikely” says [Renowned authority in immunology], “because [plausible reasons]”
What I instead got regarding this direction was:
> (null)
Don’t get me wrong, I am fully vaccinated and still recommend it to everybody.
But I do see the tendency of distrust against the new vaccination techniques rising in my surrounding since everybody is getting sick all the time now. Especially since this development didn’t show in the first opening after the first (or second for some) wave before vaccinations were available for wide audiences.
Please, tell them it’s not the vaccines. Discuss it, convince them, give them the truthful impression that their choice to trust in science and the government was not bad. Their doubts are honest and it must be allowed to doubt and to demand to see convincing evidence. Don’t write doubters off as heretics.
This must be talked about and refuted.