• 1 Post
  • 25 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle
  • It’s not just the people in power, though. When I look at primaries, where people actually have some hope of affecting outcomes, they consistently vote for the worst people. I mean, it’s hard for normal-ish people to even get to through the party structure to get on the ballot, and then they just get crushed. In 2020, Dems could have had Bernie, Warren, Buttigieg, even Klobuchar, but Biden won pretty handily. That’s on people people.



  • Recently saw a video where the boss of a contracting company, apparently a good guy, looking out for his employees and honestly trying to help everyone prosper from their shared work, explained that he hired new people at the 10th percentile wage from BLS statistics for their job description, raised them to median after six months, and eventually worked them up to 90th percentile over a few years.

    On the one hand, making sure his people are paid a fair wage for their work. On the other, participating in an information sharing scheme to fix wages. BLS data is generally a year out of date, so he’s actually paying people last year’s wage, but the sense of implicit collusion only increases as the data becomes closer to real time.

    Glad the Biden administration is closing the loophole, but I’m skeptical that it will really work in today’s information-rich environment.








  • Another non-marginalized person here.

    Restricted spaces are necessarily smaller than non-restricted. Less content. Less interaction. Less everything. If hateful content is really rampant, then that can be a valid tradeoff, but separate systems are never equal, and it is always the minority/marginalized system that suffers. You’ve described exactly why: “I would find a new instance and continue to be receptive to LBGT+ discussions that come up on Lemmy.”

    As I look elsewhere in this thread, the comments I see people reference as “against Beehaw goals” are just people being rude assholes, not misogynist, racist, or homo-/trans-phobic. Creating a space where everyone is polite and universally friendly seems a very different objective than creating a space where marginalized people feel safe. If that - universal friendship - is the real goal, then Beehaw very definitely needs to close off interactions with non-vetted, pseudonymous users, and accept that it will look like a virtual ghost town. In that case, it doesn’t matter whether it stays with defederated-by-default lemmy or moves to some other forum platform.

    The middle ground, where you accept that some people are just rude, but still provide a forum where marginalized people feel they can share their experiences without threats or repercussions, needs strong, active, focussed moderation. Have to be able to block users and communities from other instances, delete posts/comments that originate from other instances, and do local moderation of communities hosted on other instances. Have to have enough moderators to respond quickly to user reports, and probably an automod-like system to catch serious issues before users do. It sounds like that is not within the current capabilities of lemmy. So, I can see why the admins think that the lemmy framework is incompatible with their objectives. Probably, a lot of the people who joined post-Reddit are incompatible and uninterested in those objectives.

    I can see where the lemmy framework worked when no one used it, and I can see why it would immediately fail in the face of hundreds of thousands of new users. If millions are coming, it will only get worse. No doubt, the admins are aware that they’ll lose 80, maybe 90% of their userbase if they leave Lemmy, but it’s not so long ago that their userbase was only 10-20% of what it is today.

    If I lose this little window into cultures I would not otherwise see, I will be a lesser person for it, but I can accept that it was not meant for me in the first place.





  • It’s not a hardship, though. I’m healthy with no chronic conditions, and I’ve made the specific choice to go with a HDHP to get the HSA, which I treat like a pre-tax Roth IRA. If some catastrophe happens, it’ll be easier to pay for surgery out of the HSA than a real Roth, but I don’t expect to see doctors until Medicare. I don’t even pay for glasses out of the HSA, because its future value is too great.

    This is a perfectly rational individual choice to maximize my personal benefit, but it is terrible policy at the population level. It means there are less resources available for the small minority of people who do have expensive health issues, because I’m diverting my insurance premiums into a retirement fund. This is a recurring theme in right wing policy - it’s fine for people whose lives have no major complications, and people with special circumstances are too few to consider. You have to look out for yourself, and a few people will fall through the cracks, which is a borderline sociopathic attitude.




  • I think the HSA is a big attraction for the GOP - tax advantaged encouragement to get more people investing more money in stocks. Practically, though it also means more people effectively self-insuring. My deductible is $6500, but I’m allowed to put $3500 into HSA, so 2 years’ HSA savings covers the deductible. Fine, for individuals that are reasonably healthy, but it reduces the pool of money that insurers have to pay benefits to people who do have claims.

    Essentially incentivizing individuals to sabotage the system.




  • There’s definitely an arms race - if it’s cheaper to pay an SEO to get your pages shown, then you pay the SEO; if it’s cheaper to pay Google advertising, then you pay to play. I’m sure Google is constantly tweaking their algorithm to filter SEO techniques to get better, authentic results, but it seems like a losing battle at this point.