As the premier Ivy League authority on the inner-workings of Cartels, I can definitively say that our illustrious Ivy League institutions only happen to appear like a Cartel to the very, very stupid and uneducated (eg. People who couldn't attend).
It is quite an amazing psycho-social phenomena, inextricably linked to a low SES and impoverished social capital; I hope to secure a grant to make my PhD students shit out a bunch of papers with my name on it soon.
Don't worry, all the confounding variables have been accounted for. We can't release any raw data though, so sorry but it's to protect confidentiality. Could we reasonably anonymize the data? Oh nooooo, I'm so sorry you're breaking u --
It must be really difficult living in an area of the world where the Government tortures your child, dismembers them with a chainsaw, and dissolves them in a barrel of acid if you don't pay your taxes.
You act as if governments throughout history haven’t committed atrocities a thousands times more gruesome than this. I’m fact, I can think of a fairly famous example within the past hundred years.
Come on, give examples please don't leave me hanging! I think the Mafia are sick fucks, but lots of governments have been too. No shortage of violence in this pit of animals on this stupid space rock.
But thousands of times more gruesome than that!? That's wild. I've watched Cartel vids where they slice open and expose the vocal cords laterally as their victims wail, creating otherworldly sounds.
But that's like... MAYBE 0.5x as gruesome as torturing some poor helpless child or tossing infant into a barrel of acid. So if you've got stuff that's 1000x as gruesome, I can't even comprehend! Please post.
Take china for example, How many families/people/children were tortured and killed when the japanese invaded manchuria. That is an invasion, you may say, it does not count, ok, Now look at how many more than that were tortured and killed in chairman mao's cultural revolution.
The scale at which modern governments operate makes all of organized crime look like child's play. The quote "A single death is a tragedy, a million is a statistic" Is particularly apt here.
But, the Mongol government creating mountains of skulls that appear to travelers in the distance to be snow covered mountains with such a trail of human remains that the “grease” renders their horses immobile is pretty darn brutal.
Man... I just find neural connectomes so depressing.
It's like looking at the copper wiring on the motherboard, or the pins of the CPU, when what you really want is the logic from the networked gates (transistors).
Yet it seems we are many, many decades away from being able to extract that in any comprehensible or definitive way.
I need to stop reading neuroscience articles. There's always big proclamations, Like "the neural circuitry behind arithmetic has been discovered!" then you dig into the meat and it's mostly guesswork and hypothesis based on correlated activity and connectivity, no logic to be seen.
This paper did blow my mind though, I hope to see more creative stuff like it:
> It's like looking at the copper wiring on the motherboard, or the pins of the CPU, when what you really want is the logic from the networked gates (transistors).
and what you kind of really want is a debugging guide to an OS.
Yeah all that criticism doesn't go into any detail about actual methodological flaws or issues with the results... It just complains about language and is pretty sanctimonious for such weak and generic citations. Like, those are the sort of citations I'd give as an undergrad and trying to pad a paper to make it seem more authoritative and well established than it is lol.
Were any of the criticisms NOT centered around their irresponsible use of language and about the actual methodology and results? How they cultured different neurons to play pong is pretty amazing by itself to me.
Yeah I don't get any either. I also don't think they're selling your data (or if they are, they're very bad at it) because my targeted ads don't reflect my activity on their OS...
Unlike my android phone. My youtube ads change noticeably in response to whatever I've recently googled, it's very unsettling how dialed in they are.
My daily driver is Linux though. I do agree that's what you should be using if you want to be free of these dystopian shenanigans.
I have a question about Siri that I don't want to risk testing...
If you tell her "OH FUCK SIRI THERES SOMEONE IN THE HOUSE CALL 911 OH SHIIIIT!!!!"
Will siri use her chastizing tone not to speak to her that way and ignore you?
I feel like it would be hillarious if she did. She's also dumb as a bag of rocks in my experience so I suspect she would. Bitch can't even reliably play podcasts.
She's very pleasant if you tell her "thank you you classy bitch." But it has to be the entire proper "thank you." If you say "thanks" she gets offended.
Yeah you can google it, it's a real program that Alexa will notify you of sometimes (if you're in a participating region), just like the other ads, sorry, "reminders" it serves.
America is so rich and powerful precisely BECAUSE it maximizes efficiency and capital. Gutting all of those jobs and making it so that they only have 30 seconds to inspect each car (which is pretty much impossible to do due diligence) makes it so that they can rake in a ton of cash.
