I noticed that in some of those situations people forget that they also googled the topic they just discussed. So e.g. two friends were having a conversation about camping and googled specific camping items or locations. Then (seemingly suspiciously) relevant ads show up in places they would not expect. This is indeed happening very often as search/ads companies harvest enormous amounts of data and feed it into targeting almost immediately. And since there are only a few big ads networks, these interest-based ads then show up everywhere.
People should have the right to control the information flow to themselves in such a platform, for any reason they want. Neither you nor me nor anybody is owed any attention by OP or anyone. Attention is a personal resource and it is not owed to anybody. Having a platform that actually facilitates this level of control is amazing. As much as I am for the freedom of speech and expression in these platforms, I am also for the freedom of deciding whether one wants to be subjected or not to somebody else's expression, and both are irrespective to how I feel about the specific speech or expression or reasons behind any of these.
I am highlighting the problem with relying on lists, rather than making an informed decision individually. Of course, there is convenience in that, and everyone should do whatever they want. However, BS is very quickly becoming an echo-chamber worse than Reddit.
This is kind of true, I do not like either the block lists or the follow lists, also because it is not that hard to just block the occasional person I do not want to see in my feeds. But if it was harder for me to block on person basis, eg if it is too many ppl to block, I would rather rely on lists like that.
True. But you don't become an active monthly user. Unless there are some shenanigans happening, which is highly likely. I think I visited Threads by accident several times by clicking posts in IG, that were apparently Threads posts embedded directly into IG as a growth hack (my speculation).
The problem with codifying hate speech (and, eventually, punishing for it) is that even today the existing definitions are extremely broad and subjective. UN's own definition includes the use of pejorative language, i.e. "disrespectful connotation, a low opinion, or a lack of respect" towards something. This is clearly illiberal, anti free-speech, and extremely dangerous (society-ending dangerous).
There is a huge number of TV shows (e.g. old British comedy shows) and movies (e.g. big releases from Trier) that are not available to stream on any streaming service in the US. There is no other option than to pirate. An astoundingly ridiculous situation.
It's a fact that strong emotions can cloud judgment and result in cognitive biases.
See my comment above in the same thread, the data suggests that OP's view is not unreasonable. Your comment uses charged language like "asshole", "literal slaves", "justify/intellectualize the deaths", etc and you are not providing data to support your claims (only an appeal to emotions).
> the data suggests that OP's view is not unreasonable
The data uses a relative comparison of migrant deaths to overall death rate for Saudi Arabia. You are looking for something to console you that "actually the slaves aren't dying at high rates". I'd like to see this death rate for the subset of the SA population that matches migrant demographics, ex: age and gender. Then we can see what the comparable death rates are for healthy young men.
> Your comment uses charged language like "asshole"
I said I wasnt an asshole to preface that I genuinely meant what I said.
> "literal slaves"
They are literally slaves this is factual.
> "justify/intellectualize the deaths"
Again, factual. You yourself claim that you are trying to be unemotional and analyze the situation as I described, "academically".
None of that is factual. If it is - present evidence that:
1. all workers involved in this project are slaves, i.e. trafficked and sold into slavery and are owned as property.
2. OP justifies the deaths and not merely tries to add context and find a reasonable explanation for some of the deaths (which does not exclude possible human rights violations).
I like that you ignored my first point where I pointed out that your objective, rational analysis failed to account for basic variables like age and sex.
1. I don't need to prove "all workers" are slaves, that is an arbitrary burden established by you. I can provide links for you to educate yourself about the Kafala[0] system however. Here is an excerpt from the section on Saudi Arabia:
"an employer assumes responsibility for a hired migrant worker and must grant explicit permission before the worker can enter Saudi Arabia, transfer employment, or leave the country. The kafala system gives the employer immense control over the worker."
Sounds like ownership to me. You can dispute that if you want but I don't think it is a meaningful distinction to make, personally.
2.
