I'd love to know what drugs you tried, and your fav Kanye songs. I like his old stuff more, even the early mixtape stuff before college dropout, when he was a bit raw and battling his ego openly.
Thanks for your great reply. I think I might read about Van Gogh and try to understand him now. I saw some of his paintings at the MET, my girlfriend was blown away but I was pretty meh at the time. Perhaps I can understand more from his words
I had your same kind of problem, or more like just not having any kind of robust interest in art, and I was living in Amsterdam for a while which of course has great art museums...
I also didn't have an internet connection at home nor a smartphone, so it was really easy to build new interests, not being dopaminergically tethered to the world wide web...
So I decided to get a "museumkaart" which is a cheap way for residents to get endless museum access for a whole year, and to write a little journal about a museum every weekend.
Because I'm a kind of obsessive personality and I didn't have anything else to do I ended up reading quite a bit of whatever relevant stuff I could find to flesh out the journal entries, and that's why I read the Van Gogh letters!
So yeah, I also recommend finding a way to be more disconnected from the internet on evenings and weekends. :)
I'm not sure if it's my 'interest' but the art that seems to interest me most is that with some kind of stated science/anatomy/geometry/clean lined architecture
It may surprise you to know countries outside the us have stable corporate laws. I'd hasten to add there's nothing stable about the us right now and I'd be reluctant to incorporate or HQ there
Good, let the reasonable folk settle in DE / the US instead. Not folk who read too much sensationalized news. There may be problems but being unstable isn’t one of em.
I've noticed some people on Twitter, including Susan Fowler and Kara Swisher, saying free speech is only a protection against government intrusion and doesn't apply in the corporate sector. That seems to be mirrored in this article.
The only thing I'd say is that those people should think carefully. Denouncing and shrinking rights such as free speech and normalising their role as negative rights when it is convenient to do so will work against their agenda, and is in common with how people like Trump view other rights
I think it's hilarious you would bring Trump into this example of Silicon Valley PC-group think run amok.
This type of collective mob mentality lashing out at "wrongthink" is why Trump won the election.
This is no more common than with people who hate Trump. This is par for the course with Social Justice Warriors who treat a person's well reasoned point of view citing data as unacceptable sexism that must be eradicated, so he gets fired.
> This type of collective mob mentality lashing out at "wrongthink" is why Trump won the election.
No, he won with the help of the gutted Voting Rights Act, ridiculously gerrymandered districts, and an electoral college that gives far too much weight to rural racists.
Ironically the primary benefit of free speech was central to the article: you don't just need people who look different from each other, but think different from each other. It's sad to see that we're increasingly putting ourselves in information bubbles at the same time that our culture has decided that we should punish thoughtcrime.
But Google can't really tolerate people with controversial opinions because, ironically, the legal environment. If a person says the wrong thing, the courts will say it created a discriminatory environment. And now that even discussing controversial topics is off the table, I don't see how we can really expect things to improve. We'll just wind up with an increasingly divided society with each part living in their own alternate reality.
I think you missed the point. Nobody is shrinking or denouncing rights because right of free speech never protected against corporate sector sanctions. You are the one who is trying to expand free speech to protect you in places that no one intended.
maybe we need to re-evaluate free speech protections to bring them into alignment with today’s world, where certain corporations can be (arguably) more powerful than governments
That's arguable. Do you mean the right to free speech as found in the US Constitution doesn't extend to the corporate sector? That's true, SCOTUS agrees thus far.
Does some right to free speech not sourced in law, but perhaps morality or elsewhere, or even rooted in democracy, extend anywhere? I think that's well arguable.
did the author shot gun the manifesto or just send it to a few colleagues?
How did it spread so far?
The difference is that one is a few people discussing a thought bubble (good for everyone) the other is inappropriate use of company facilities (not good for everyone or the company).
the first one is not in itself sack-able... but the other may very well be a sack-able offence.
The author was trapped. He shared the document to the "skeptics" internal group asking for feedback. He didn't realize that the skeptics group had been infected by SJWs for years. They swarmed him. It was like dropping a steak in a shark tank.
> The author was trapped. He shared the document to the "skeptics" internal group asking for feedback. He didn't realize that the skeptics group had been infected by SJWs for years.
Sounds like a company sponsored honey pot, even more ammo for an unfair dismissal lawsuit.
If I was you, I wouldn't want to help the drug companies without getting paid. But I would be interested to see how what you've written could benefit not for profit researchers?
I don't know much about the field, but if I was you I'd probably email Professor Eric Grimson at MIT and see if he has any suggestions how your library could be beneficially shared. He seems pretty nice and into this kind of stuff.
Thanks but that doesn't really cut through the noise. It's not really for dummies, it would be nice if there was a good UI site with simple explanations and solutions. I'm sure this will be decried as trying to simplify something which can't/shouldn't be simplified but it seems otherwise web developers largely stay ignorant
there is considerable information behind each item for example A1 has its own link [0] describing much in detail. there is an incredible wealth of information there if you poke around a little, I suspect it has everything you are looking to learn.
One feedback - when you press Subscribe it opens a new tab to take you through the Mailchimp flow. Considering there's not much value on the landing page, I think it's better to stay in that tab.