Sure, accidents will go up. Small little towns will find themselves doused in carcinogens or burned to the ground (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lac-M%C3%A9gantic_rail_disaste...). Politicians will use it for photo ops. Yet a small group of key individuals will amass a ton of capital and, therefore, power. They can then use that to create more businesses and ventures that will be just as ruthless and driven to succeed at all costs.
I don't think it's "gutting" America. On the contrary, I think it's the heart of America, and what makes it so powerful and hegemonic. You don't make a scientific and cultural powerhouse omelette without breaking a few eggs.
I bet you also think that cutting executive salaries would somehow make major corporations like McDonalds be able to pay all of their workers a living wage. I would encourage you to do the math on that -- it literally never works out.
>I bet you also think that cutting executive salaries would somehow make major corporations like McDonalds be able to pay all of their workers a living wage. I would encourage you to do the math on that -- it literally never works out.
Hmmm, in Denmark McDonald's manages to pay their workers ~$22 an hour[1], with 6 weeks of vacation, and paid sick leave without substantially increasing prices[2], and remaining profitable.
In a similar sense, can you reasonably object to being eaten by a man-eating tiger?
We create corporations who's utmost responsibility is feduciary in nature, we make capital the lifeblood of our society, and then act shocked and horrified when capital trumps human life, and corporate interests hold similar priorities?
Seriously. How did anyone think gutting the workforce and the ability to do safety inspections in a reasonable manner would turn out in any other way? How did the regulatory agencies think this was acceptable? The quote by Cixin is the only explanation.
That disaster I cited in Quebec was many years ago, yet a scathing report was released that effectively nothing has been done to meaningfully/substantially regulate the railways. An entire town was wiped from the map. What business is it of theirs if they are ground to dust by industry? Ultimately we are all meat for the machine :)
> American is so rich and powerful precisely BECAUSE it maximizes efficiency and capital.
> I bet you also think that cutting executive salaries would somehow make major corporations like McDonalds be able to pay all of their workers a living wage. I would encourage you to do the math on that -- it literally never works out.
So what you're saying is that capital's big brain move is exploitation of the worker a.k.a maximizing efficiency? Why's the reasoning that the mom and pop store shouldn't be opened if it can't "afford" to pay it's workers a living wage but when corporations like McDonald's do it it's hailed as maximizing efficiency and capital.
You said it yourself: "paying workers a living wage literally never works out".
Not only is that not true (as pointed out by another comment regarding McDonald's in Denmark) you're admitting that part (at least some of) the "efficiency" is really just theft from the worker.
I find it hard to believe that that's what you're stating, trying to give you the benefit of the doubt, so what am I missing here?
> I bet you also think that cutting executive salaries would somehow make major corporations like McDonalds be able to pay all of their workers a living wage. I would encourage you to do the math on that -- it literally never works out.
Ignoring the "franchising" model which explicitly breaks the local/corporate link of profits and costs...
- McD had a 12B in profits in 2022.
- McD had ~2M in employees at franchises
- McD employees make ~$12 an hour. Thats 24k a year at full-time.
- I couldn't find just the executive salaries.
If you took those profits and distributed them to employees, thats a 25% increase.
You're citing gross profits, when what you actually want to look at is net income, no? For 2022 that was about 6 billion.
So now we're talking about a 12.5% increase in wages, in exchange for the entirety of the net profits.'
The best part is that it is common practice not to give people full-time hours so that they don't qualify for benefits. So I imagine of those 2M employees, a huge amount aren't exactly getting a living wage even after that 12.5% increase.
> The best part is that it is common practice not to give people full-time hours so that they don't qualify for benefits
Gross profits are fine. We’ll leave the 25%. If people aren’t working full time (which was assumed in the calculation) then that means it’s >25% increase in salary. Seems pretty life changing to those employees tbh. Imagine a 25%-50% raise? Life changing to someone who is intentionally denied work so they can be denied benefits.
Interesting point. Though, the average and certainly median american is not rich (somewhat poor even), and has worse quality of life and life expectancy than lots of the rest of world. US is behind Cuba, Guam, Chile: https://www.worldometers.info/demographics/life-expectancy/
> Yet a small group of key individuals will amass a ton of capital and, therefore, power. They can then use that to create more businesses and ventures that will be just as ruthless and driven to succeed at all costs.
I'm really not sure if that is a good thing. What are those costs? Are we talking Amazon workers wearing diapers because the walk to the bathroom is too much inefficiency? People getting layed off when they have cancer and also losing their health insurance at the same time? Further, those new businesses, would they perhaps also mostly benefit that same small group of people?
They're citing "their friend" and posting other stuff from the daily mail. Like... No.