They don’t have to be new or good. Or recently washed.

Crohn’s here. You would not believe what my body can produce. The other side of it as well is when you really need to go, and somebody has thoroughly destroyed the only available cubicle(s). I once just walked out the state of the loos was so bad. It’s ok to touch the toilet brush to sort out your own stuff people 😭

To understand this you need to understand the theory. Marx outlined that socialism and communism each had to be transitioned to after reaching a given level of social/economic development. In particular there is the notion of “withering away of the state” which would happen after a global revolution, which is the aim of this classless/moniless society they outlined.

The communist manifesto is a short read!

In fact the USSR implemented explicit market policies, a sort of contained capitalism, which was designed to facilitate reaching the necessary preconditions for socialism and communism. Essentially all of the “communist” states we’ve seen so far have been some play on the notion of just “socialism in one country” in the Marxist-Leninist version of communist parties, who have/had the goal of eventually reaching communism.

What’s probably most interesting is that the idea behind the USSR wasn’t initially to have the state direct everything from the top, but in fact to facilitate worker councils (soviets) to direct their workplaces.

But you have to remember this all happened in the context of a state which had recently undergone a revolution, was rife with counterrevolutonary action (see revolutionary France and civil war Britain to see how this played out during the birth of liberalism) and was then plunged into WW2 where most states involved were acting fairly dictatorially for the duration of it. Followed shortly by the US making it an explicit goal to prevent world communism through e.g. CIA intervention because they feared “domino theory”

As it happens you don’t actually have to be a social chauvinist for the country in which you reside.

“hey guys I was just chatting with the wives and they all think waging war is for guys with small dick energy”

I’m fine enjoying their leavings.

hello, .world! 👋

By the sounds of it the first point is handled by having essentially a year long probationary period, and then another two year period before someone becomes fully entrenched in the org as a full partner. This is almost certainly a long enough time to determine if someone is going to be a piss taker or not and so other instances of underperformance can be handled via supportive mechanisms.

It’s worth highlighting that performance “curves” in some companies seem to lay off reasonably productive people and preserve people who are great at gaming the system/metrics.

For conflict resolution I don’t know how they do it, but if I were in charge of this I’d probably have a dedicated body like an HR set up for this which would be democratically accountable but ultimately still deal with that kind of thing as a last resort (assuming it can’t be sorted out between team members).

Many worker co-ops have been resilient to recessions as members often choose to temporarily lower their own pay/share of profits rather than having layoffs or other similar arrangements. https://www.yesmagazine.org/issue/new-economy/2009/06/06/mondragon-worker-cooperatives-decide-how-to-ride-out-a-downturn

For me I was actually diagnosed with just dyspraxia as a child and it was considered severe enough to have some support needs, recently my mum told me that the educational psychologist said I probably had symptoms of both autism and ADHD but I was never put in front of a psychiatrist who could diagnose that stuff.

Of course this was also back when the DSM had the mutually exclusive diagnostic criteria so who knows what they would have labelled me with in the end. I think the apparently ADHD symptoms bother me more and seem more treatable so I’ve gone in for a referral for that at least. Only 6 months to go 🙃

The main thing about the prevailing circumstances is that it showed idiocracy was way too optimistic. Their eugenics-ish narrative happened over way too long a period of time. We just needed a bunch of billionaires to poison the information supply.

It’s too easy to reply “it is” at this point for sure.

The victims are those who want musk punished

We covered this, it’s not the case

Sounds to me like it’s a victimless crime then.

I think it’s fair to say Musk already screws them to the maximum extent possible, so the degree to which they are screwed is probably not responsive to changes in insurance premiums and we can expect that to more or less come straight out of Musk’s pocket.

Some LLMs have specific jailbreaks which including in the document may cause them to act strangely in a way that is specific to the LLM. But it’s unlikely to be robust over time as they get patched/changed/etc.

Strictly speaking these all do something similar-ish at face value but actually quite different in terms of mechanism and target. I think the unpopularity of a lot of these licensing structures is also down to lack of legal verification in a lot of cases.

The illegality possibility does warrant careful consideration, but I suspect in many cases regimes which would oppose this kind of license would be making the use and enforcement of software fairly selective in any case. If it is made illegal, it’s made illegal by the respective government, not the software author or license writer.

A question is then raised as to what degree the implied open source requirement that open source should be leveraged by e.g. Nazis actually benefits developers and users. Or whether it is in effect a kind of appeasement as no doubt use which contradicts those values (and hence promotes freedom) is illegal already. Those uses which are orthogonal to that aim may be selectively targeted for arbitrary reasons such as the identity of the user.

Strictly speaking I think such provisions would be unenforceable in those circumstances anyway so doesn’t the effect kind of cancel out? Don’t get me wrong I get where you’re coming from but why would we imagine such a license has an effect in nations that are already hostile to those ideas and probably have broken judicial systems anyway?

It is ok to question the benefits of open source provisions. They are written by humans and are fallible.

Yep, it makes sense when you consider the real nature of management and why it actually exists.

A rich man starts a company. He hires 12 people under him. He’s working a bit harder than he’d hoped, he’s constantly fielding questions and such but all is well. He needs to hire two more people. This is too many for him to manage directly, so he appoints two people to manage the other twelve as two teams of 6. All is well again.

They expand up to 30 people and suddenly they find the two managers are too stretched again! So another manager has to be introduced. When the company is over about 150 people, we even need multiple layers of management to keep this whole thing afloat as suddenly there are too many managers reporting to the founder or to the managers.

Yet at no point does the person who owns the company agree to give up any real control. If someone sets a budget he doesn’t like, he gives that control of the budget to someone else. Everyone in that hierarchy is acting on behalf of the owners under this arrangement.

The managers are just sat there with the mandate to make employees do more work under ever-increasing resource constraints, in the name of profit maximisation.

The management hierarchy functions as little more than a way of getting the owner’s instructions down to the employees by people who can interpret them as such, and to feed issues back to whatever level has the ability to deal with them (or declare them not an issue, as is often the case).

I’ve been using this for a while. It’s good, lots better than postman’s annoying attempts to force you into their cloud nonsense.