> My guess is that it's some combination of (a) truly awful slave-like conditions, (b) just general "lack of safety culture" conditions (e.g. ~100 people died building the Hoover Dam - I don't think people considered them slaves but they definitely weren't following OSHA rules)
OP is trying to contextualize the deaths in a way that makes them "cleaner" or "more acceptable" instead of just reading the damn articles that actual investigative journalists have written which would prove to them that YES this is slavery and YES these are human beings that are being worked to death.
If all your objective, rational analysis has wrought is a shitty half-assed statistical comparison in an attempt to justify slavery, on an internet forum, what good was it to begin with?
> I'd like to see this death rate for the subset of the SA population that matches migrant demographics, ex: age and gender. Then we can see what the comparable death rates are for healthy young men.
I don't disagree with your first point. Yes, I would like to see these breakdowns. However, OP's point was that other factors like natural death can account for some of these numbers. This point is reasonable and data seems to suggest that it is statistically probable.
> educate yourself about the Kafala[0] system
Is this an abusive system? Yes. Does it create opportunities for slavery? Yes. Can 21K deaths be attributed so slavery? No evidence. This is not splitting hairs, this is a reasonable approach to digging into details when dealing with complex issues.
> This point is reasonable and data seems to suggest that it is statistically probable.
You found a random datapoint to compare to without accounting for confounding variables. That is an unserious analysis.
> Yes. Can 21K deaths be attributed so slavery? No evidence. This is not splitting hairs, this is a reasonable approach to digging into details when dealing with complex issues.
The issue is not complex. You are just using this air of objectivity as cover for your intellectual incuriosity. You could literally stop arguing with me and go read articles that have been documenting the high mortality rate and human rights abuses, that have been coming out since around the time that the Qatar World Cup was announced, but you wont. People have done the legwork to bring this journalism to you, but you wont bother to go and read it, because you'd rather pull some stats out of your ass and call it a day, and then lecture others about emotionally-driven arguments.
The fundamental problem here is that you are being intellectually incurious, but don't want to admit it, and you are trying to stave off the cognitive dissonance that happens when you read about something bad happening, so you can contextualize it and go about your day without feeling sad. If that's the case, just say "I don't live in Saudi Arabia why the fuck do I care", at least it's honest.
Try being honest with yourself mate, instead of pretending like you're being rational while plugging your ears saying "lalala" to confirm your biases. It's not cute.
Logic falls into a weird space between pro (studio) software and home studio software. Professional studios mostly use Pro Tools and Cubase (Europe). Home users mostly migrated to Live. It's obviously an oversimplification but it does reflect the problem Logic is facing.
Live is far ahead of Logic in the electronic music space. With a streamlined UI and M4L it dominated the market for the new(ish) generation of musicians. Every single musician I know (100s) moved from Logic to Live within the last two decades. The only people I know who still use Logic are composers (Live lacks music notation) using laptops at home.
Not to say that Logic is not a great piece of software. Drummer tracks were revolutionary, built in plugins are solid.
There's some other places that migrated to Reaper because of its own specialties. Reaper runs great and is absurdly, unreasonably customizable.
That of course means extensive skinning capabilities, but it also means ReaScript, a scripting language with a whole API. I recently succeeded in using ReaScript to take my control surface, the faders of which I'd colorcoded, and using them to on the fly adjust output level controls on plugins I wrote.
Not just 'assign the plugins to a fader', or 'assign controls to plugin parameters on the selected track, or discontinuous selections of tracks', though those are also things Reaper happily does.
I mean, in a big mix I can assign track colors to the tracks in Reaper, and the parameters (in plugins, mind you, anywhere in the FX stacks) will all jump to the live position of the control surface fader with that color. A bit specific and personal, but it's entirely done in scripting.
The game industry uses Reaper for similar reasons: being able to automate generation of a game's entire collection of sounds has its uses. I would say it is the DAW equivalent of what Blender is, in 3D modeling.
Interesting, that's a very cool idea! I tried Reaper when it was released but didn't find a good reason to move away from Pro Tools. That was a very long time ago though.
What's the best community for sharing ReaScripts? Also, is your script available anywhere?
