• charlytune@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months 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
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months 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
            2
            ·
            11 months 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
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months 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
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months 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
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months 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.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year 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

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months 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.

  • Xariphon@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year 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
      0
      ·
      1 year 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

  • rbesfe@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months 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.

  • steven@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    The vast majority of humans are actually nice, altruistic and not selfish if you treat them with respect. And hence anarchism would not resolve in everyone killing each other.

    • haui@lemmy.giftedmc.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Absolutely correct. It would be the people who are in power now, building gangs and robbing the weak.

      Anarchism is a schoolyard without teachers. Most kids are ok and will treat each other with respect.

      But if you ever were molested in a dark corner of said schoolyard you know how important oversight is.

      In an Anarchist world, it would be traumatized/autistic people like me running around with guns and shooting everyone who so much as touches another person on sight.

  • SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months 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.

  • Xavier@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months 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.

  • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year 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.

    • Dharma Curious@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Add into this people who love pits and own them, but also believe they will “turn,” and so constantly give their dogs subtle cues to be on edge, stressed, and like something is wrong. They’re no more prone to dangerous actions than any other breed, they’re just very, very intelligent dogs that learn how to react to their surroundings. The myth of the aggressive pit is what causes the aggressive pit. We need real education on dogs in general, because that Labrador you love or the poodle who was your best friend when you were a kid is just as capable of snapping or “turning.” All dogs can bite, and all breeds can be sweet and well behaved.

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

  • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months 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.

    • Sunrosa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months 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
        2
        ·
        11 months 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
      1
      ·
      11 months 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
      ·
      11 months 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
        ·
        11 months 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.

  • UnfortunateDoorHinge@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Teachers should be paid 50% more. If you want good teachers to stay, you have to walk the walk, otherwise you’ll get a perpetual cycle of overwhelmed grads being bossed around by rusted-on bottom teer heads.

  • whoisearth@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Leadership has the capacity and capability to change things for the better and continue to fail to do so because true leadership means making decisions that at times may hurt and may not be universally liked.

    This is as true in politics as it is in business.

    In short our leaders are not leading out of the fear of repercussions of leading.

  • T (they/she)@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    There’s no such thing as unskilled labor. Labor is labor, specially if someone else has to do it even if you don’t want to.

  • KeenFlame@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 months 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
      1
      ·
      11 months 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.

    • SuperSaiyanSwag@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Can you elaborate on your second sentence? Not trying to be ignorant, but it genuinely sounds like “ice cream doesn’t taste good, it just has ingredients that makes your taste buds act favorable towards it”